• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free Notes, Lectures, Tests and Forums for ACCA and CIMA exams

  • ACCA
  • CIMA
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Books
  • Forums
  • Ask AI
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
  • ACCA Forums
  • Ask ACCA Tutor
  • FIA Forums
  • CIMA Forums
  • OBU Forums
  • Qualified Members forum
  • Buy/Sell Books
  • All Forums
  • Latest Topics

Save 20% on ACCA & CIMA Books

Interactive BPP books for June 2026 exams, recommended by OpenTuition.
Get discount code >>

ACCA Marking Scheme

Forums › ACCA Forums › General ACCA Forums › ACCA Marking Scheme

  • This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 10 years ago by AvatarJohn Moffat.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • December 1, 2015 at 4:43 pm #286767
    Avatargonko
    Participant
    • Topics: 11
    • Replies: 57
    • ☆☆

    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?

    December 1, 2015 at 4:58 pm #286780
    AvatarJohn Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54843
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    Question 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.)

    December 1, 2015 at 5:05 pm #286789
    Avatargonko
    Participant
    • Topics: 11
    • Replies: 57
    • ☆☆

    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.

    December 1, 2015 at 5:54 pm #286797
    AvatarJohn Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54843
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    Your 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.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Log In

Primary Sidebar

ACCA News:

ACCA My Exam Performance for non-variant

Applied Skills exams is available NOW

ACCA Options:  “Read the Mind of the Marker” articles

Subscribe to ACCA’s Student Accountant Direct

ACCA CBE Exams – Instant Poll

How was your exam, and what was the exam result?

BT CBE exam was.. | MA CBE exam was..
FA CBE exam was.. | LW CBE exam was..

Donate

If you have benefited from OpenTuition please donate.

PQ Magazine

Latest Comments

  • TEDI on IAS 16 Property, plant and equipment – Initial Recognition – CIMA F1 Financial Reporting
  • ChanNV on Framework – measurement – ACCA Financial Reporting (FR)
  • ChanNV on IASB Conceptual Framework – Introduction – ACCA Financial Reporting (FR)
  • Konstantinos43 on Financial Performance Measurement – Liquidity Measures – ACCA Management Accounting (MA)
  • Hirak.5 on ACCA TX-UK FA2025 Chapter 3 Property Income and Investments – Individuals

Copyright © 2026 · Contact · Advertising · OpenLicense · About · Sitemap · Privacy Policy · Cookie settings · Comments · Log in