Becker BEC Class Review

I took the live class of Becker BEC in February 2010.  I sat for that section of the exam at the end of February and passed with a 93.  I put in a total of 75 hours of study time into the section.  This post will be my review and experiences with the Becker program for this section of the CPA exam. 
Just as a reminder for those that haven’t followed any of my other posts, I have been out of college since 2001 and haven’t seen any of the materials covered on the exam in 10 years.  I worked a normal 40-45 hour week while taking the live classes and studying.  I took off one day of work to study during this class (and one day to actually take the test).

Overall the Becker materials were a good representation of what I saw on my actual exam.  This section was a bit odd compared to the AUD and REG sections that I have already taken.  My initial thoughts on this section were that it would be easier than AUD or REG as well as being short.  Once I got into the material I found that I struggled with it more than I had with the other sections.  Going into the test I was nervous (vs feeling good going in for AUD and REG) and felt great coming out of the exam (vs very nervous coming out of AUD and REG).  I can explain the good feeling coming out of the exam as BEC is not adaptive; hence it did not get more difficult the better I was doing.  My nervousness going in was due to my letting the exam mentally beat me before even taking it.

BEC is different from the other sections of the CPA exam in many ways.  The exam itself is different in that it does not get harder or easier depending on how well you are doing on it.  Through the end of 2010 it also is the only section comprised solely of multiple choice questions.   There are a variety of topics covered in the five classes that do not really relate to each other or build on each other.  It is like a completely different course each week.

BEC-1:  The first class covers entities (sole proprietorships, corps, s corp, partnerships, LP, LLP, and LLC).  This section was pretty easy.  I had never known the differences between the L** entities, so that was all new to me.  Much of the other stuff was still fresh in my mind from the materials in REG.  This section helped fuel my “this section is going to be cake” mentality.  I scored 95% on the multiple choice questions my first pass through them.  Listening to the lecture once was plenty to grasp everything I needed to know for this section.  I listened to the lecture, did the multiple choice questions once, and reviewed the great summary table for 3 minutes.  If you are planning out your study time for BEC, this section shouldn’t require nearly the time commitment the other sections will require.

BEC-2:  The second class covers basic economics.  I try and read the materials before class.  Reading this section put me to sleep (literally…..I had to stop reading the book on the couch and move to the kitchen table).  The wording also didn’t click with me for some reason.  The good news is the lecturer really brings it together so that it made a ton of sense easily.  I would go as far to say to not read this section until after listening to the lecture.  The lecturer for this section was not one of the two usual guys.  He was not as humorous as Tim or Peter, but he got the job done, which is really the important part.  This lecture covers material only worth 10% of the BEC section and several people I know ignored it more or less.  It is worth the time to go through it in detail though since the homework and supplemental questions manage to find a way to twist simple concepts into questions that make baby Jesus weep.  Once you feel comfortable with the questions though the material isn’t overly difficult to grasp or get.

BEC-3:  The middle class covers financial management.  I was really hoping for an easy pass on this section since it is close to what I do in my day job.  The material covered here comes mostly from the basic finance class with a few items from later finance classes thrown in to keep you on your toes.  I felt great coming out of the lectures.  Then the brick wall that was the multiple choice questions humbled me greatly.  I felt like the village idiot after I got through the questions on this section.  Ultimately, I re-watched this lecture one topic at a time stopping after each lecture topic and re-worked the multiple choice questions.  This topic by topic approach took me 10-11 hours to get through (on a Friday I took off from work expecting to relax on).  This was probably the best 10-11 hours of study time I had in BEC.  The topic by topic approach really helped me understand the material and piece together my shattered ego.  Even after the day of hell I spent on this topic, much of my study time was spent reviewing this class.  There are various ratios and such between this section (and some in BEC-5?).  They are worth knowing.  Don’t kill yourself trying to know them, but they are worth a couple of points on the exam, so don’t blow them off.

BEC-4:  The fourth section is the dreaded IT section.  I’m a computer geek.  I love computers and am a techy.  I was expecting this section to be a joke.  I was going to go to the lecture and listen and then blow through the questions once.  I was humbled a little, but it wasn’t as bad as people thought.  The main thing to focus on this section is the separation of duties between the various computer job titles.  This is less techy in nature and more old fashion memorization.  Being a computer person definitely gave me an edge in this section, but everything in this section can be memorized by a non-techy without too much effort.  If you can memorize the terminology of BEC-1 you can get through this one the same way.  This section is known for having really random and detailed questions being thrown at you in the actual exam.  I saw two really random, out of left field types of questions on my actual exam.  There is no way that any material is going to be able to prepare you for those things without completely overwhelming you.  Learn what is presented in the chapter and it will be enough to get you through this section.  I did read the 40-ish page addendum provided.  I found a few tidbits interesting as a computer nerd, but by and large it was boring and more detailed than anyone would ever want/need to know.  I am a fan of Linux but I really could care less what programming language was used to program and compile it.  Know the basics of what a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, & 4th generation programming language features are but keep it simple overall.  All but two of my IT related questions were basic concepts covered in the Becker material.  Of the two questions that were not, one was logically deductible; the other was just so random to even worry about it.

