Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 11:04 | IP Logged
|
|
|
annam726 wrote:
I am also done with section 5, and then I am going to review until my test on 7/1. I also plan on using Wiley questions because there were some critics of Becker here on the forum that think Becker wasnt that good for BEC. |
|
|
Hi Annam,
I just finished BEC and left the exam feeling really confident after having used Becker exclusively.
My strategy was to save this exam for last thinking that it would be a walk into the end zone; however, this was not the case. My exam was calculation intense which was best evidenced by the fact that I had almost no scratch paper left by the end. Another challenging aspect of the exam was the time factor. I finished with like 30 seconds on the clock. Time management is key on this exam perhaps more than any other.
The bottom line IMO is that Becker is more than sufficient. I felt well prepared for the MCQ's. As far as the WC goes, there's only a limited amount Becker can do for you there. I used their solutions to get a feel for what a good answer should "look like", but that's about it.
Study B1, B3 & B5 well. It will pay off. I personally wasn't too impressed with Becker's breakdown of 3 way OH variance, and took time to figure it out myself on excel spreadsheets. I've got some well labeled detailed breakdowns I'd be more than happy to pass on if that's something you think would help.
The last thing I'll mention was that I felt that the MCQ's on B5 were good, but a bit ridiculous and overkill. A lot of those MCQ's took me like 10+ minutes to figure out and nothing like that showed up on my exam. As it turns out, I only did every 2nd of the 141 MCQ's in B5 T5, and in the end that was sufficient. As usual, part of Becker's strategy is to somewhat over prepare you.
Hope some of this helps. Work hard, trust Becker and you'll be fine. Best of luck!
__________________ FAR 11/19/10 (92)
REG 2/25/11 (81)
AUD 4/29/11 (95)
BEC 5/30/11 (89)
----------------
Becker exclusively 1st attempt: No PA experience, No flashcards, No final review.
|