[Jan_in_WI]

I know this is probably a tired topic, but I’m in the mood to discuss it, if anyone else is so inclined.

I graduated with my bachelors degree in public accounting over 12 years ago. At that time, the exam was still offered only twice per year and required taking all four sections at once, with a minimum percentage required on all parts in order to keep passing scores on passed sections.

Of course, the sheer volume of information tested all at once was overwhelming, and the testing dates were very inflexible. However, I think today’s exam format presents its own challenges with the simulations, research questions and topic coverage.

CPAs who have been around for a while might be tempted to state that the exam is “easier” now than it used to be. But is that really true? As one who has seen both sides of the fence, I’m not sure it is actually any easier now than in the past, with the exception of study flexibility and being permitted to take sections individually and at different times of the year. Beyond that, the expectations are higher, I think.

What are your thoughts on this topic, and have any of you been on the receiving end of comments from elders in the profession who believe the exam is easier than it used to be?

Thanks,

Jan

FAR - 94 (7/10)
AUD - 99 (8/20)
REG - 99 (10/15)
BEC - 88 (11/20)

[Anonymous]

I just want to say “who cares.. just let me pass” haha.. I've been studying too long today..

I wonder what the passing rates were back then? There are many people out there who took it a long time ago with the attitude of “poor me, I had it harder” then there are the realistic people who say we have it harder. However, I think the people next year will have it the hardest.. did that make any sense?

I know one individual who took it a long time ago that failed the exam 6 times. He used Becker, the volume of information and the opportunity to only take it twice was hard. Then, waiting 6 months to see if you passed, not knowing if you should keep studying or not would be hard. Today, Becker is better at the questions, practice simulations, etc. When I walk in the exam, if I prepared enough, the exam seems easier than becker questions. I think the exam is slightly easier today then it was back then, because of the response of scoring, focusing on one exam, support like another71.com, facebook becker, Becker, etc… however I think next year will be harder. No easy points in the written communication and 40% of your grade is from the simulations! GOD Please let me pass all this year!!! PLEASE PLEASE

[whitesoxfancpa]

My thoughts are this:

Very few people have taken the exam both ways. The people who have obviously failed it the pencil and paper way, so they'll either way the new format is easier or that they didn't study hard enough before so they can't make a proper comparison.

The people who passed the paper and pencil way will way it's easier now because we get to take it separately.

The people who passed the current way will say it's harder now because there is more material to be covered.

The CFO at work always jokes with me (maybe half jokes) that we have it easy now.

I think a proper comparison will be hard to come by. The true way to get a gauge would be to look at the pass rates.

AUD 96 FAR 95 REG 94 BEC 88

[Anonymous]

I sat for the exam back in 2001 using the old pencil and paper method and the computerized version in 2009-2010.

I would say the exam is harder on a per section basis but easier overall. There is much more detail tested on any given section using the computerized version.

The paper exam was honestly pretty basic type of stuff. Everything on the paper version came straight off the tests I took in my college classes. There was nothing I can't say I hadn't seen multiple times before.

The real difficulty in the paper exam was in the testing process itself. In 2001 that was 2 very long and painful days. In earlier years it was over 3 days. The marathon test taking in uncomfortable environments (wobbly tables in cheap shaky chairs in a freezing room with 300 other people). By time you got close to the end of the first section of the day your wrists were hurting and you had to come back and go for another 4-5 hours after lunch and then do it again the next day.

You also could not focus on a single section at a time initially. You had to take all 4 your first time. You had to pass at least two sections and get at least 50 on the sections you failed in order to keep any of them.

The current system is much better. The testing times are infinitely more flexible. The testing environment is infinitely better. You are using a computer and you don't end up with physical pain at the end of a test (at least I didn't). Most importantly you can focus on a single section at a time.

There is one huge thing I do miss from the paper exam days though. That is being able to write on my question/test. On the actual exam I would circle relevant information, cross out bogus and eliminated answers. It is a little hard to do that on the computerized versions and the attendants don't take kindly to carving things into the monitors.

Both versions are/were a challenge. They were challenging in different ways. Passing either version was an accomplishment. Time and technology marches on and I believe the AICPA has made the right decision in moving to the computerized testing. I don't agree with everything they've done or not done with it, but it is a move in the right direction.

If anyone is giving you grief over “the easy computer exam” give them some of the overhead variance questions and tell them they have a minute and a half to get it done correctly.

Edit: Also, good grief you folks are scoring great on the exam.

[Anonymous]

I agree with Dale. I took the exam under the old format in 2002. I can attest that the testing conditions were horrible for all the reasons Dale explained. Also there were a ton of distractions. You didn't have your own little cubicle with headphones to put on. You shared a table with 50 other people. One by one they would finish and get up and walk out… all the while distracting you. And to come back the next day and do it all over again was almost unbearable.

One reason I think the computerized version is more difficult is the adaptive nature of the exam. If you are doing well on the questions the next testlet gets harder. That did not happen in the old days.

[Author]

Replies