Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

Correlation of EK Practice Exams and Actual MCAT


webshy

Recommended Posts

For those who completed the Examkracker practice exams (both the 30 min subject specific exams in the back of each review book and the 16 mini MCATs) and have written the MCAT, how did you find your marks compare? Did the marks you achieved on the practice tests correlate well with your actual MCAT marks?

 

Thanks for the info.

Elaine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think mine were reasonably close to my actual result, but i can't remember for sure. in general, i think the practice exams made by princeton/kaplan/EK/etc. are harder than the AAMC ones, but i thought the material on EK's tests was closer to the real deal than princeton/kaplan. AAMC practice tests are the best way to go, especially right before the MCAT, to gain confidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I consistently failed the practice exams in the Physics Exam Krackers, but wound up doing way better on the actual MCAT in that section. I think that they purposely make those tests harder, so don't get discouraged if you don't do well on them. I found the old MCAT exams much more representative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found the BS passages in EK to be very good. It helped me to get a sense of the "verbal-like" passages...I am talking about the passages that are dense in text.

 

EK was good for the experimental passages, and I found their range in topics was excellent. If you can pick up the 101 Passages for Biology...I would definitely recommend it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't tell you about the real REAL MCAT yet (score available on 5/16), but my EK scores for the 30-min subject tests were either same or below my AAMC practice scores for similar sections. E.g. my EK orgo scores were 4, 9, 10, and 10, and my AAMC BS were 10 and 10.

 

Joshi,

 

How dod you feel you did? did you do a count of what you are sure of and what you guessed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, this is how I found the difficulty

 

PS

 

Kaplan > AAMC

EK < AAMC

 

VR

 

Kaplan is just different from AAMC

EK is more similar to AAMC and a little bit more difficult (most people who can get 10+ in EK I've found were getting 12+ in AAMC)

 

BS

 

Kaplan > AAMC

EK = AAMC (very similar to me)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so difficulty-wise.... AAMC < EK < Kaplan < PR ???

 

i'm finding this hard to believe... why would the real thing be easier?

 

because the companies teaching MCAT courses want to prepare you to a level beyond the MCAT, so that when you get there, you feel confident. if you're used to harder tests, then all the other stuff that contributes to the difficulty of the real MCAT (nerves, noise, disruptions, loooong day) won't seem so bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last week before MCATs last summer, I got consistently 10 for EK and AAMC (never above 10 though, but rarely below), and then on the real thing, I got 8 =( So it varies with the whole EK correlation thing. I think you need to do really well to be confident, i.e. 11-12 to get a 10 on the real thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last week before MCATs last summer, I got consistently 10 for EK and AAMC (never above 10 though, but rarely below), and then on the real thing, I got 8 =( So it varies with the whole EK correlation thing. I think you need to do really well to be confident, i.e. 11-12 to get a 10 on the real thing.

 

 

hey...sorry to hear that...it always sucks when that happens

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

For me I found.

 

VR --> AAMC < EK < TPR

 

Kaplan VR isn't MCAT VR

 

BS --> AAMC < Kaplan = EK = TPR

 

PS --> AAMC = EK < TPR

 

Kaplan PS isn't MCAT PS

 

 

I found that Kaplan was very demoralizing. EK builds confidence as it really focuses on mastering the material you will definitely see on the test inside and out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I did find TRP VR harder. But I only did 2 TPR exams last year. I studied mainly with EK and then did a few TPR. I found TPR questions were different in style from EK and the AAMC. Not as different as Kaplan but still pretty different. I think the difference in styles threw me off.

 

After compairing TPR and EK to AAMC I decided I would just stick with EK. I got a 12 on VR on the real deal in Aug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find that I don't get as frustrated with TPR's explainations as I do w/ EK's. They make more logical sense to me, but with EK, I feel like I want to argue with the answer writer lol. I guess I'll do a mixture of both. Yeah Kaplan's VR is definitely not that great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I hear ya on that one. I can think of more than a few times in the past where I wanted to give the test writer the one fingered salute. I hate it when the explanation basically says, that is the answer because I say it is the answer. It also sucks when the explanation is something like that is answer but the other answer is better... Cool.....

 

Both EK and AAMC tests like to mess with your head by pulling that sorta crap.

 

Oh yes Kaplan VR is pretty special stuff... My Kaplan VR book from last summer had an honorary location outside in my backyard. It was there through fall, winter and spring. I was impressed by how high the paper quality was as it was still slightly readable as of early June. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the EK exams were more correlated to the AAMC than the Kaplan tests - I didn't like the Kaplan tests, they seemed all over the map - the EK was better, although not perfect (yes the VR was great, the BS was great, the other sections were hard).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...