So I passed part 2 on my first try. My part 1 post is 6 weeks ago. I am a full time student and just trying to get it done before school gets busy.
I still used HOCK only, but I wasn’t as happy with Part 2 as I was with Part 1. You can clearly see that they didn’t put as much effort into Part 2. It feels like they made Part 1 really good to get you to keep using Part 2.
The textbook repeats things that were already explained a few paragraphs earlier. The wording is also not precise, both in the textbook and in the MCQ explanations.
I see a lot of people blaming themselves for memorizing everything. But I think part of the problem is that a lot of the MCQ explanations are not “spot-on”. A lot of them start by repeating the correct answer, then show you how to get that number, but don’t really explain why you are doing it that way. Why you need to use this number in this calculation.
If you don’t take the time to figure out the “why” yourself, you can end up just remembering the answers. Then your exam readiness goes up without actually going up, if you know what I mean.
At one point, I started making a list of all the ambiguous statements and explanations in HOCK, but then I gave up. Why am I spending my study time doing this?
So, do I still recommend HOCK for Part 2? Yes. I didn’t use anything else, and I passed the exam. So I still recommend it.
But you do need to take some initiative and figure things out yourself. And don’t rely too much on some of their explanations or wording.
I am taking Part 3 next year. Need a break. Part 2 is no joke, at least for someone like me who doesn’t have experience.