Preparing for the MCATs with no science Background.

[Raihan Mirza]

Hi I am going to prepare for the MCATs this year but I have no science background. I ordered the Complete Exam Krackers MCAT guide that includes all the subjets on the MCATs. However after reading several reviews about the book online, I read that inorder to greatly benefit from the book I need to have some of the subjects background. What books should I study along with the Exam Krackers books to get the full benefit of the Exam Kracker book, since I have no science background. I need to maintain at least a 30 on the MCATs.

 

What book should I use along with The Exam Kracker Complete study guide to prepare and get a better understanding of biology?

 

What book should I use along with The Exam Kracker Complete study guide to prepare and get a better understanding of organic chemistry?

 

What book should I use along with The Exam Kracker Complete study guide to prepare and get a better understanding of general chemistry?

 

What book should I use along with The Exam Kracker Complete study guide to prepare and get a better understanding of Physics?

[Kiel]

Check out the thread under pre-med called humanities, social science, non-science majors. The person who posted his/her question has the same questions answered.

[futuredoc1]

You can also try the Subject Refresher tests and Practice tests from testeasymcat.com, They have good material at very good price.

 

Try www.testeasymcat.com, I purchased the membership and it is really worth it.

[LLBtoMD]

Hi Raihan;

 

I'm doing the EXACT same thing. Trying to get an excellent score on the MCAT with absolutely NO science background.

 

I have also ordered the Examkrackers set. And after doing EXTENSIVE research on different textbooks to supplement my studies I've settled on some excellent recommendations which I will share with you.

 

For each subject, I'm reading the "outline" first, then going to the Examkrackers volume, then supplementing where needed from the "textbook" (for some of the easier topics, I'm starting with the Examkrackers and then moving to the outlines/textbook) I have also supplemented my studies with Examkrackers Audio Osmosis which I highly recommend, as well as some math review for my rusty math skills):

 

For Biology

 

Outline: Schaum's Outline of Biology

Outline: Schaum's Outline of Human Anatomy and Physiology

Outline: Schaum's Outline of Genetics

Textbook: Biology by Neil Campbell

Textbook: Principles of Anatomy and Physiology by Gerald Tortora

 

For Chemistry:

 

Outline: Schaum's Outline of College Chemistry

Outline: Schaum's Outline of General, Organic and Biological Chemistry

Textbook: Chemistry The Central Science by Theodore Brown

 

For Physics:

 

Outline: Physics for Dummies (I know it sounds juvenile and most of the "for dummies" books are, but this one is excellent and is good when the Schaum's, examkrackers, or textbook are not clear enough)

Outline: Schaum's Outline of College Physics (make sure to get the "college" physics and make sure its the 10th ed!)

Textbook: Physics by John Cutnell

Textbook: College Physics by Paul Peter Urone (I have the two texts because one is totally algebra based and the other is precalculus based.)

 

Organic Chemistry:

 

Outline: Schaum's Outline of General, Organic and Biological Chemistry

Outline: Schaum's Outline of Organic Chemistry

Outline: Nuts and Bolts of Organic Chemistry, The: A Student's Guide to Success by Joel Karty

Outline: Organic Chemistry 1 for dummies (an even better outline than the Physics for dummies -- which is saying a lot)

Textbook: Organic Chemistry by John McMurry

Textbook: Organic Chemistry by Francis Carey

Textbook: Organic Chemistry by Suyan Ege (I might have spelled this name wrong)

 

 

And there you have it. I really think it can be done. The examkrackers set is essential though. Hope this helps.

[everyoneloveschem]

I wouldn't necessarily go out and buy any texts. If you have friends doing science degrees I'm sure they would be more than happy to lend you first year chem, bio and physics textbooks and second year orgo and biochem. Or if you don't, your university library will have tons to borrow. Or you can probably buy really old versions cheap at your used bookstore. The content you are learning is so basic that a slightly older book will not hinder you.

 

Good luck! I also really recommend the AAMC practice tests. I found they gave me a really good sense of what the real thing would be like (I did them as if I were sitting the actual exam).

[LLBtoMD]

Or if you don't, your university library will have tons to borrow. Or you can probably buy really old versions cheap at your used bookstore. The content you are learning is so basic that a slightly older book will not hinder you.

 

 

 

You can also try the public library. That's where I got all of the books on that list (except for the examkrackers). That way too, if you come across a textbook that just doesn't "do it" for you, you can bring it back to the library and get a different one (instead of being stuck with one you've bought)

[Raihan Mirza]

Thanks a million LLBtoMD. I was about to lose all hope in studying for the MCATs but your response had given me some hope. Thanks I really apreciate it!