BEC-5:  The last class covers cost accounting.  This section floored me as well.  I spent a great deal of time on my own in this section.  Like BEC-3 I ended up re-watching these lectures topic by topic.  The overhead variance stuff I watched more times that I would care to admit to.  There is a ton of material covered and it can be calculation intensive.  The homework for this section is brutal.  I thought the wall that hit me in BEC-3 was bad…..nooooooo.  The BEC-5 homework made BEC-3 look like reciting your ABCs.  I was especially amused by the answer explanation that looked like the chalk-board drawings of a football play.  Do not fear though.  The homework questions were much, much harder than what I ultimately saw on the exam.  This section had me in a panic prior to my test.  The actual was not as insane.  A slightly side note, the video lecture sortof skips over their S-A-D and PURE mnemonic.  I didn’t fully get what they were doing with it until I drew it on the whiteboard.  Nailing this bit down saved me tons of time on the actual exam.  My regret is that I didn’t nail this down until almost the end of my studying.  I could have saved lots of study time getting this down earlier.

Overall this section spun me around and I ended up using it differently than I had on the previous classes.  After BEC-2 I did not read the book materials prior to going to the live class to watch the lectures.  This explains my lower overall study time for this section compared to AUD. 

Again let me say that the Becker class prepared me well for this section.  The homework questions in the Becker software were much harder than what I ultimately saw on the exam.  If you can survive (and it is a fight at times) the homework questions the actual exam should be no problem.  That does not mean you shouldn’t work hard at getting through the homework with good percentages though.  Struggling through the homework questions will pound into your brain how to do the problems.

This section was the first section that I was worried about the time limit.  This exam has a 2.5 hour time limit in which to get through 90 questions (1.67 minutes per problem).  In the homework I was averaging a bit over 2 minutes the day before my exam.  This really worried me and I was committed to spending no more than 50 minutes on any one testlet.  When I got going on the actual exam I was churning through it at a pace that was not going to leave me any time problems at all.  I was able to go back and really think through the couple of questions I wasn’t sure on.  I moved onto my last testlet with about an hour to go and finished it in under 25 minutes.  I felt almost guilty how easy that last testlet was to me so I reviewed every question and still finished up with time to spare.  Again, the homework was a ton harder for calculation type of problems compared to what I saw on the actual exam.

The keys to this section is know where to put your study time.  You need to spend time going through all of the material, but don’t waste time in areas that are simpler.  Don’t skimp on study time for BEC-3 and BEC-5.  They are complicated in places and you just have to spend the time working through it over and over until you just get it.

DO NOT SKIP THE HOMEWORK READINGS in the Becker materials.  Just about every homework reading was worth at least one question on the exam.  They may not have time to cover it in the video lecture, but don’t skip it.  Read it through once and have a basic understanding of it.  If you pass with a 90+ it may not make a difference.  It could make a difference between a 72-73 and a 75+.

I did not even look at the flashcards for this section so I have no basis to comment on them.  As per my usual, I prefer a blue pen for taking notes in the book as it stands out better against the black type.  I still love the Becker highlighters, I just wish their comfy pens were blue as my finger cramps up after a couple of hours of writing with my cheap 15 cent pen.

This section is different from the others.  Don’t get over-confident and try to blow it off.  Don’t become the puddle of mush that my nerves were over BEC-3 & BEC-5.  They take a chunk of time and patience to get through, but if you do it will give you the ability you need to pass this section.  I spent over half of my total study time on those two sections (and most of that was just on BEC-5).  Get a white board and work through the variance problems until you understand it.  Note I didn’t say until you get the right answer…..do it repeatedly until you UNDERSTAND it.

Becker REG Class Review

I took the live class of Becker Regulation in January 2010.  I sat for the exam on the first of February and passed with a 97.  I put in a total of 118 hours of study time for this section.  40-ish of that was me reading the book in December and doing the multiple choice questions once before the classes started in January.  Without that I would have been about 75-80 hours in January which is similar to what I put into AUD and BEC each.  I do not work in tax and haven’t had any college classes in tax in about a decade.  This post will be my review and experiences with the Becker program as it relates to the Regulation section of the CPA Exam.

