[Anonymous]

I’m studying for BEC and I was just wondering whether the purpose of WC is to determine whether you have adequate professional writing skills or whether you are knowledgeable about a particular topic. I know it’s both, but is it one more than the other? In general, are the topics usually more broad to give you plenty to write about or more specific to make sure you know all the details about a particular topic?

[Biff-1955-Tannen]

It is more of how you format the WC. Unless you are on the bubble, then a human will grade the response for content.

AUD 93 Jan 16
BEC 83 Feb 16
FAR 83 Apr 16
REG 84 May 16

99% Ninja MCQ only

[SchruteBeet]

The WC mostly tests you on your writing skills but knowing the material actually helps because it reflects your writing by a great deal. A majority of the WC content I was tested on were very general concepts so it really wasn't that tough sounding informed. If you're a decent writer, I wouldn't worry too much! Not sure if Ninja has a video, but I just watched through the Becker video to familiarize myself with how WC's are set up on the test.

[Anonymous]

When I was studying, the study materials etc. said that it was based on writing more than content. It needed to be related to the subject at hand, but your advice given (if it asked for advice) didn't need to be the best advice, your analysis (if it was an analysis one) could be based on a faulty understanding and that'd be OK, etc. Personally, I remember being a bit confused about the topics for the WCs that I got, but since my understanding was that the test was about writing not knowledge of the topic, I just wrote a solid response that was as related as possible. Like, if it was an essay about the care of zebras as pets, I've never read about caring for zebras as pets; however, I could still write a response that drew on what knowledge I do have and drawing some conclusions beyond that to make it sound good – that zebras are larger than most pets and will need room to run, so pet lovers should consider whether they can provide this before getting a zebra; that zebras each have unique stripe patterns, which is part of what pet owners enjoy about keeping zebras; that zebras haven't been domesticated nearly as much as horses have, so people shouldn't anticipate owning a zebra to be like owning a horse, if anything more like owning a wild horse; etc. As you can probably tell reading through these random thoughts of things I could write with that WC prompt, it's all just manipulation of basic knowledge. I don't know where you could even legally keep a zebra as a pet, but I do know it's not common, so I can deduct that they're not breed very much as pets, so are pretty wild underneath. I've read enough articles about pet care for somewhat abnormal pets to know that cautions about unique needs (like lots of room to run around) are a standard practice. Etc. So, I don't really know the topic, but I could blend all that together into a seemingly thorough and on-point response to the WC. From my understanding, that is what the exam is looking for.

That being said, I passed BEC first try and am in a state that only gives score reports for failing scores, so I don't know how my WC score was compared to others or compared to my MCQ score.

[Anonymous]

The WC section tests your writing ability more than your knowledge. But having the knowledge certainly helps you frame out and write a solid response faster than having to ponder how much BS is necessary to satisfy the requirements, what order to put the BS in, etc.

Always remember that unless your score is borderline, a computer will be the only grader. The computer is programmed to look for proper paragraph structure (topic sentences, supporting sentences), transition words between paragraphs, key terms, definitions, examples, and proper spelling, grammar, and punctuation.

Key terms, definitions, and examples are the places where your knowledge comes into play, but again, a computer is reading this, not a human. So you can get credit for writing something kinda useless if you phrase it in the right way.

For example, say you're writing about depreciation methods. This could be the start of one of your paragraphs:

“Straight-line is one acceptable depreciation method. For example, a boat is an asset that can be depreciated on a straight-line basis.”

That's a fairly ridiculous attempt to explain what straight-line depreciation is, but you'd get some credit for it because you included all the bold terms.

Also remember, if you have no idea what to write, a lot of key terms will be included in the writing prompt itself. Take those, add some high-level color and some creative rephrasing, and you'll be okay.

[Author]

Replies