[WabbaJ]

hey R,

 

are you applying with no science background on purpose, or did things change in life and you've got a new dream to become a doctor? cuz really IMHO i cant put together wanting to go to med school and avoiding a science education

 

to me its like wanting to make the NBA, but preparing for it by playing tennis. some people might say that the traits like hard work, dedication, commitment, and critical thinking are ones that can be developed regardless of what program you study, but IMO i dont buy that. not a bit. if someone tells me that they study 12th century romantic era art and want to go to med school, what am i supposed to think? wheres the connection?

 

medicine is pretty much science. you cant contort that statement or find a loophole in it.

 

i dont know if its obvious but i'm in science and a rabid supporter for studying science.

 

hope i'm not coming across as offensive-- and i apologize for reals if i am, my point isnt to hurt anyones feelings-- but i think that it doesnt make sense when people try to go around a science education and cut into medicine.

 

right.... now the whole board prolly hates me.

[Sparkles]

hey R,

 

are you applying with no science background on purpose, or did things change in life and you've got a new dream to become a doctor? cuz really IMHO i cant put together wanting to go to med school and avoiding a science education

 

to me its like wanting to make the NBA, but preparing for it by playing tennis. some people might say that the traits like hard work, dedication, commitment, and critical thinking are ones that can be developed regardless of what program you study, but IMO i dont buy that. not a bit. if someone tells me that they study 12th century romantic era art and want to go to med school, what am i supposed to think? wheres the connection?

 

medicine is pretty much science. you cant contort that statement or find a loophole in it.

 

i dont know if its obvious but i'm in science and a rabid supporter for studying science.

 

hope i'm not coming across as offensive-- and i apologize for reals if i am, my point isnt to hurt anyones feelings-- but i think that it doesnt make sense when people try to go around a science education and cut into medicine.

 

right.... now the whole board prolly hates me.

 

No no.....no one hates you. An honest opinion is an honest opinion. I can see how you feel......I feel the same thing. Usually if you have a passion for medicine you have some sort of passion for the sciences. I feel somebody wanting to get into medicine without a science background really hasn't researched what medicine is about and wants the prestige of "being a doctor". Of course I'm sure not people are like that but it's hard not to feel that way. You can't get into the U of A without actual Science 100 prerequisites.

[Smurfette]

Most schools across Canada have some sort of science prerequisites (exceptions: Mac, Calgary - although Calgary has recommendations).

 

I can see what you're getting at in some ways, but just for the sake of balance I'm going to play Devil's Advocate (and I'm a science student so there's no pro-arts bias here).

 

(1) There are some arts that are much more relevant to medicine than some sciences. For example, most physicians need to have some knowledge of psychology and sociology (eg. how do you deal with a patient suffering from abuse or how do you deal with patient compliance as it relates to culture, gender, or education?). However, very few physicians need to be able to know exactly how phase changes occur (physical chemistry) or the life cycle of ferns (botony). Therefore, it is too broad to say that someone is sciences is more prepared for medicine than someone in arts.

 

(2) The second major argument is that your undergraduate education isn't meant to be a time for you to acquire knowledge about medicine - the time to do that is medical school. Undergrad is meant to broaden your understanding of yourself and to broaden your understanding of others. Therefore, it is just as important to learn to be open-minded and to learn to learn (or learn to think) rather than simply acquiring knowledge. "Education's purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one" (M. Forbes). In some sense, you could consider undergrad as an "education" and medical school as an "apprenticeship" - where you learn to do a task rather than learn to think. Therefore, any degree that broadens your mind whether a science degree that helps you critically analyze new information, an arts degree that helps you broaden your view of people, or an engineering degree that helps you find solutions to problems. (These are obviously very generally descriptions of what you might learn from a degree - each individual degree and each individual person will take something different from each thing.)

 

I've blabbed on long enough. Now I better go back and do my science homework =)

[Smurfette]

Oh yeah...I forgot to answer the original question.

 

I don't think it makes sense (from a cost-benefit point of view) to get a bunch of textbooks on sciences for the sake of the MCAT. I would get very specific MCAT prep books (eg. Princeton, Kaplan texts) or take an MCAT-specific prep course. If you have trouble understanding the stuff in the prep books, then go to an introductory science text.

[Raihan Mirza]

Oh yeah...I forgot to answer the original question.

 

I don't think it makes sense (from a cost-benefit point of view) to get a bunch of textbooks on sciences for the sake of the MCAT. I would get very specific MCAT prep books (eg. Princeton, Kaplan texts) or take an MCAT-specific prep course. If you have trouble understanding the stuff in the prep books, then go to an introductory science text.