Overall the Becker materials were a good representation of what I saw on my actual exam.  Going into the test I felt really comfortable with the material.  There were a couple of questions that were not covered in my Becker materials, but those might have been pre-test questions.  The book presented the materials in a logical progression of topics and it flowed well.  The lecture style for REG was very similar to AUD.  In my AUD review I mentioned that I felt the lectures reading the book to us and having us make notes and highlights seemed odd.  I am use to it now and it does work and I didn’t question it this class.  I reviewed the book materials the weekend before my test and the notes and highlights were useful.  If you are using Becker for REG make sure you read all of each chapter and the homework reading.  I had questions on my exam covered in Becker’s material that was not in the lecture.  Be sure you’ve actually read the odd industry-specific exceptions on things.  Even reading it once should be enough to tickle your brain during the exam when they bring up the random oddities.  It got me a point on my actual exam.

I took my study style from AUD and actually increased it a bit.  Towards the end of AUD I was reading the materials before class once and trying the multiple choice questions before going to the live class.  For REG I did this for all classes.  It was extremely beneficial to me for REG.  I had a basic understanding of the materials and how the material would be presented in questions.  Listening to the lectures knowing that allowed it to sink in really well.  Any area I had trouble in was typically clarified by an example in the lecture not given in the book.  All in this means I went through all the material twice during the course of the month-long classes.  I think many underestimate the power of seeing the material in its entirety twice.  I did not go through all the multiple choice questions 4-5 times like I did with AUD, but I felt more comfortable with the material sooner in REG than I did in AUD. 

Throughout REG I also continued to take progress tests.  Progress tests in the Becker software allow you to select which classes you want questions to come from.  It then gives you up to 100 questions (if all classes are selected) weighted by the same weights the actual exam uses (ie. more tax than law questions).  This helped keep what I had already done fresh in my mind.  This was an important part of keeping the tax stuff in my head during the two weeks of business law lectures.  If I had not done those I would not have been in good shape to take the test so quickly after the last class (I took the exam a week after the last class).

I have the Becker flashcards for REG (and other sections).  I figured there was no point in going cheap on the $200 after dropping almost $3,000 for the classes.  Like AUD, I did not use the REG flashcards after looking at them early in my course.  They would probably be beneficial for those that learn well in short sessions.  I was always doing multi-hour study sessions so I got more benefit out of working multiple choice questions.  I probably would not buy the flashcards knowing what I know now, but they would be great for someone that has used flashcards before.  If you are going to make your own consider buying the pre-made ones.  I am just not a big flashcard person in general.

I do have a couple of criticisms towards the Becker REG program though.  The quality control for this section was noticeably bad in several places.  In many questions there were inconsistencies in the question answers and explanations.  Most of these were due to deduction, phase-outs, and other changed values not reflecting the current amounts.  Most of these were fairly trivial and most occurred solely in the answer explanations.  There were a couple of questions where the problem’s answer choices did not have the correct answer as an option though.  All in Becker dropped the ball on their quality control for the 2010 REG materials.  It was still very useful, but the number of simple issues was a bit distracting and embarrassing given the price point of their classes.  Most of these issues were published in a correcting document on the Becker site after being brought to their attention, so they get good points on making correcting information available to those that check regularly for the updates.

Another item I’d like to note is the same thing I mentioned with the AUD review.  I really wish there were more simulations to work through in the software.  They did have several additional simulations in the REG software than they did in AUD, but I still wanted more.  I would have loved to have 15-20 or more.  With the written parts I would have loved to have a whole addendum with example questions and suggested answers just to read through.  The written part is a bit pointless to mention since starting next year there will not be any written parts to REG though.  Basically though I wish there were a ton more simulations available to work through.  The topics that can be covered in the exam and how they are tested are so random it is hard to say that working just a few is good enough to make you feel comfortable with them.

While I doubt anyone associated with Becker will actually be reading this, the following could be helpful for those doing the self-study versions of the program.  I really wish they would cover the law/ethics/professional responsibility part of the course first and then move on to the tax topics rather than doing the tax stuff first.  The tax parts account for a larger portion of the exam and it would be beneficial to have those topics fresher in your mind.  I worked around this shortcoming by doing progress tests constantly to keep it fresh.

One last general recommendation for Becker.  At the start of the live classes they give you these really high quality highlighters (for highlighting along with the lecturer) and ink pens.  I prefer blue ink for stuff like this as it stands out against the black print better.  This is a really minor suggestion, but might be logical.

