Hi everyone! So I decided to take the Subject Test for Bio on October. I heard biology was the easiest science and I am good at memorizing things so yea. I have a few months to prepare for this but I just wanted to point out that I hate biology. I just want to get over with this and I am good at chemistry but I have taken a lot of chemistry college courses in high school so I would like colleges to see another science I am okay at. I want a 700+ and I am willing to put time and effort into studying. I don’t really know much about biology so I am a beginner and I have 3 months left. Any tips on how to do well? What book is the best to study from and will for sure give me a 700+? Also I heard there are two versions of the test so is E or M easier? Thanks!
Buy a Barron’s book and you should be set.
Thanks! @rdeng2614 I was planning to do that. Did you ever take the Bio subject test and if you did, which one did you find easier E or M?
Barron’s or PR should suffice.
M and E are neither easier nor more difficult than the other. It all depends on where your interests lie.
It depends on what major you’re interested in. Ecological or Molecular, whatever you see yourself more likely to do, then that’s the section you do.
I only got a 700, but I have some tips:
- If you haven’t taken either a normal OR AP biology class, you will find the studying and test much harder.
- If you HAVE taken a bio class, make sure you fill in the gaps between your class and the subject test curriculum. For example, I took AP Biology and for the test I had to learn plant specifics (angiosperms/gymnosperms), taxonomy, basic embryology, etc.
- Kaplan & Princeton Review practice tests are trash. Do not expect the real exam to be similar.
- Buy the Official SAT Subject Tests book and take the official practice test. It is most similar to the test.
- I would recommend using Princeton Review and Barrons to learn new topics and perhaps Kaplan as a review of information you already know.
- It is true that the decision of E or M should be based on what you find easier (possibly M for you because you like chem, and M is a lot of biochemical reactions like DNA reactions and photosynthesis/respiration). However, in the past, the M test has had a more generous curve.
This is absolutely wrong. The PR tests resemble the actual test well, especially in difficulty.
Really? I got a 780 on the Blue Book test, and a 730 on the real one. That book is absolutely worthless for three reasons:
- If you’re not taking more than three Subject Tests, then it’s a waste of money.
- The tests are outdated and much easier.
- There is only one test per subject. For a full price book, this is absolutely ridiculous.
No, the E test had a more generous curve, NOT the M test.
@DarkEclipse Actually, M test has had the more generous curve.
Whoops, my mistake. Sorry about that.
The difference isn’t that large though, just a 10 point difference between each raw mark.
Yeah… both curves are pretty harsh when compared to tests like math 2 and physics…
Agreed.
@DarkEclipse I absolutely disagree. The official book is handy and it’s not like it’s that expensive. I don’t know that the tests are outdated. But if they are, I don’t think the curriculum has changed much at all. And you can’t beat tests made by the maker of the test. PR and Kaplan’s questions are mere guesswork and stray from the subject test curriculum. They also test on their content and background info, which is not necessary to know for the test. It’s subjective whether they are “similar in difficulty to the real test.” I literally got a 610 on the first PR test a few days before the test and a 700 on the real one.
I disagree. Having one test per subject does not qualify it as “handy”. There is no difference between the two editions of the book, and the first edition was released in 2006, with the included tests being 3 to 4 years older than that. This makes each test ~12 to 13 years old. Changing the cover and including more subjects does not make it “handy”.
The pattern has changed, which means the difficulty has changed. Ergo, they’re inaccurate in difficulty.
How so? This makes no sense at all.
PR does not do that, Barron’s does.
Then your statement on Kaplan and PR books being trash is also subjective.
I got a 740 on the PR test and a 730 on the real one. What’s your point?
When I say handy, I’m referring to the fact that you don’t have to go out and buy prep books that come with practice tests for each test if you don’t want to…this book has a test for all the subject tests.
Hm. In what way do you mean the “pattern” has changed, and do you have verifiable proof of this? As far as I can see, the test has consisted of the same question structure and topics (cellular/molecular, ecology, genetics, organismal, evolution/diversity) for a long time.
Because CollegeBoard does not release anything about the test aside from the types of questions (i.e. experiments, matching, etc.) and its general composition, as in the categories I listed above and weighting of these categories. While PR and Kaplan are good at creating questions on the content in the style of the exam, they can NOT match the quality of a test made by the actual company. CollegeBoard goes through a tedious process to create questions with the correct difficulty that test their curriculum. I don’t think anyone would argue PR/Kaplan tests are as reliable as an official test for the ACT/SAT, and same goes here.
This is my problem. For a full priced book, one test per subject is not worth the money.
Take a look at the Blue Book test, then look at a few recent tests (I dunno where you might get them, maybe ask the test takers about the questions that appeared?). For starters, the number of classification questions and the difficulty of physiology questions has increased over the last few months (I took the January test, my friend took the May one, and another friend took it last year in December).
I said pattern, not topics. Pattern as in the way the old topics are tested, with a few minute details coming every now and again, and increasing the lesser important topics.
That’s because College Board refuses to update the Blue book. While YOU may not have found it to be matching, I have, and so have a few others. However, not everyone can benefit from them, and I agree that it is difficult for some to truly gain from the PR/Kaplan tests.
No, the same does not go here. The Subject Tests and the SAT are two completely opposing poles. The SAT aims to confuse, the Subject Tests do not. The SAT tests content you have learnt in a different way, the Subject Tests do not. So comparing the official tests of the SAT is unfair, since it is not possible to accurately create tests which can mimic the SAT. The same does not go for the Subject Tests.