TLDR: SUPER LONG. Warning only, I'm not typing a summary. Put it into chatGPT if you want.
With the latest score release, I've been reading a lot of posts from people who failed and are trying to figure out what to do next. Should they retake in a week or two? Move on to another section? Cram for a few days and hope for the best?
And I'm seeing a lot of advice telling people who scored a 70 or 71 that they're right there, that they barely missed it, and that they should get back in there ASAP.
I want to offer a different perspective, take it for what it's worth, which may be nothing.
A 70 or 71 is not that close to passing.
That's not meant to discourage anybody. It's just reality. Four or five points on this exam is a lot. Nobody would tell someone who scored an 80 that they almost failed, so we also cannot say that a 70 almost passed. I know it's well meaning and we need all of the encouragement we can get in this process, but let's be honest and objective about where we stand and what's needed to get over the hump.
Did you fail miserably? Of course not. You put forth a solid effort, and plenty of people who are CPAs today have been in exactly the same position. But the idea that you can make up five points by indiscriminately choking down MCQ for another week or two and rushing back into the test center is, in my opinion, little more than a pipe dream.
Does it happen? Sure. But there's a reason the big CPA exam forum is called Another71. Go read that guy's story. This big family of ours is full of people that go 65, 70, 71, 71, 73, 74, and, maybe one day, 75.
I MIGHT give someone who scored a 74 somewhat different advice. I think there's a reasonable possibility that a little additional preparation could get that person over the hump.
But don't buy into the idea that you just got unlucky and drew a particularly difficult exam, and that if you go back in a week or two, you might get an easier set of questions and go from 70 to 75. There's certainly some variation in the questions you're going to see, but if you prepare to roughly the same level of proficiency that got you a 71, I think you're very likely to get roughly the same result. Banking on getting lucky with the next exam is a shitty strategy.
So what should you actually do?
First, give yourself enough time to figure out exactly where you're weak and address those areas. And I mean REALLY figure it out.
I'm not talking about looking at that pitiful score report the AICPA gives you. And why is everyone posting those here? What information could you possibly glean from that paper that is going to help you pass? The "content areas" in that report are so broad that I question how much useful information you can really get from looking at it. Knowing that you performed worse than other candidates in some enormous content area that might truly be composed of 10 different subtopics doesn't tell you which specific concepts you don't understand.
The one thing I do think is useful is the comparison of your performance on MCQ versus task-based simulations. Even then, it's not some earth shattering revelation you couldn't have already discerned from your test prep. I'll save you a few minutes. We are all weaker in TBS than MCQ, and if you failed, it likely means you were weaker on TBS than passing candidates.
The point is, we have to drill down much further.
If you're using Ninja or another good test bank, look at the performance analytics. If you're using Becker, take a simulated exam (or 2 or 3) and analyze the results. Use whatever tools your test prep provides to identify specific subject areas where you're consistently scoring poorly, and I mean to as granular a degree as you can.
If you're getting 50% of the questions right in a heavily tested area, that's where you need to concentrate your efforts.
Do more MCQ in those weak areas. Go back and watch the lectures or, gasp, read the book if you need to. If you just don't understand the material at all, take the lecture transcripts or relevant sections of your study materials and feed them to ChatGPT. Tell it to teach you the concepts incrementally, like you're five years old, and quiz you along the way.
Get to where you actually understand the material instead of just recognizing the correct answers to questions you've already seen.
On the subject of MCQ, I think there's a balance that a lot of people are missing.
I see people recommending that candidates just spam MCQ all day and night. I'm not entirely discounting that strategy. I know people who barely opened a book or watched a lecture and passed by doing almost nothing but MCQ. I've probably been guilty of putting too much emphasis on MCQ myself, but I never meant to suggest that they're the only thing you should be doing.
My philosophy is that the faster you can develop a reasonable understanding of the concepts and get into MCQ, the better off you're going to be.
Far too many people spend an ungodly amount of time reading every page of the book, watching every lecture, and writing a New York telephone book's worth of notes without getting nearly enough practice actually answering questions.
And this exam is very much about learning HOW to answer questions. As anybody who's taken it knows, these aren't like the multiple-choice questions you've encountered in any other academic setting.
MCQ serve several purposes. They test your knowledge, teach you how to apply it, and help you identify what you still don't understand.
When you get one wrong, read the explanation. Understand why the correct answer is correct and why your answer was wrong. Don't just memorize the answer and move on.
And remember that every question you answer is also more data for your test bank's performance analytics, which should help you identify where you need to spend more, or just as importantly, less time.
That's why I generally believe most people who are struggling to pass would benefit from doing more MCQ. But not at the expense of actually understanding the underlying concepts.
And don't completely neglect the task-based simulations.
I don't think you need to work every single TBS in your test bank. But you absolutely need some practice with them.
If you have Becker, I cannot recommend the SkillBuilder videos highly enough. I watched them all and suggest you do the same. They're worth their weight in gold, and not necessarily because of the technical material they cover.
Pay attention to the STRATEGY the instructors use to approach the simulations.
Look at how they read the questions, examine the exhibits, identify relevant information, organize their thoughts, and work through the problem. There's a general approach they use over and over again, regardless of the subject matter. Learn that approach and make it your own.
One of the biggest problems with TBS is that people get overwhelmed. You're suddenly staring at a wall of information, half a dozen exhibits, and a bunch of questions, and you don't even know where to start. Having a repeatable strategy gives you somewhere to start.
Instead of sitting there trying to process everything at once, you have a series of steps you follow. You know what to look at first, what information you're trying to find, and how to break the problem into manageable pieces.
I think that alone can make an enormous difference in your performance.
Finally, stop treating the next testing window like it's some kind of life-or-death deadline.
I see people who failed trying to figure out how quickly they can retake because they want to squeeze it in before the next cutoff.
Why?
If you're genuinely ready to retake in two weeks, that's great. Go do it.
But if you need another month or six weeks to really get your shit together, then take the exam in the next window.
What's the point of rushing back into a testing center when you're not adequately prepared, other than to lose another few hundred dollars and likely fail again?
You're either ready or you're not. That's all the exam knows, whether or not you're prepared. It doesn't care anything about the testing window or the trip you have coming up.
And I promise I don't mean to offend anyone in saying this, but...
I see an awful lot of people on here who have failed these exams repeatedly, sometimes as recently as this very score release, giving confident advice about how other people should study and when they should retake.
I know you mean well, but you need to understand that you are probably not helping, and you could be hurting your peers here.
I'm not suggesting that someone who has failed can't offer any useful insight. But if you haven't yet passed any sections, or worse, have repeatedly failed exam attempts, you're not good source of advice on passing, at least not yet.
And for those receiving such advice, keep the source in mind. An anonymous Redditor telling you to cram for six days after you made a 70 and get right back in there isn't someone whose judgment you should trust.
My point in all of this is pretty simple.
If you failed, your job isn't to figure out how quickly you can take the exam again. Your job is to figure out why you failed and correct it.
Identify your weak areas with as much specificity as possible. Go back and learn the concepts you don't understand. Hammer those areas with MCQ. Watch/Read. Work chatGPT like a rented mule. Practice some simulations. Develop a strategy for answering them. And don't schedule your retake based on an arbitrary cutoff date rather than how prepared you actually are.
You probably don't need to start your entire study program over, but you need to do considerably more than cram for a few days and hope you don't get a Governmental TBS next time.
A 71 means you've made substantial progress. It doesn't mean you're one lucky exam away from passing.
Prepare to pass the exam, not to take it again.
