Comparative Govt wasn't as good...

<p>Man, I knew I shouldn't have used the REA book for comparative govt&politics. So much crap that they didn't even mention...I had to freakin' BS so much of it. Who knows, maybe I can get a four? Or maybe a miracle would happen and I would get a five. Probably a 3 though... dang it...</p>

<p>without a doubt....took both US and Comparative- the second one was much more difficult. Hopefully the curve is nice...</p>

<p>I really hope the curve would be nice.</p>

<p>back to back ap exams are
are
i cant even think of the words to describe it
lets just go with "bad"</p>

<p>yeah, my school makes us take comparative with US but my teacher never got around to teaching comparative so i learned everything yesterday from some packets he gave us. i didn't think it was too bad except one essay buuuut then again i have lower standards for my comp grade than my US grade. all these people @ my school just wrote "this is sparta" and "i heard u liek mudkipz" on their essays so that's good for those of you who actually did stuff ;)</p>

<p>Really? I self-studied with the Ethel Wood book in 3 days (basically fell asleep through the chapter about Nigeria) and felt super about the test! Which part did you think was harder; the MC or the FR?</p>

<p>But yea, I looked at the REA book and thought it was too simplistic..</p>

<p>ethel wood is god, pretty much. unfortunately i didn't have time to buy her full book but i had packets for each of the countries except mexico, plus the EU, the introduction, and something about less-developed countries. other than a couple specific things i got mixed up in from cramming in 6hrs i knew pretty much everything. maybe some specific current examples would have improved my essays, but i guess they were alright. i have no clue what to expect for my score... hmn.</p>

<p>FR was harder than MC. definitions were fine, surprisingly. one of the country essays gave me trouble but the rest was good.</p>

<p>why is everyone hating on REA, i used it and i thought i did pretty decent, i think it missed a little bit of information but nothing that couldn't have been supplemented with wiki.</p>

<p>I'm hating on REA cause it's basically the reason I got screwed on the MC of comparative. I used CliffAP for US and I'm pretty sure I got a 5, or at least a 4.</p>

<p>Comp gov made me :( :( :(
US gov made me :D :D :D</p>

<p>if you guys want to share your <em>thoughts</em> on either exam, join the chatroom i started</p>

<p>USGOVPOL
and COMPGOVPOL</p>

<p>REA book was a joke. I had no clue on a number of multiple choice questions, they completely missed some topics. I found the FRQs really easy, however. I had some trouble conjuring examples, but I got all the definitions and I'm pretty sure I got question 6, the most important question by far, almost all right.</p>

<p>Actually, the country-context questions (numbers 7 and 8) are each worth just as much as the contextual analysis question (number 6).</p>

<p>Really? I used the REA book and I found the MC manageable. Although, I learned a lot of stuff by just reading multiple choice explanations and sample essay answers.</p>