08-12-2018, 12:14 AM
I've taken 4 CLEP exams so far (Intro to Psych, Intro to Sociology, Analyzing Literature, and Human Growth and Development), and used REA's practice exam packages before each one. The ones for Intro to Psych, Intro to Sociology, and Human Growth and Development were very, very close to the actual CLEP exams, if maybe a tiny bit easier. I felt afterwards that they were a pretty good diagnostic tool for my CLEP-readiness. Scoring in the 70s-80s on the practice exams led to CLEP scores in the 60+ range. The REA practice exams for Analyzing Literature, however, were just absurdly difficult and nothing like the actual CLEP.
I'm currently studying for the Humanities CLEP, and have done all the practice tests I could find. Here's my issue:
-I took the full-length practice exam in the 2018 official CLEP book and made a 94%.
-Took the Free-Clep-Prep practice exam and scored in the high 70s.
-I took the REA exams and they must have been designed by the same sadist who did their Analyzing Literature exams; it was all the exact same vague, highly-subjective analyses and trick questions. I scored a 64% on each of the REA exams.
-I took the first couple Peterson's tests and totally bombed them--low 50s on both sections. The questions were pretty straightforward, but insanely specific and "deep."
What I'd like to know is, for those of you who use a lot practice exams, which tend to be more accurate? Obviously REA's accuracy depends on the subject (whoever is in charge of their Literature department should be tethered to a stake and flogged with a hardback copy of War and Peace). Are Peterson's generally more accurate than the REA tests? Is there a thread on here with different practice exam score comparison charts, or something similar?
I'm currently studying for the Humanities CLEP, and have done all the practice tests I could find. Here's my issue:
-I took the full-length practice exam in the 2018 official CLEP book and made a 94%.
-Took the Free-Clep-Prep practice exam and scored in the high 70s.
-I took the REA exams and they must have been designed by the same sadist who did their Analyzing Literature exams; it was all the exact same vague, highly-subjective analyses and trick questions. I scored a 64% on each of the REA exams.
-I took the first couple Peterson's tests and totally bombed them--low 50s on both sections. The questions were pretty straightforward, but insanely specific and "deep."
What I'd like to know is, for those of you who use a lot practice exams, which tend to be more accurate? Obviously REA's accuracy depends on the subject (whoever is in charge of their Literature department should be tethered to a stake and flogged with a hardback copy of War and Peace). Are Peterson's generally more accurate than the REA tests? Is there a thread on here with different practice exam score comparison charts, or something similar?
![[-]](https://www.degreeforum.net/mybb/images/collapse.png)