Calling Out Dr. Weishaus

[Dark Horse]

Originally Posted by Practicing

I think it's also important to note that the 1st printing of the 11th edition was more than sufficient for many folks on here to pass. I used that alone and got a 10. Yes, the exam made me panic, but I came out with pass.

Originally Posted by StevieB

got 10 myself, was also panicking

I'm riding the 10 train as well, and although I thought the exam was very difficult, I will stand by Abe. The 11th edition was sufficient.

Sure, there were problems that I came across and thought "Where did this come from?" But, I just skipped those problems and devoted my time to the 22-23 problems that Abe's product prepared us for.

[emilyins]

From someone not on the 10 train - I also stand by Abe. I'm using the same manual to study for the Nov sitting and I think its sufficient, especially with the added "benefit" of having taken the exam in May. I know what I need to concentrate on and what I don't.

[Dark Horse]

Originally Posted by emilyins

From someone not on the 10 train - I also stand by Abe. I'm using the same manual to study for the Nov sitting and I think its sufficient, especially with the added "benefit" of having taken the exam in May. I know what I need to concentrate on and what I don't.

Just for the record, I don't mean to be arrogant. If the pass mark is indeed 15 (as many speculate), then a 21 is a 10 (40% above the pass mark). Anyone who got a 10 should consider themselves lucky, since for most exams, 21 is barely passing.

[AdmiralWen]

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

Anyone who got a 10 should consider themselves lucky, since for most exams, 21 is barely passing.

But this sitting was nothing like most exams, which is why all this drama is going on in the first place. I think the people who scored above 21 deserve some credit.

[Practicing]

Just for the record, I had 24, which would be at least a 9 on every sitting of MLC. And that is with ASM as my primary study guide and a 2 day subscription to ADAPT for practice questions as my supplement.

[Peetie Skunk]

You guys can keep using ASM. I will be using TIA and AMLCR for this sitting.

[Annie Howe]

For myself, I am seriously considering not using ASM from now on.

It's partly because there is no supplement now, when the syllabus change had already happened when I bought the book... It's also because while I appreciate all the problems, I find the text a little lengthy and confusing. I don't know that the other manuals are any better though.

[KUUUUUUU]

Originally Posted by Annie Howe

For myself, I am seriously considering not using ASM from now on.

It's partly because there is no supplement now, when the syllabus change had already happened when I bought the book... It's also because while I appreciate all the problems, I find the text a little lengthy and confusing. I don't know that the other manuals are any better though.

I used Actex and ended up passing in May. I thought it was a good manual. The explanations were very good, as they were clear, simple, and straight to the point. Easier to read too...bigger font/more spaced out!

Also, when I compared the manual with other people that used ASM, the newer material (UL, Pension, Profit, etc etc) were covered in greater detail than ASM.

[Baby, ByeBye]

Originally Posted by Peetie Skunk

You guys can keep using ASM. I will be using TIA and AMLCR for this sitting.

So you complain about price but opt for something more expensive?

[Peetie Skunk]

Originally Posted by Baby, ByeBye

So you complain about price but opt for something more expensive?

The price isn't what I'm complaining about. Besides, I'm not even paying for this stuff.