Medentry Vs Real UMAT

[Graphite]

So now I am doing alright for section 1 after lots of practice with Medentry, but I am still worried because am I just simply getting used to the way Medentry asks questions or its actually very indicative/similar to the real UMAT?
So for those who did prep, could you tell me if your performance in Medentry section 1 was particularly similar to the real UMAT performance?

[Graphite]

bump

[pi]

I'd like to know too actually.

[ninwa]

So for those who did prep, could you tell me if your performance in Medentry section 1 was particularly similar to the real UMAT performance?

Pretty much yes for all three sections - maybe a bit lower than I did on Medentry but I think that's down to nerves

edit: I also took a LOT less time on Medentry than I did on the real UMAT (where I ran out of time and left 1/3 of section 1 blank and quite a bit of sections 2 and 3). I think everyone struggles with time management though, because I was still in the 90th percentile for section 1 (similar to Medentry scores) - either that or I just got really lucky with my filling in of random bubbles

[vea]

Is it just me or is being a math student very useful for sections 1 and 3? For many of the questions in eureka section 1, I've found that most questions can be simplified into a simple maths Q. Is it like this for the real UMAT?

[Graphite]

Are you sure about that? There is very few maths questions in section 3, it may be related to maths but finding the answer isn't so easy just because you know maths. E.g. the pattern is x^2/2+4 it is a maths equation but its not so easy to figure out nor is there a lot of them anyway.

[nacho]

I find that eureka for section 1 is not so similar to the section drills
it's a lot like the type of questions you get in scholarship/entrance tests

[shinny]

Is it just me or is being a math student very useful for sections 1 and 3? For many of the questions in eureka section 1, I've found that most questions can be simplified into a simple maths Q. Is it like this for the real UMAT?

Number patterns for section 3 pretty much aren't used by ACER; it's more of a MedEntry thing. Regardless, for both sections, converting them into a maths problem while effective, is almost invariably too slow. There's almost always a much faster logical way through it. I had many cases where I converted it into a maths problem (simultaneous equations etc) and solved them, but this would be too slow in the real UMAT and I eventually resorted to finding logical ways to do these instead.

[slothpomba]

Well i think section 3 would be most effective to prepare for.

I got 98th percentile for section 1 and i barely touched anything but i didn't do hardly any practice for section 3 and i only got like 40th percentile (or something low i cant remember).

They could throw you a total curve ball with section 1 and 2 if they wanted to but with section 3 its probably something youve seen similar questions to 100s of times over.

[Graphite]

Well done!
Could you please provide some tips as to how you were did so extraordinarily well in section 1?
Most people say its only prepare-able to some extent so I guess technique and mindset must play a vital role.

[dooodyo]

bump-bumpity-bump

[vea]

My school had two Monash Med students come in and they both told us how MedEntry questions were similar to the Qs in the actual UMAT!

[happyhappyland]

I reckon they were quite similiar but I did so poor in the real umat but did OK for medentry practise ones...