Is it just me, or does the marking scheme seem unfair in section B. I had a brief look at June 2014 and compared it to Dec 2014 (new format).
Take questioin 2 on the F5 paper, a similar question on both exams re bottlenecks, yet in June 2014 this would have bagged you 20 marks, and only 10 in December. I do not think the weighting is very fair since the shake up.
Has anyone else noticed similar on other papers?
ACCA Forums
General ACCAACCA Marking Scheme
10y ago#1Question 2 in the June 2014 exam was nothing to do with throughput accounting (which is where bottlenecks are relevant). It was a question on linear programming which would have taken much longer - especially because you were required to draw a graph.
However, it is to your advantage in that if cannot do a question then at least you only lose 10 marks instead of 20 !
(And obviously there is nothing anyone can do about it - the examiner decides on the questions and the marks.)
I really need to differentiate between bottlenecks and constraints. And read the question more closely.
I do take your point on the marks. I guess we have no choice but to get on with it lol.
i do find that with the new structure, there is nowhere to hide. Everything must be studied. I came exempt from all F's except F5 and F9, and I am finding it a lot tougher than my college degree. Much more to cover and a lot more detail also.
10y ago#3Your second point is very true - there is nowhere to hide, and that is what makes the exams so difficult. On their own most questions are not too bad - the big problem is that they can (and do) ask just about everything.
Sign in to reply to this topic.