<p>i read the whole book like twice...took the test in the back and got a really bad score...just wanted to know how the test compares to the real thing???</p>
<p>its alot harder, and has superfluous information
and what do you mean by a bad score?</p>
<p>i didn't think that the barron's tests were too too bad, but yeah apparently they are a lot harder</p>
<p>well how good is it if i got a 780 in the diagonistic test and 790ish -800 on the barrons 1st practice test??????</p>
<p>you'll prob get an 800. barrons, as a rule, is harder than the real thing. depending on the subject, it'll be from a little to a LOT harder than the real thing. ymmv.</p>
<p>heyy i am kinda in the same situation.....i get like 790-750 on the practice etsts in barrons but like i have cd-rom tests too but for some reason those are rlly har for me and i am getting rrly bad scores so i shud rely more on the book tests rather than the cd-rom tests right????</p>
<p>also do u guys think we have to apoplast and symboplasts from the barrons book fro teh test cuz i have never heard of those before???</p>
<p>bumpp............................</p>
<p>good info but bad sample questions. the real tests questions are not as obvious and not as detailed.</p>
<p>barron's just blows the tests out of proportion in difficulty. your better bet in test acccuracy is PR or the real CB test.</p>
<p>agreed yup!
I got a 720?
Take the CB test</p>