 

I heard that studying from Princeton Review or Kaplan won't help much without a good science background. What do you guys think?

[Sparkles]

Most schools across Canada have some sort of science prerequisites (exceptions: Mac, Calgary - although Calgary has recommendations).

 

I can see what you're getting at in some ways, but just for the sake of balance I'm going to play Devil's Advocate (and I'm a science student so there's no pro-arts bias here).

 

(1) There are some arts that are much more relevant to medicine than some sciences. For example, most physicians need to have some knowledge of psychology and sociology (eg. how do you deal with a patient suffering from abuse or how do you deal with patient compliance as it relates to culture, gender, or education?). However, very few physicians need to be able to know exactly how phase changes occur (physical chemistry) or the life cycle of ferns (botony). Therefore, it is too broad to say that someone is sciences is more prepared for medicine than someone in arts.

 

(2) The second major argument is that your undergraduate education isn't meant to be a time for you to acquire knowledge about medicine - the time to do that is medical school. Undergrad is meant to broaden your understanding of yourself and to broaden your understanding of others. Therefore, it is just as important to learn to be open-minded and to learn to learn (or learn to think) rather than simply acquiring knowledge. "Education's purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one" (M. Forbes). In some sense, you could consider undergrad as an "education" and medical school as an "apprenticeship" - where you learn to do a task rather than learn to think. Therefore, any degree that broadens your mind whether a science degree that helps you critically analyze new information, an arts degree that helps you broaden your view of people, or an engineering degree that helps you find solutions to problems. (These are obviously very generally descriptions of what you might learn from a degree - each individual degree and each individual person will take something different from each thing.)

 

I've blabbed on long enough. Now I better go back and do my science homework =)

Good argument. But I can honestly say I personally think it is much easier to maintain a higher GPA with art courses than science courses.

[WabbaJ]

Good argument. But I can honestly say I personally think it is much easier to maintain a higher GPA with art courses than science courses.

 

really? i thought its easier to get a better GPA in science. thats not because science courses are easier-- hellz, no.... but the marking in Arts is mega subjective in most cases.

 

theres no real right or wrong. just for kicks... if youre in science, you say how an inhibitor is competitive, non-competitive and uncompetitive. in philosophy, you argue how its a "good" or "evil" inhibitor. or if youre in history, you might want to discuss the cultural effects of the inhibitor. its retarded, and i'm one of the guys who openly bashes arts programs cuz i hate how subjective it is.

 

the great part of science is how you can study, work your butt off, try hard, and it pays off. you got your well deserved A+. arts, its a crap-shoot at best and your mark is anyones guess.

 

thats how i've seen it all these long years. maybe it varies by school and by teacher.....but i'm happy that almost all my electives have been science. its the only way to play!

 

PS: i feel like i'm hijacking this thread with these kinda comments:p

[OttawaURookie]

Well, as someone who will do their undergrad in the Arts, I wanted to comment.

First off, I definetley have an interest in the sciences.(you have to have that if you want to get into medicine) But my interest has always been varied. I like the Social Sciences and Arts as much.

 

Different jobs ask for different skills. Intelligence does not make a good teacher, for example. The job is about teaching, so unless you have amazing communication skills, you should not be a teacher. What you know is pretty pointless to others if you dont know how to express it properly.

 

I think you have to be intelligent to be a doctor. However, most schools ask you to have prereq's and you have to write MCAT's. (this is on top of having a great GPA) GPA shows that you did full time studies and you had top marks over 3 or 4yrs. It shows you are consistent, hard-working and can get the job done independently. If you dont have a science background, you might have to work twice as hard to do well in the MCAT's and then in med school as well. But the same thing goes for people who are all about Science.

 

Personally I think succesful doctors are a) intelligent have varied interests and backgrounds. Now, you can know all your stuff but if you dont express yourself well, you dont look at things from different perspectives, you will not make your patients happy. If you just know the science, you come off as the "I know everything so you just listen" type of person, but you aren't very understanding of patient needs. You can miss a diagnosis that way as well.

So I say the way they are doing it is correct. And if you look at the stats, it probably is the majority of Science students that are applying to med school, but then you have some from the other areas.

[Jewels1986]

If it makes you feel better, based on the stats on the MCAT website, biological sciences and life sciences majors generally don't do as well on the MCAT as students who major in a variety of other subjects, including philosophy, math, history, english, and physics. And that's for all sections, including biology, not just verbal reasoning. There's a certain amount of core content you need to know, but the MCAT is primarily a test of reasoning, and arguably an arts degree prepares you for that as well or better than a traditional pre-med degree that focuses on memorizing. Good luck!