[Kent]

The AICPA, NASBA, & state boards of accountancy system stinks. It is too complicated, too expensive, and takes too long (a month for me) to register for the tests. Eliminating 4 months of the year from possible test dates makes no sense.

I am also not too fond of only a 6 month window for registering – if you want a discount you register for all 4 tests but there are only 4 months in which to take those tests. If real life slows you down then you’ve paid for one or more tests that you didn’t take. These tests are expensive. I can only assume that the people who set this system up and monitor it never had to take any ethics section.

I am waiting for BEC. Can somebody tell me why a test that is 100% multiple choice taken at a testing center does not give you results on the spot???? [On a related note, I understand why cost/managerial is tested, but the rest of BEC makes little sense to me when FAR packs in too much material. I understand why a bit of I/T is covered in AUD, but the part in BEC should be scrapped in favor of better testing ACCOUNTING.]

I am also waiting for FAR results on a test that I took almost 11 weeks ago (October 1st)! If I did not pass I would have already started studying for it again, before I fill my head with possibly conflicting tax (REG) rules. Since I do not know my results I have started studying for REG (legal), which I may have to put down while I return to FAR. In other words, this almost two month wait for FAR is slowing down my optimal study method. This is too long of a wait.

[Anonymous]

I agree!!! This system SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

1. I cannot agree more.

2. As you have studied in BEC, this is a result of “monopoly” competition. The level of service provided is considerably low, and the price charged is very inelastic.

The AICPA basically outsources NASBA to answer the phone calls, especially, during each score release period. It is a very good solution to find someone to listen to us, CPA exam candidates. While none of complaints is never taken into consideration and the level of service is relatively constant or diminishing, the fee keeps increasing. This relationship cannot be explained by any mathematical model I have learned in college algebra and calculus. It is very illogical to me.

We, CPA exam candidates, are charged by the AICPA for designing tests and scoring them. Claiming to use IRT (Item Response Theory) and other technologies do not seem to explain why the scoring process is (very very very) slow.

We, CPA exam candidates, are also charged by NASBA for maintaining our records and many other ridiculous activities we do not really need. I cannot find any “value-added” activities by having NASBA as a middleman.

The only one in this process that seems to function properly is “Prometrics”. I never have a hard time schedule or reschedule my test. The computer never flips on me either.

At the end of the day, we are encouraged (or even required … I am not sure) to be a member of the AICPA for a “minimal fee”. What you get out of it is to tell people that you are part of the prestige professional organization which designs and forces people to adhere to 35,000 rules and deadlines. But the AICPA is scared very much to speak to the world that “we cannot set the deadline for ourselves in this scoring process because we are busy collecting the fee and enforcing others to follow our rules!”.

[Patrick909]

I agree. But I don't really think NASBA is the problem here. It's mostly the AICPA's fault on one hand. On the other hand, some state boards of accountancy are just absurdly poor with processing your applications, or even giving you any kind of service or help at all. NASBA may not add much value, but at least it doesn't feel like NASBA is out to screw you. I also agree, Prometric is pretty slick, they have this testing thing down pat.

As for waiting that long for your FAR score, that's inexcusable, IMO. You mean to tell me that the AICPA, with all its years of administering this test, with all the simulations in its bank to choose from, sees fit to give you all new simulations? Come on.

In addition, the AICPA should just test the fundamentals of all these little areas of accounting, rather than getting all excited about some stupid new FASB statement and threatening to test it on the next FAR section. You're freakin' kidding me, right….the book is thick enough with all the FUNDAMENTALS of accounting as it is! OK, obviously, we should be aware of the new stuff at some point, but isn't that the function of CPE???

[Anonymous]

Well I personally will take this form of testing over the old school way of taking all four parts at one time in a room with 1000 other people in a two day window!

[hopetopass]

And, what about NASBA's archaic website?

[Anonymous]

hopetopass – not sure if you are looking for a good or bad angle. I think the website is Ok.

[ihavecpaocd]

I completely agree that the whole system is absolutely ridiculous. I'm a PA candidate and it took over 2 months from the date I applied until I got my NTS. After waiting the recommended amount of time, I had to go through 4 hours of calling the state board and being transferred from person to person to finally realize they lost my transcript. Turns out they eventually “found” it- I have this picture in my head of it being buried under a pile of papers on someone's desk. After they found it, it took another 2 weeks for them to process my application (meanwhile the good appointment times being filled at the prometric center).

It is absolutely absurd that we have to pay $1,000 for poor service and extremely long waiting periods. It seems as if the CPA world is a cult and only the most patient people with lots of extra money laying around are allowed in…

REG-95, FAR-91, BEC-85, AUD-2/24/10

[Anonymous]

Ihavecpaocd,

It took me 3 1/2 months to get my NTS. They didn't receive all four of my transcripts (I can see one missing, but all four?). I was about to have them resent when they suddenly appeared.

When I applied for my FAR NTS, which should have taken about a week since I was already approved in their system, it took over a month and I had to call and get it.

It is absurd.

[Anonymous]

I could not agree more with the points made.

It took me almost 2 MONTHS to receive the NTS for one of my first sections, and this was with me calling everyday to track it down. When I finally did receive the NTS, the date on it was the date that I registered, which meant that instead of having six months before it expired, I only had four. And when you call your state board to get any kind of help, it's like they just don't care.

The other thing that really bothers me is the actual grading. Does it infuriate anyone else that transparency is discussed in our profession ad nauseam, yet there is so much mystery surrounding the grading of the exam that determines whether or not we will become licensed? On the bottom of the score breakdown for a section you didn't pass there is a box that says, “Your examination performance, could differ from one day to the next, depending on a variety of factors.” What? I do understand that there might be some degree of subjectivity or gray area in the grading, but just how much is there really? I mean, what really is the difference between a score of 73 and 75? The note at the bottom of the score breakdown seems to suggest that maybe if they graded your test on a different day you would have received a 75 instead of a 73.

[Anonymous]

@laurab512 – I could not agree more. No transparency in grading is totally UNACCEPTABLE.

[TNcandidate1]

well, i have a problem with scoring better then 70 – 71 in FAR to pass but 79 – 80 in AUD to pass. At least that is what the back of my test results sheet revealed. They need a class on how to read the statistics.

REG 75, BEC 77, AUD 66,74,80 FAR 62,71,85 feels good to be done!!!!!

[Author]

Replies