Overall Becker is great for REG.  If you follow their material and put in the time it takes you will have the knowledge needed to pass this section of the exam.  I have no basis to compare Becker to other programs as I only used Becker.  However, if you use Becker you will be able to get through it just fine.

Becker AUD Class Review

< < per my post on another71.com > >

I took the live class of Becker Audit in October 2009. I sat for the exam in November and passed with a 94. I had no working audit experience and it had been 8-ish years since I had my audit classes. One of the big questions I’ve seen people asking in the short time I’ve been reading is how to study and which review materials to use. I can’t speak towards the other materials, but thought I’d share my thoughts on the Audit portion of the Becker materials.

Overall the Becker Audit materials are a fair representation of the AUD test. There may have been 3-5 questions that I can say were not covered directly in my study materials and those could very well have been the pre-test questions. The simulations given in the Becker software gave a good mechanical feel to the types of simulations I saw in the exam. There are so many possible topics and/or ways the simulations can test I don’t know that it is possible to cover everything in the practice simulations. That being said, the Becker materials had about 2 simulations per class (5 class X 2 = 10 simulations) plus two simulations in each of the practice exams (total around 14 simulations). Given that Becker has been around for ages I am not sure why they couldn’t have an extra 10-25 simulations available. I did download an update that put one of the AICPA released simulations into the Becker software. The same thing applies to the written as the simulations. I would love to have just had questions and answers to read through. Reading through the good solid answers in the ones available was helpful, I just wanted more of them.

I questioned the style of the lectures after my first couple of classes. The lectures mostly revolve around the lecturer reading chunks out of the book and telling you to highlight and/or underline certain parts and other notes in the margin. At times I was busy highlighting or writing and missed parts of what was said. I would have preferred the book already have the arrows, notes, and highlights/underlines, but I understand having me (the students) do it is part of the learning process. I still think I got more out of the examples and explanations of things moreso than the mechanically highlighting, but each person learns differently.

There is a question people ask that I haven’t seen a good answer on is “how do I study?” People spend a lot of time telling people how much they studied, but I didn’t see many answers detailing the how. This was important to me as I never really had to study much in college to get good grades (I was lucky). So, how did I study using the Becker AUD? I read the material and answered the multiple choice questions prior to going to the class (shot for 70-80%)%). I then went to the class. The day after the class I would work all the multiple choice questions (including supplemental) (shot for 90% but often got 85-90%). I would also work the prior class’ multiple choice questions (here is where I was firmly in the low-90%s).

Maybe less confusing version:

Saturday: read the following Monday’s class material and work prior week’s simulations
Sunday: read the following Wednesday’s class material and work MC questions for upcoming Mon/Wed class
Monday: class
Tuesday: work Monday’s MC questions and previous Wednesday’s MC questions
Wednesday: class
Thursday work Wednesday’s MC questions and that week’s Monday MC questions
Friday: night off

Basically I was constantly doing the current class and previous class questions as I moved through the material. The weekend would do the prior week’s simulations and answer the upcoming week’s MC questions.

When doing the MC questions I might get the answer extremely quickly (especially after seeing the questions a ton). I didn’t stop with getting the right answer. Before I would look at the answer I would try to explain why the other answers were incorrect. This is important as the actual exam might ask a question on the specific content from a different angle or slightly different situation. By explaining why the incorrect answers are incorrect it allows you to think through things so when you see the same type, yet different facts it is just like what you studied.

This process basically means I went through the material twice; once before class and once in class. I went through the MC questions three times; once before class, once right after class, and once a couple of days after class. The simulations each got one pass through them. During my final review I went through each class’ MC questions in their entirety yet again as well as read through all the simulations. I then took 4 or 5 practice MC sets (100 questions each pulled from the homework MC questions weighted by content). I finally finished up with the two practice final exams. By time I took the exam I had seen every MC question 4 times plus whichever pulled into the weighted exams and every simulation at least twice.

I almost feel like I could have ignored the book. I didn’t memorize the standard audit report verbatim (as recommended). I actually only briefly skimmed the book during my final review. I didn’t learn all the mnemonics listed. I did pick out 4 or 5 of the ones I thought were most important (internal controls, modifying previously issued opinion, and a couple of others). Mnemonics are good, but when you have a dozen of them they start to run together and remembering which goes with which concept can get confusing.

