<p>^It was nothing like the Barron’s practice exams.</p>
<p>I went to my school’s library and found that there were two books by Rubenstein. What is the name of the book you all are using?</p>
<p>[The</a> Cultural Landscape: An Introduction to Human Geography 7e](<a href=“http://wps.prenhall.com/esm_rubenstein_humangeo_7/0,6341,421832-,00.html]The”>http://wps.prenhall.com/esm_rubenstein_humangeo_7/0,6341,421832-,00.html)</p>
<p>^^ is what i used last year. Scores came in, got a 4.</p>
<p>@Chess I really didn’t need a prep book at all because I had the class, but it was my first AP so I just did it to be safe.</p>
<p>Thanks, Omegaparticle. Cool name.</p>
<p>To whoever is self studying, get Princeton Review. I got Barron’s and meh, it was useless. I got a 4. I was aiming for a 5.</p>
<p>^Agreed.</p>
<p>Do NOT waste your time and money on Barron’s. If you’re getting a test prep book, get Princeton Review. It helped me review trememdously and I ended up getting a 5 my freshman year (2010). REA also was no good, and Kaplan wasn’t much help either. PR all the way.</p>
<p>I have Barron’s (bought it before I knew it) and now I’m waiting for PR to arrive in the mail!</p>
<p>when will the new editions be available?</p>
<p>The new edition of PR is going to be released in about a month.</p>
<p>Hey guys, update. You can take all of my advice because I made a 5.</p>
<p>I took the HG test last year ('09). Here are my 2 cents. Rubenstein book is good, and you CAN read it to understand the concepts. But, I think it’s way too detailed so I recommend to review from PR and Barrons! You’ll be fine if you review from both. Good luck</p>
<p>P.S. I got a 5 even though I messed up a full FRQ.</p>
<p>Hmm. Rubenstein does not seem too detailed to me, but I guess reading history textbooks in the past two school years has changed my perception of whether the textbook is too detailed or not.</p>
<p>I agree with the people that back PR. I blindly followed CC advice, and got Barron’s, which wasn’t great. It was enough for a 5 for me, but not a comfortable 5. My friend had PR and his was more in depth.</p>
<p>Should I start working through my Rubenstein book now or should I wait for the course changes to be made?</p>
<p>^Wait. The test is so easy I could have read the PR 30 minutes before and still made a 5, I really overestimated.</p>
<p>
+1.
I completely agree. You don’t really need a textbook for APHG, but if you need one use Rubenstein. It’s a good, albeit very detailed book. As far as prep books go, the general consensus is that PR + Barrons should suffice, but if you have to choose one go with PR.</p>
<p>In the 2010 AP exams, I self-studied APHG in one day (“ditched” school the day before and crammed for around 19 hours straight) solely with Barrons. I think I only did one of its practice tests. I got a 5. It’s very doable, but you really have to hardcore study the hell out of the prep book. If there’s stuff that is confusing, look it up and understand it.</p>
<p>As for whether or not Barrons is enough, I thought it was good enough. I chose it because the general consensus on CC had been that Barrons was the best for this exam. However, it appears that within this past AP exam, the consensus has shifted to PR. Perhaps PR is better, but I never looked into it.</p>
<p>Good luck, everyone!</p>
<p>PR is definitely better, I can’t stress that enough. You hardly need to know anything about maps for the test and the first chapters of Barron’s are nothing but maps. Really. If you’re expecting a 5 get the PR, if you’d be good with a 3<a href=“assuming%20you’re%20self%20studying”>/u</a> get the Barron’s.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is good enough. But is it really going to give you what you need for a five if you’re self studying? I don’t really think so.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just use the PR. Take our advice.</p>