[travis_rogers]

NINJA Question –

Hi all,

I’m hoping to get a little guidance as far as when to take REG and how to integrate NINJA MCQ into my plan. I’m scheduled to take BEC on 10/14 (long story why I scheduled it before REG, and I’m already kicking myself over it), and I’m trying to decide whether to attempt REG before the end of the current window (and the Q1 changes) or move on to AUD and save REG for last. I’m not a tax guy, and I doubt that the changes would affect my learning much. I have been using NINJA MCQ heavily for FAR and BEC, however, and I’m concerned that it might not be as useful a tool once all the new topics are testable.

Bottom line, I’d like some perspective on 1) If I wait until the change, would that keep me from being able to rely on NINJA MCQ? and, on the flipside, 2) Is trying to study for REG in 7 or 8 weeks realistic, and is NINJA MCQ a good tool for the current version of the exam? Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

[OTK1995]

I studied REG using just Ninja alone just recently to pass it again. The first time I took it was with Becker and I passed with that too. IT did take me about two months of studying: 3 hours a day during the week (except Wednesdays) and 8 hours each Saturday and Sunday. You can pass but you absolutely need to put the hours in. I also did every SIM at least once and MCQ until my eyes bled. Have you looked at the AICPA sample test? It gives you an idea of what the format is like.

[Anonymous]

Is 7-8 weeks realistic? Yes, and actually anything longer than 8 weeks for most folks is too long to retain all the info covered.

[SuperAccountingGod]

7-8 weeks is definitely realistic for REG. Although I think Jeff mentioned in one of his Youtube videos that 6 weeks is the ideal time-frame you want to study for REG. I might be wrong on that one so don't quote me. Though I think 8 weeks may be too much since you risk the chance of losing some of the earlier info you learned and will have to spend extra time catching up to refresh. That's what happened to me on FAR.

[Author]

Replies