[TCav12579]

Well I am studying for my third section (FAR) which I am taking on 5/7. I have gone back to do the MCQs for F4 and F5 before I continue on with the lectures from F8 till the end of the book and have come to the conclusion that Becker’s MCQs are absolutely demoralizing. Each question has so much going on, it seems as if I am reading another language. I can only hope that these questions are severely overkill and are not nearly as complicated on the actual exam. If they are, I will have to come to terms that I am screwed for this next section.

Anyway, I hope everyones studying is going well! Sorry for the rant… if anyone has felt the same way or has insight on the topic please chime in!

 

 

[Anonymous]

I assure you that the actual FAR questions are not as complicated as the ones presented in Becker. It's still a great practice though. Better to take the exam over-prepared than under-prepared.

[msquared17]

I agree. I've learned to read the question first. Then you know what information to focus on for those long paragraph type questions.

[TCav12579]

Thanks for the reassurance/tips! This is my first time going through the questions, I took a different study approach of trying to get through the lectures first then circling back to do the MCQs (not sure if I think this was a good choice anymore). Still they seem the most complicated out of the MCQs for all of the other tests.

[mskcle]

FAR MCQ in practice through Becker is like 10 steps to get 1 number, but on the exam its one step to get the answer. How did Becker MCQ compare for REG? I got an 86 on FAR last window, and have REG coming up end of April.

[TCav12579]

^ Good to hear!

The REG questions difficulty wise were fairly similar I would say except for the wordiness of the questions in Becker. Reading the question first in Becker really helped to cut down the time needed for each question but was unnecessary for the MCQs on the exam. They were pretty straight forward compared to Becker.

[Author]

Replies