Problem 1: You don't have a big problem with time and you're making a lot of careless mistakes.
Solution 1: You may not know “how” to take the test. For me, the big issues with taking the test involved learning the most effective way to read a problem and identify its key points/issues while maintaining a steady pace.
First off, make sure you learn the journal entries and any plugs until their recollection becomes automatic as soon as you hear a term. Doing so is a great starting point to also learn the keywords of a problem as well as the weird nuances related to that transaction, all while maintaining the “big picture” or “structure” of a topic. I could elaborate if you'd like, but ultimately, your end goal is to develop a separate “FLOWCHART” in your mind for each type of transaction. To give you an example of what I mean, my thought process during the test is as follows:
If the MCQ is about “Consolidations”, my mind immediately thinks “CAR-IN-BIG, plug Goodwill”. Or if the question is about “Treasury Stock”, then my mind immediately recalls 2 sets of JE's because, uh-oh, there are two ways to deal with TS. Therefore, I go back to the question to figure out which if it's related to the Par Value Method or Cost Method and proceed from there. Kind of see where I'm going?
The next thing you'll need to address is pacing. Unfortunately, the only way to learn this is by going through the MCQs. Learn how to read the problems. Of course you've heard to start with the last sentence first, but in my experience, starting with the last sentence was confusing because too often the last sentence doesn't give me enough info to know what “flowchart” (see above) to use. Instead, start with the first sentence (at least a portion of it) to identify the topic, then go to the last sentence to identify the problem, then reread everything again to identify the details. Finally, take your time reading each problem. Read each word, and again…DON'T RUSH through the problems. IMO, the questions in the actual tests were presented much less confusingly than the MCQs. Reading comprehension seemed like a problem for me while studying, but it wasn't an issue at all during the actual test.
(I must have asked myself a million times if I was too dumb to take the test from just a reading-comprehension level. I mean come on! I thought I had that stuff down. Didn't I always test in the collegiate level when taking those elementary-school standardized tests? What did I read bout the Apache Indian code talkers then in 3rd grade for?). Anyways, I ramble. Moving on…
Problem 2: Too much content.
Solution 2: If you're just using Becker MCQ's, then BIG MISTAKE. IMO, Becker MCQ's are the worst MCQ offering compared to my experience with Roger and the things I've heard from coworkers about Ninja, Gleim and Yaeger. Becker's MCQ topics are too blocky (i.e. 10 questions on this topic, then 10 questions on that topic, etc.) since they don't have an option to randomize the questions or combine the different sections into a mixed test (outside of the practice test function, which doesn't show you the correct answer after each question). Also, Becker MCQs seem to focus on their highlighted items ONLY, and not all the weird nuances that they didn't highlight. What Becker was great at was getting me through the content in a timely manner (Roger's jokes would trigger my ADD and make me lose concentration). Once I blazed through the content and MCQs on Becker, I turned around and reviewed with Roger MCQs. This helped by not only helping my mind recall information from a wide range of topics at once (not just the concentrated blocks that Becker gave me), but also helped me identify the gaps in my studies that I didn't know were there since each course emphasizes each topic differently (i.e. what would be 2-3 sections in Roger would be a 30-second paragraph in Becker).
Also, don't give yourself too much time to study for the test. Your optimal study time depends on your short-term and medium-term recollection capabilities (I work with GASB, you don't deal with complex entries, so who cares about long term?). But figure out what your mind can do, including how long it can concentrate for, and how long you can remember things. From there, figure out the most efficient way of going about the test. I did mine in 4.5 weeks. 3.5 to go through the content, 1 week to review. Don't constrain yourself or stress yourself out with the “recommended study plans” or what everyone else here says to do, you – do – you.
To give you some final tips on the test, do yourself a favor and replicate the testing experience. Get some crappy noise isolating headphones and find a quite place kept at a cool 73 degrees F (lol, jk). But also, download Moffsoft Freecalc, which is almost identical to the calculator in the test program, and buy yourself a A4 sized whiteboard notebook to practice your MCQs on. Reduce the variables!
Finally, to give you an analogy for the testing experience:
Think of the FAR content as a flowing substance (e.g. water) that you're trying to fill your mind with. But your mind is a crappy bucket with a bunch of holes with it – each hole having a specific method of plugging up. Becker was great and very efficient at patching up the big holes, but since they focus on their highlighted questions and don't mix things up, they don't really address the small holes. Fill those small holes in with another course's MCQ's (and any related review content or even Google) once you've addressed the big ones. Those patches won't hold forever, so take your test when you have the most “water” in your brain.
You got this, my friend. GL!
-J
.