sv3 Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 Apologies in advance as I'm sure this has been asked before but I could not locate the thread. So far, I've gone through Chem, Orgo, and partway through physics and I've found that I needed TPR since I haven't done basic science in 8+ years and they have more fundamental knowledge and explanations. With that said, I looking ahead at my last science, biology, and see that TPR has 350 pgs and Ek has only 170pgs. So my question is: Is Ek thorough enough and have enough fundamental content in their book for someone who hasn't studied Bio in 8 years? I ask b/c i've heard/read good things about Ek Bio but not sure if what I heard was about their 1001 question book or content book as I'm interested in content coverage. I heard not so great things about Ek's physics content review so I dove into TPR and just have been slugging through it and if i can avoid a 350 barrage of bio, I'd like to. thanks in advance, steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 I dunno, man, I'd take the tougher way and be confident about my knowledge. Yeah, you won't need too much bio background to do well on the passages - but the lack of a good knowledge base will seriously screw you over when it comes to the discretes. Read the TPR book - just don't spend too much time on things you already know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASMED Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 I used both EK bio and TPR bio last year. I think that you should read the EK bio book primarily. It's a very efficient book. But definitely use the TPR book to fill in any gaps for areas where you think you need more detail to thoroughly understand the material. For instance, you might want to read the more detailed micro/cell biology and molecular genetics chapters in TPR. For the past couple of years, the MCAT bio section has really focused on those areas as opposed to physiology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Octavius Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 Use the EK. There are less pages in EK because the information is more compact (denser sentences) so you may have slightly more trouble reading it in TPR which is well written but a tad bit long. I used both and the information content is just about the same. EK won't go over **** you won't know. I suggest you take notes from EK and just read the TPR casually to know the mechanisms and processes in depth. I think EK has shortfalls in reproductive bio and genetics and molecular biology so you might want to go into TPR for those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sv3 Posted May 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 thanks for the replies. Perhaps I should Ek first to get a good overview and then read TPR for more depth. So far I've done things the other way round so hopefully changing it up doesn't hurt. I will eventually read both and just trying to find the most effecient way. It's tough as I've consistently read that TPR includes lots of things you don't need to know, and that Ek doesn't cover some topics well. If I've got 3-4 weeks just for bio studying hopefully I can cover it all. I have no problem wasting a few hours here or there or needless info, but don't want to waste so much time that it hurts my practice runs after I'm done Bio. I plan to have 4-5 weeks of nothing but practice runs after all my content review (I've also done hundreds of questions for each science topic within the content reviews). Not sure thats enough time for practice runs but all i got! thanks again steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.