[ITSTIMETOPASS]

What are your experiences with UWorld Roger CPA Review compared to other review courses you used?

DONE

AUD: PASSED!
REG: Q4 2015
FAR:
BEC:

[ncjm304]

I have used MDS, Roger, Gleim and NINJA. As far as lectures, Roger is far superior to MDS. He is the best lecturer, particularly for AUD. I would say AUD and FAR are his strongest areas as a lecturer. He is much more entertaining that the instructor in MDS and his memory aids are definitely very helpful. His lectures are also better than Gleim's IMO. Gleim's lectures consist of somebody just basically reading the book out loud to you.

As far as Roger's MCQs, they were initially lacking. They have made a lot of improvement over the last year. They just released the new IPQ software today and it looks pretty good for the most part. I am not going to really use it much since my test is on Tuesday. I am just using the legacy mode.

NINJA is definitely better for MCQs. I think the answer explanations are way better than Roger's and are more helpful. Some of the multiple choice hits more obscure topics too, which can be helpful.

AUD - 79
BEC - 77
FAR - 83
REG - 83

Licensed FL CPA

AUD- 71,79
BEC- 72,77
FAR- 83
REG- 63,71,83

DONE!

[Anonymous]

Roger lectures are great and he makes it as entertaining as it can be – I haven’t watched any other review courses, so I can’t really compare anything. His book is good too…I mean it’s a CPA book…so yeah. It’s long and not necessarily meant to be read quickly. So I supplement with the Ninja notes – anytime there is something in the Ninja notes that isn’t making sense, I go back to the Roger lectures/book to figure it out. I think the combo of the two has me pretty covered.

I also have the Roger audio and just got the Ninja audio. The Roger audio is basically the cram course without the video. There are clearly times when he is referring to something on the board but I don’t have a visual so I can’t see what the difference is between “this one” and “that one”. However, I do like to listen to his audio course on my commute when I’m going through the lectures because it repeats the memory mnemonics that he uses and makes it a little easier to remember as I’m moving into other sections. But if I had to pick between the two, I’d probably go Ninja simply because the Ninja audio is what I think people really expect from an audio course – it’s not referring to things you can’t see – and it’s give you the main facts you need. Plus, I think the Ninja audio for REG is 4 hours and the Roger audio is 12 hours, so obviously Ninja is quicker to get through. Either way, if you have a commute or any downtime where you can listen, I recommend an audio course because the more you hear something the more likely you are to remember…or at least that’s what I’m telling myself.

I was actually just discussing MCQ and the difference between Ninja and Roger. We both said we feel like Roger questions are easier. I can’t really put my finger on why – I've used both and I see some of the same questions but there’s still something different. I don't know if Roger supplements his with his own questions or how it all works. Ninja definitely has more random where did that come from specific facts questions – I guess I like that because it's typically stuff that neither review went over and if it pops up on the actual exam maybe I'll have a shot at getting it right simply because I saw it before. With that said, I tried some of the SIMs for AUD and I think Roger’s are more realistic.

I think they actually mentioned they will be updating this, but Roger sucks at giving you random questions. I’ve tried to do sets of 30 in there and it gave me clumps all from the same section and only covered 1 or 2 sections when I had selected all the sections. Obviously this isn’t as much of an issue if I’m going section by section anyways, but yesterday when Ninja was down I tried to use Roger and I think I got all commercial paper and a few warranty questions. This is not going to get me ready for my test, Rog!

The one thing I will say for the Roger IPQ is the setup /functionality is a good practice for the actual exam. If I have time I'm going to run through a practice exam so I can get use to not getting immediate feedback after each question & flagging/reviewing questions before I click finish. I feel like Ninja accustoms you to knowing right away if you got a question right or wrong and it lets you assess how you feel you are doing as you are going along – when I didn’t get that during the AUD exam it really threw me. Plus, even when I got Ninja questions wrong it immediately explains why and I can apply that to later questions – you don’t get that on the real exam. Ninja also trains you to pick an answer and not go back to it to review your answer – I had PLENTY of time to review during AUD but I didn’t and I think part of that was because I hadn’t trained myself with the option to go back and re-analyze the question; I was use to picking an answer and moving on. But maybe both of these issues would be solved if I actually made it to the review portion :X

*** I haven't had a chance to use the new Roger IPQ (MCQ) – so everything I just said about that might be fixed now.

[Author]

Replies