Becker AUD Flashcards: I did purchase the flashcards. I figured if I was already spending $3,000 I probably shouldn’t be cheap on the last $200 for the flashcards. I found them to be both good and bad. There were some things that were split onto three flashcards that really was a single concept and could have been on one card. Some cards had minor points that was either extremely basic knowledge after listening to the lectures and not worthy of a flashcard. Ultimately I removed many of the cards and kept a core group of flashcards I thought were the most important or areas I felt weak in. I kept about a third of the cards in the set I carried with me to review and the other two-thirds went back in the box. The cards I used were great. If the other classes are of similar quality then they will be worth the $200. On a side note, I did find one incorrect card that had the same answer as the previous card on it. This was somewhat irrelevant since that material had changed due to a recent update anyhow. It was actually a good learning tool for me since I identified the incorrect answer and then thought out and looked up what the correct answer was.

Material that had changed or was being updated and possibly tested on was covered by handouts from the in-class facilitator. He covered the changes and how they might be tested. These updates were presented in the same format as the book. Some of my exam questions were covered by these updates. If you have updates be sure to read them and get the one or two points towards your 75. Do not ignore them.

All in I spent 89.5 hours studying for the AUD test including class time (tracked it on my blog). This time did not count minor 5-10 minute flashcard sessions I did occasionally during my lunch breaks at work (didn’t do as many of these as I would have liked, so really minor time investment overall). While taking the actual exam I felt that everything on the exam had been covered. Even the stuff I had issues with I knew and had seen the material.

I took the exam 12 days after the last class. Some people from the class told me I was crazy for taking it that soon, but I would have felt comfortable doing it a week after. I really did not spend much time studying the last 5-6 days before the exam. It was actually nice to do two classes worth of MC questions and be done for the evening instead of spending every waking moment after work studying. The last several days were actually very motivational as I would hop on, do the questions, and score in the 90s and still have 30-60 minutes of conscious spouse time.

On a rant note, half the challenge of the questions was figuring out what they were saying/asking. It was frustrating knowing what concept they were asking about and knowing that concept inside and out but trying to read through triple negatives in the questions and answers was annoying (which of the following does NOT include…..and then double negative in the answer choices).

I hope this write-up will help someone with the exam. The goal is to let people know that the Becker AUD material does adequately cover and give you practice relevant to the exam. I also included how I used the material to assist those trying to formulate their study plan.

Getting Closer

157 days remaining
Mood – Ok
Study Time – 3.0 hours (79.0 total)
Sections Taken/Passed:  none/none

I reviewed all the supplemental simulations today.  I also downloaded the additional AICPA released simulations that the Becker folks have converted into their software.  I am doing 85-90% on the content of those.  I would still mostly suck at the written part (I've got a mental block against the written part at this point I think).  I worked through the 137 supplemental questions  for AUD-4 today as well.  I got 84% correct.  I was split on my misses.  Half of them I had it down to one or two answers.  The other half I had a hard time figuring out what the question was asking or what the answers were saying.  It is sad when half the battle is just trying to figure out what they are saying. 

I suppose the CPA title wouldn't be as exclusive if they just asked questions in a clear, concise manner that tests knowledge rather the ability to translate intentionally crappy wording.  I am not being bitchy when I say this.  There is a distinct lack of consistency (hello GAAP principles!) in wording throughout the questions.  A specific example of this is in the use of the words Trace and Vouch.  This is  probably a function of different people writing the different questions, but there should be some sort of quality review process (internal control perhaps?) that should consider consistent use of terminology.  While I am on a soap box, there also seem to be many questions designed to test the differences between how thing use to be and how they are now.  I find these types of questions both pointless and relieving.  I find them pointless from the perspective of "I have no idea how things were done 3/5/7/10/more years ago" and putting questions in concerning specific wording (or how it has changed) is moot.  They would be good questions if you were testing people who already had their CPA and they needed to know the changes (CPE classes?).  I find them somewhat of a relief in that the answers to these questions tend to be easier than other questions.  I have four choices and three of them use wording or terms I've not seen in any example report.....duh!  I suppose this is a function of existing CPAs writing questions to test things they find interesting/compelling/important without regards to why they are asking it or who they are asking it of.

On another note, I managed to get a doctor's appointment in.  Unfortunately I don't have strep.  I looked at my doctor funny when he said that like he had gone crazy, but I understand his explanation.  If it was strep he would put me on antibiotics and I'd be good in 3-5 days.  Since it isn't strep, it could be the beginnings of something worse that will come up over the next week.  I suppose it would be just lovely to be coughing up a lung or drowning in snot while trying to take the CPA exam on Monday.  In any event, I've paid $250-ish already to take it, so it will be taken assuming I'm well enough to be conscious long enough to get into the test.