How inaccurate is barrons for chem?

<p>I just took a practice test for barrons, and it actually seemed easy (because of the HUGE curve). More surprisingly, I did this without even studying any parts of organic chemistry (the only thing I know about it is that there are C's and H's). Did I just get really lucky, or are the barrons tests focused too much on the wrong material? I feel that I really shouldn't be able to get away with not studying a section of the book, no matter how small. And finally, what alternatives are there to barrons, if the tests are too different from the real thing?</p>

<p>Hmm. We haven’t even learned organic chem yet in AP Chem. I don’t think it’s that big of a topic though because my Chem teacher said we’ll just review some of the basic stuff for organic chem the week before the test. We’re done with everything else so I’'m guessing he’s just putting that off since it’s not that important.</p>

<p>I hope Barrons is accurate though. I have Barrons for SAT Chem too…</p>

<p>Umm an alternative…try PR. I have the AP version of PR and it’s great. I thought I’d switch it up and get Barrons for the SAT haha but yeah, PR is good.</p>

<p>I have PR for AP and Barrons for the SAT 2.</p>

<p>The Barrons tests are definitely inaccurate and I would avoid taking them. However, the review is excellent so use that.</p>

<p>Okay, so it looks like Princeton Review has good tests. Are they accurate in terms of difficulty only, or is there also a similarity in the emphasis on topics? And how does PR compare to sparknotes?</p>

<p>Sparknotes is good for practice tests. Barron’s is good review, but the practice tests are overly difficult and require far too many calculations, given that calculator use is not permitted.</p>

<p>For organic chemistry, you really just need to be able to tell the difference between different types of organic compounds (aromatic compounds, hydrocarbons, etc.), and you need to be able to identify functional groups (hydroxyl, carboxyl, etc.).</p>

<p>Terms you should know: alkane (alkyl), alkene (alkenyl), alkyl (alkynyl), alcohol (hydroxyl), ketone (carbonyl), aldehyde, ether, ester, carboxylic acid (carboxyl), amides, amines, aromatic vs. aliphatic compounds, benzene, and that’s really it. A knowledge of organic suffixes and prefixes is helpful and I think it may even be necessary in some parts of the test.</p>

<p>You should be familiar with the different orbital hybridizations of carbon atoms in organic compounds (see Huckel’s rule). Questions about orbital hybridization rarely come up on the SAT, but it’s best to be prepared. For example, you should know that the carbon atom in methane (CH4) has four sp^3 orbitals that form sigma bonds with each of the hydrogen atoms, whereas the carbon atoms in methene (C2H4) each have three hybridized sp^2 and one p orbital that form both sigma and a pi bonds, respectively (both a sigma and pi bond between the two carbon’s and sigma bonds with the hydrogens).</p>

<p>i think barron’s is not bad… at least the review materials are challenging and gives you some pressure. however, the practice tests are way harder than the actual ones.</p>

<p>rockermcr - thanks for the help! So it looks like the test won’t go too in depth in organic chemistry</p>

<p>Also, how in depth does the test go in terms of nucleonics? I took a second test with a slight dip in score (3 points fewer raw score), all because of the 5 or 6 questions dealing with this that I had to omit. It doesn’t look like I’ll be able to get my hands on a PR book, so I guess I’ll have to stick with Sparknotes, with possibly 1 or 2 more tests from Barrons.</p>

<p>Barron is wayyyyyy too hard, i barely got like 600 on the practice on…</p>

<p>You really only need to know the properties of alpha and beta particles (ex. alpha particles are essentially stable helium nuclei with two neutrons, and are the heavier than beta particles), and how to balance nuclear equations involving beta or alpha decay. Anything else (nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, positron emission, electron capture, neutron capture, half-lives, radiological dating, etc.) is far beyond the scope of the SAT.</p>

<p>So I finally got around to taking a Princeton Review test and scored more or less the same as Barrons, maybe with one or two more questions correct. </p>

<p>My main concern now is the problem with the curve</p>

<p>How many points off (raw score, including subtracting the 1/4 point for wrong answers) can I afford to get and still safely get an 800? -5? -10?</p>

<p>How did you guys get on Barron’s Practice test? And what score are u guys aiming for?</p>

<p>Scoring 680-740’s on them.</p>

<p>Praying for a 780.</p>

<p>I usually get anywhere from 12-17 wrong, so I get around the 65-70 raw score (this is from 3 tests, so they are relatively consistent, except that the best score came from PR practice) the range of my scores for 3, and I’m aiming for 800</p>

<p>However, I am not sure about what the actual curve is, so I am not sure what my scores will translate into. does anyone know around how many I can afford to get wrong and still get an 800?</p>

<p>From collegeboard, you can get -5 for an 800 at the lowest.</p>

<p>Yeah I have PR for AP and Barrons for SAT. They both have pretty good review sections.</p>

<p>I have never heard of nucleonics. Uh oh. We didn’t cover this at all in my Chem class. And we’re reviewing organic chem like next week. My teacher decided it wasn’t really worth our time…so we’re focusing on the bigger topics and then going over those basic organic chem stuff later. Ohh boy. </p>

<p>Those Barrons practice tests are freakin hard…</p>

<p>i recall from kaplan books that i hovered around mid-600s on the subject tests for chem. then got a 780 on the real thing last may.</p>

<p>thats good to hear since i get 680-720 on Kaplan.</p>