- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
- Posts
A-There are slightly different answers for the same risk of material question for example when it is given that there is revaluation of Property plant Equipment, then following are the risk of material misstatement
1-Risk that independent expert is not used and further explanation
2-Depreciation is to be calculated on revise amount.
3-Deffered tax asset liability will arise due the difference in the carry value and tax base.
4-Disclosure requirement.
The issue is that is some answers all 4 are given and in other just 2 or 3. Why?
What if i write down all 4 give will additional point will secure more marks?B-Similarly in some questions there is just 1 marks for the explaining standard criteria even there are a number of criterias which could be explain and are relevant like Non Current Asset held for sale there are 4 to 5 criterias, some time marking scheme say 1 mark and sometime 2 marks.
How do we know all this?C-Question on Ethics and professional issues.
Some time it is given that there is self interest threat to objectivity or self review threat to objectivity, and there is a mark for writing this. According to me ALL self interest and self review threats is actually threat to objectivity and so when ever we see self interest threat we can write it self interest threat to objectivity but in solution it is not given always. Please explain?This is a fair question.
When the exam is being drafted, the examiner will write the questions and then determine how many marks each part question would be worth.
That mark value will be based on the mental assessment by the examiner of how many valid points could be raised
When you are planning what to write, your planning time is dictated by the number of marks available for each part question and it works out to being 30 seconds per planned point (10 mark part question = 5 minutes’ planning time)
For that 10 mark question, in 5 minutes you are looking to plan 10 markable points. If you can only get to 4 points, maybe the examiner has allocated 2 marks per valid point.
Or maybe not …. and probably not. Most marking schemes at P7 generally say …
“1 mark per valid point up to a maximum of 10” (in the above 10 mark example)
So work on 1 mark per valid point. And there you are with just 4 planned points for your 10 mark answer.
So bring in your “self interest threat to objectivity”
In fact, bring in anything at all that you think may be remotely relevant. And if you’re still only on 6 points ….. bring in points that you believe are not relevant! Until you run out of your 5 minutes’ planning time
And now start writing out your answer
“What if i write down all 4 give will additional point will secure more marks?” – if it’s a 3 mark part question, there are only 3 marks available so writing a fourth will not score an additional mark
However, you could try combining two points like this:
“In addition to the requirement of full disclosure in the notes to the financial statements, there is the risk that depreciation is possibly not calculated on the revised amount”
That way you can build in a substitute so that if the marker for whatever reason doesn’t like one of your points, there is an additional one there to pick up the mark
The two points in the sentence that I have used to illustrate the principle do not actually fit together sensibly, but a marker under time pressure is not going to say anything about that. It’s of no concern to the marker how your mind works in connecting thoughts together
Does that answer you?
There is a fuller examination technique article for both “general” and for P7 in particular on this site. Go to home page, ACCA, P7 and scroll down
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.