Med Entry vs. ACER

[Random_Acts_of_Kindness]

A question to past students:
 
Do you think the Exams that are provided by Med Entry are good preparation for the actual UMAT exam?

I have found that the type of questions given by the Med Entry exams and the Practice Acer exams to be quite different. For instance in Section 1 of the Acer Exams, there seems to be a heavy emphasis on the understanding of "games", where as on Med Entry it is largely Reading Comprehension. Also in Section 2 of Acer Exams, they seem to require more consideration of the passage as a whole rather than in Med Entry where the answers seem to be explicitly stated in the text.

Can past students give comment to what the actual UMAT exam is like and which of these models best simulate it?

[pi]

I didn't find MedEntry's Section 2 was anything like the UMAT. I felt their Section 1 was overly verbose and lengthy too. Section 3 was around the mark though, if not a little trickier than the real UMAT.

[Micheal Jackson]

I didn't find MedEntry's Section 2 was anything like the UMAT. I felt their Section 1 was overly verbose and lengthy too. Section 3 was around the mark though, if not a little trickier than the real UMAT.

How is the medentry section 2 different (is it easier?)
And thank god that the section 1 is not as verbose. I never finish on time with the medentry practice exams.

[Valyria]

I've found that after practicing MedEntry Section 3 problems, I've developed this tendency to look for more convoluted patterns (i.e instead of a simple element movement of 1, 1, 1, 1 in a pentagon, I start with 1 CW, 2ACW, 3 CW, 4ACW). If anyone has experienced this issue, how did you counter it?

[pi]

How is the medentry section 2 different (is it easier?)

It's not easier or harder, it's just "different". It's hard to explain in words, but it just wasn't the same style.

[medlet]

After doing the umat yesterday, I have to agree.
Its much different but having said that, it did help in my preparation

[Micheal Jackson]

It's not easier or harder, it's just "different". It's hard to explain in words, but it just wasn't the same style.

I get what you mean now, lol.

[Equilibriaas]

Maybe it was just this year , but there were only like 2 qs on logical reasoning where as tthe rest was like PROBLEM SOLVING..my weakness :/

I agree with pi....the medenntry drills and exams had way too long paras on logical reasoning...

[grannysmith]

So is medentry actually worth its price?

[ChickenCh0wM1en]

I sat the umat ages ago (2012) but I also did the Medentry course (the exams + the lectures or whatever) and I found the style of all the questions different.
Medentry had a lot of logical reasoning - "what can be inferred" etc but I found for the actual UMAt there was a lot more problem solving (which I hated) compared to the ones on the Medentry papers.

SIII for medentry was pretty decent though but some of the answers to their questions were ridiculous. As a result, like others have said, I started getting so paranoid with the acer SIII practice questions thinking everyone would be some messed up/complicated pattern where in reality it was just like +1, +2, +3 to the shapes or rotating figures etc.

SII not much comment - did shit in both medentry and the real thing LOOOOOOOL

[datfatcat]

So is medentry actually worth its price?

It is really hard to say. Some people think it is useful and some don't. If you have the money, I would probably suggest you to give it a go. The reason is that if you didn't do well in the actual UMAT, you would probably blame yourself for not spending several hundreds on medentry. Still, I need to point out to you that doing medentry doesn't guarantee you a good score. Many people do medentry and still got low %tiles. On the other hand, I have a few friends who are in med now and they didn't do medentry or any umat preparation course.

[Random_Acts_of_Kindness]

So is medentry actually worth its price?

No.

[pi]

So is medentry actually worth its price?

Worth it if you get into med

[grannysmith]

Worth it if you get into med

Haha - good point.

[deekay]

Medentry is a lot more dense in vocabulary and very pedantic with their choice of wording which is how their questions are generally oriented. Whereas with ACER the wording is much clearer and concise, although its easier to understand, the way they structure the question almost always makes it boil down to one of two answers and makes it much harder to choose from.

Comparing the 2014 UMAT exam to the Medentry Exams :
Section I:
- Similar in difficulty however simpler to understand and read through.
- Questions similar including some graphs and statistics.
- A probability question about Justin Bieber which was stupid

Section II:
- 3 Comic strips
- A few long passages to read usually with 4 questions attached
- Some single paragraph questions
- Many say it was quite hard

Section III:
- Much easier to work through than Medentry
- Lesser variables in questions
- 3-2 Method worked for almost every question, if that did not work, mapping it did.