Please tell me about BPP manual for course 3

[EnoughAlready]

Has anybody used the BPP manual to prepare for the exam 3? How would you rate the readability of the manual? What would you say of the completeness (comprehensiveness) in terms of coverage of the sylubus topics? As the BPP claims, was it enough to be used as the only source of the exam preparation? Even so, was it readable enough or understanbable enough without any other reference? Even if it's comprehensive enough, if you can't understand as you read on, and if you have to read something else because you can't understand the BPP manual itself, then I don't really think I can use it as the only source to study.

I would appreciate any comment or story about your personal experience with the BPP course 3 manaual. In terms of readability (understandability) as the sole manual, Arch 3 appears good. Also the Mahler's notes seem to explain things from scrach. Relatively speaking, is the BPP manual for course 3 easy to understand? What are the weak aspects of the BPP exam 3 manual compared to other guides out there?

Thank you much in advance. :o

[Paddy Murphy]

ARCH is the best manual for a fundimental explaination of the material. The problem with ARCH it is the lack of exam caliber questions in the sample exam, and its regurgitation of past exam questions you would have studied anyway.

I used BPP last time (3rd attempt, got an 8) and passed. I didn't pass from using BPP to learn the material, I passed because of the questions. The Q&A banks, 75 question review and the sample exam are all very exam like in difficulty, if not more. I was done the actual exam in 3 hours after making myself crank through BPP problems repeatedly the last 2 weeks.

Since I already new the material I didn't use BPP to substitute for the books, and my company paid for the manual, so it was worth getting. If you're trying to learn the material, use ARCH.

[passed 3]

I used BPP for course 3. I don't recommend it for the first try if that's the only manual you are going to have. Another more exam oriented manual with BPP would be a good combination if you can have two manuals.

The past exam package of BPP is very good though, because of the in-depth solutions. I think you can order the past exam package alone.

Good luck.

[EnoughAlready]

Paddy & Icegirl, thanks much for your reply. So the BPP C3 manual is not as good as the BPP claims it to be as the sole source of preparation. Paddy, do you think the combination of Arch 3 & BPP alone would be understandable and passable for the exam 3? In the past, I have heard about the Question & Answer Bank and Review Questions contained in the BPP manual, and I've been told they are good. Because of this, I'd like to use the BPP, but the reading material portion of the BPP #3 manual does not seem to be as good as BPP claims it to be (so I've heard as both of you suggested). At this moment, I am leaning toward Arch 3 (with the combination of BPP) as Paddy suggested. Paddy, what do you think about BPP plus Mahler instead? Icegirl, would you suggest any specific material that I should use in addition to BPP? :-?

[passed 3]

I am sorry that I don't know a specific manual that is good to be a supplement to BPP. I just feel that a more detailed and exam oriented should be good. A seminar might be good too. The problem of BPP is that it is too theoretical in some part. There is a lack of link betweem the theories and the exam questions. There are a lot to learn in each topic covered by course 3. A direction of where to go is important for each topic becuse there are so many topics there. Sorry for not able to answer your questions.

[Bama Gambler]

Paddy & Icegirl, thanks much for your reply. So the BPP C3 manual is not as good as the BPP claims it to be as the sole source of preparation. Paddy, do you think the combination of Arch 3 & BPP alone would be understandable and passable for the exam 3? In the past, I have heard about the Question & Answer Bank and Review Questions contained in the BPP manual, and I've been told they are good. Because of this, I'd like to use the BPP, but the reading material portion of the BPP #3 manual does not seem to be as good as BPP claims it to be (so I've heard as both of you suggested). At this moment, I am leaning toward Arch 3 (with the combination of BPP) as Paddy suggested. Paddy, what do you think about BPP plus Mahler instead? Icegirl, would you suggest any specific material that I should use in addition to BPP? :-?

warning: Mahler's notes cover only non-life (45% of exam)! Arch 3 covers all of the exam. I didn't use Arch 3, but Mahler's notes are great.

[EnoughAlready]

Bama, I almost read all of your postings. And I know I'm not supposed to spell you Bamma. I actually learned about Mahler mainly from your postings because you say so along with others.

My concern is that Mahler's notes may be a little too big to supplement BPP, let alone that Mahler's notes cover only the non-life stuff, so it may not be a good idea as the supplement to BPP. I'm looking for a good supplement for BPP.

I read almost all your postings last night and my eyes are hurting this morning.

[EnoughAlready]

icegirl, what other material have you used for the exam #3 other than BPP?

[Paddy Murphy]

I honestly think that, while simplistic, the ARCH manual is great for putting the concepts into a language that most people (ie, geeks like us) will understand. BPP is a "basic principles" kind of manual, much more mathematically oriented. For the exam you should know all the shortcuts for constant force and DeMoivre mortality, as at least 1/2 of the life contingency question will revolve around them. BPP tries to have you integrate everything which will slow you down come exam time.

On the flip side, if you can get a grasp of the material from other sources and then master the BPP questions(which will test you, trust me) I have no doubt you could pass.

[passed 3]

I used CSM which I don't think is really great. The good part of it is: it listed a lot of old exam questions by topics which helped me to practice for each topic. But the outline part and the solution part are not very friendly. I had a hard time using BPP and CSM last time. BPP is really great in terms of format and its tutoring support. If I will do it again, I will use BPP along with something else.

[Inadequate]

I had great luck with BPP for C2 and plan to use it in conjunction with Actex and CSM to get problems. For C2 I thought that the BPP questions were lacking compared to exam questions. Seems that I had a different experience than others here.

[EnoughAlready]

Surprisingly, I have learned that many consider the BPP C3 much inferior to BPP C2. That's why I'm asking people here about their personal experience on BPP C3. People say BPP C3 is not that good, but I've never heard of people saying that on BPP C2. :duh:

[mathguy2222]

The problem of BPP is that it is too theoretical in some part. There is a lack of link betweem the theories and the exam questions.

I honestly think that, while simplistic, the ARCH manual is great for putting the concepts into a language that most people (ie, geeks like us) will understand. BPP is a "basic principles" kind of manual, much more mathematically oriented.

That's why the Universities in the U.S. are where the Indians teach the Chinese. :D

[Bama Gambler]

My concern is that Mahler's notes may be a little too big to supplement BPP, let alone that Mahler's notes cover only the non-life stuff, so it may not be a good idea as the supplement to BPP. I'm looking for a good supplement for BPP.

That's a valid concern. Arch 3 might be a great choice, but I can't recommend it since I haven't used it (except for the free sample chapter which was well written). Without regard to cost, I think the best supplement would be the GSU seminar.

Good Luck,
Bama Gambler

[Inadequate]

Surprisingly, I have learned that many consider the BPP C3 much inferior to BPP C2. That's why I'm asking people here about their personal experience on BPP C3. People say BPP C3 is not that good, but I've never heard of people saying that on BPP C2. :duh:

Reaaly I am surprised to hear that. At my company, we had a slew of people taking C2 and C4, and both used and loved BPP. The only one who sat for C3 used BPP and failed! So maybe you are right. I was planning to use Bpp as my first go around and then use CSM and Mahler and a seminar. What have you heard about that combination?

[EnoughAlready]

I've heard BPP C4 is better than BPP C3, whereas BPP C3 is not that good.

[c3 taker]

I have heard that the BPP for Course 3 is very good. I am going to trust BPP when it says you can use BPP and forget about the text (well, if I find that to be the case). I have other manuals to supplement, but I know a few people who used BPP for C3 last sitting and all highly recommend it. I should be getting mine in the mail today :D

[theplaymaker]

c3taker, tell you know who to send the manuals down to PA already!!