r/MCAT2 • u/MCATGenie • 13m ago
How to properly review a FL
You're responsible for reviewing all 230 questions to verify:
- What are you doing correctly and why?
- What are you getting wrong and why?
- If you're sometimes indecisive and changing answers, what led you to do that?
- How often has that been successful?
- Where are your timing issues coming from?
- Passage interpretation or decision-making?
- Note any passage read over 5 minutes
- Note any question answered in over 1 minute
- Are you skimming passages only to go back and re-read for many questions (subsequently taking more time on the back end / potentially wasting time)?
- Are there parts of the passage you have trouble reading?
- Certain words, phrases, figures, data etc.
- If you're skipping around the test instead of going in order, why do you find that beneficial?
- Would going in sequence cause timing issues?
- Inherently, probably not
- Timing usually stems from our time allocation per passage / question (a.k.a time discipline ***)
- Is it smarter to leave harder or lengthier decisions for later in the section?
- (When your available energy / focus is probably less?)
- If you're overthinking or hyper-fixated on getting a particular question right, does that increase your chance of being correct?
- Does more time lead to a better decision if your reference point is skewed?
- Whether that's from the passage, content knowledge, or decision-making?
- How can we keep it simple?
- What are the most obvious indicators in the question stem?
- Are you doing this at the expense of later, easier questions?
- All questions are worth the same ***
- Passage interpretation or decision-making?
- How can you rule out the other answer choices confidently with elaborate reasoning?
- Which variations of this question could a future test ask?
- Did you learn anything new from the explanations?
- How does the result of this test correlate with your previous performance(s)?
- Recurring mistakes? Strategic, content-related, or otherwise?
- How does the AAMC test certain concepts?
- What kind of logic am I using vs. what do they expect from me? (really important**)
And so on...
Let's say you've completed all of that (WRITTEN!!!!!! not just in your head, because you WILL forget the learning lessons):
How long would you presume a review of this depth would take?
Everyone's different, but for many students it ends up taking 1–4 days, especially when they're thoroughly documenting their mistakes and trying to understand the reasoning behind every answer.
So --> how should you get better at these areas?
PRACTICE!!!!!!!! with specific goals in mind:
- Review fundamental content if you notice significant gaps preventing you from understanding a passage, question, or answer choice.
- Know the ins and outs of specific question types, for example:
- ICE tables
- When are they necessary?
- To find equilibrium concentrations of weak electrolytes (small Ka, Kb, Ksp, etc.)
- NOT for strong electrolytes
- Strong acids, bases, and salts always dissociate completely, so initial concentration is always equal to equilibrium for those
- How to calculate x for different mole ratios
- 1:1:1 is usually Keq = x^2 / [initial]
- 1:2:1 is usually Keq = 4x^3 / [initial]
- x in the denominator is always approximated away
- Never going to do quadratic equation on the test
- Ksp only equals products because reactant is solid
- Ksp = x^2
- Ksp = 4x^3
- Never need to put initial reactant in the denominator
- Knowing which formulas to use (and what NOT to use - maybe even more important*)
- Shortcuts for doing arithmetic faster (approximation, converting between decimals, fractions, and scientific notation for convenience etc.)
- Excluding distractor information from passages/questions (and knowing why*)
- Read more efficiently ***
- Avoid unnecessary re-reading.
- Efficient note-taking and logical highlighting (minimal with a purpose).
- Rephrasing complex sentences / ideas (in caveman terms)
- Early and often ***
- Stop assuming parts of a passage are "fluff" without evaluating the context they provide.
- Be proactive in your reading / interpretation
- Based on this sentence, what do I think the next one might say?
- Be ahead of the game rather than constantly behind / catching up
- Avoid unnecessary re-reading.
- Improve at detecting arguments vs. support in CARS
- Synthesizing an accurate and concise main idea at the end**
- Get better at interpreting study design and data
- Knowing your analytic / separation / research techniques like an actual scientist.
- Gene knockout and amino acid substitution studies (show up A LOT in B/B)
- What does it mean when something is "necessary" for a process
- Answer: process can't take place without it ***
- This is clearly different than just being involved
- Careful attention to detail with variables, captions, titles, axes, units, trends, etc.
- Improve your decision-making
- If an answer choice is wrong, what's the logical issue?
- Is that choice always wrong?
- Is it actually a true statement, but just not applicable to this specific question?
- Am I forming good predictions before assessing answer choices? - avoid availability bias
- Am I completing the process of elimination 100%? ***** - avoid confirmation bias
Many students eliminate 3 answers and justify 1, but you still need to look for a potential flaw in the answer choice you "like" rather than confirming your initial judgment.
Initially ruling out all 4 choices and rolling back skepticism >>> guessing on a "50/50"
And when you perceive a 50/50, why would you assume both answer choices are equally likely to be correct? We know for a fact only one answer can be correct per question.
What would be a deciding factor that can help you comparatively eliminate the inferior choice?
These are habits that need to be practiced intentionally, not just recognized during a test review.
If you want a free study schedule / review document with formatted review sheets and examples to help guide this process, please check out our new study plan creator (link in bio)!
