Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Reading this forum it is clear to see that most people had similar issues with this paper.
Students that have reached this far in their studies are not stupid. The examiner and ACCA must accept this. The examiner has written (slightly condescending) articles about the importance of reading the requirements and exam approach that I’m sure all of us have read and taken note of prior to taking this paper.
So why is it that many of us on this forum have expressed the same problems regarding understanding the requirements of the paper? Th examiner wants to create real life scenarios where the remit given by a CEO or MD is sometimes unclear. However, in my career I have always been taught that best practice is to ask questions to ensure I have fully understood the requirement so as to not waste time doing something not required (“Quality is free”, Mr Watt?).
So why is it that the examiner continues to set requirements that even after having read several times still come across ambiguous and vague?
I had similar issues with P2 but at least with that paper there is some recognition and mitigation with a lenient marking scheme.
Honestly, I think either the questions set and/or the marking scheme for P5 is grossly unfair or… we really are all stupid!
@matt2803 said:
Hi,
Maybe this thread might offer some explanationhttps://opentuition.com/topic/f8-exam-similar-to-sept-2015-sitting/
Thanks. Seems a little odd though, as it would give December re-takers an advantage over students taking a paper for the first time?
But if true, does that mean that going forward the June / December papers will always be similar to the preceding March/September papers?
Is it just me or does the hybrid paper appear to have the ‘easier’ questions from the Sept/Dec sittings? Why is this?
I read somewhere that markers only have about 8 minutes to mark each answer booklet.
With the general time pressures of the exam and time lost on trying to understand the requirements, I can imagine that handwriting for most people will become pretty shocking during the exam.
I do believe markers would try to understand the points being made but there’s only so much they can do under their own time constraints.
Probably contributes to the low pass rate.
Against all odds I managed to pass with 57%. Even more surprising is that the overall pass rate is in line with previous sittings.. Considering the general opinion that the Dec 13 paper was significantly more difficult than previous years, how is this possible?
I’m obviously very happy to have passed but objectively speaking I believe questions need to be asked of the examiner’s competency with regards to his paper setting skills and his subsequent marking guide.
Frankly, I think the markers have been told to mark scripts very leniently to cover up the very poor paper set by the examiner.
I am now really beginning to question the overall integrity of acca because of this..
It was a very tough and unfair paper (especially Q4). I think I may have got close to full marks for the cashflow but will struggle to pick up enough marks elsewhere to get the pass… the main problem was understanding the wording of the questions.. maybe the examiner needs to go on an english language course! 😉
I’m expecting the pass rate to be in the 30s for this one. On the brightside, ACCA won’t allow this to happen twice so in theory the June 14 paper should (hopefully) be a lot more fairer to students.