K19
The Widowmaker
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2012
- Messages
- 84
- Reaction score
- 6
Hopefully the topic title is somewhat indicative of my question/dilemma... I've begun a program of study for the October exam (Env/WR PM) with these two primary references, and from what little I've already covered it appears that:
(a) Goswami's All-in-One, while being more approachable and less daunting, may be too light in it's coverage of the syllabus material.
(B) Lindeburg's CERM, while being far more comprehensive and the test prep standard, is often (to borrow from a review I read on Amazon) "like trying to drink water from a fire hose." This is particularly the case with respect to material outside one's areas of practice/knowledge. The material is by and large organized/presented in such a way that there's no way to tell (beyond consulting the NCEES syllabus) whether a particular topic/item is fundamental or esoteric.
It's a frustrating "goldilocks"-type dilemma, whereby one reference is to much, the other to little. Furthermore, neither are particularly well-aligned to the exam syllabus - I've already spent a fair amount of pre-study time pruning the chapters of each that won't apply come exam day.
In researching here on the EB forums and elsewhere, I gathered that a reasonable approach would be to using the All-In-One as the primary base for my review, consulting the CERM as needed for additional depth. Several hours in and I'm feeling less than confident that this is the way to go, hence this slightly long-winded post!
Does anyone have any experience in reckoning with these two texts that they could share? Any guidance or advice would be much appreciated!
Thanks,
Kevin
(a) Goswami's All-in-One, while being more approachable and less daunting, may be too light in it's coverage of the syllabus material.
(B) Lindeburg's CERM, while being far more comprehensive and the test prep standard, is often (to borrow from a review I read on Amazon) "like trying to drink water from a fire hose." This is particularly the case with respect to material outside one's areas of practice/knowledge. The material is by and large organized/presented in such a way that there's no way to tell (beyond consulting the NCEES syllabus) whether a particular topic/item is fundamental or esoteric.
It's a frustrating "goldilocks"-type dilemma, whereby one reference is to much, the other to little. Furthermore, neither are particularly well-aligned to the exam syllabus - I've already spent a fair amount of pre-study time pruning the chapters of each that won't apply come exam day.
In researching here on the EB forums and elsewhere, I gathered that a reasonable approach would be to using the All-In-One as the primary base for my review, consulting the CERM as needed for additional depth. Several hours in and I'm feeling less than confident that this is the way to go, hence this slightly long-winded post!
Does anyone have any experience in reckoning with these two texts that they could share? Any guidance or advice would be much appreciated!
Thanks,
Kevin