*** ACCA Paper AAA September 2018 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***

I am totally in agreement with your comment. In the real world, you don’t perform analysis and other examination under such pressure. To me these exams are impractical and more speed testing than knowledge. If I had just about one hour more, I definitely could ace the paper….study like hell and now all I can depend on is God to deliver me.

“You cannot change the exam process. You can however work efficiently within the framework forced upon you. And that is why exam tutors (I teach university audit courses in a very different manner) do what we do.”

we, students, are the stakeholders right? I believe we can change it considering we have high interest and high power (it is ultimately us, who pay for exams)?

is exam technique for the sake of tutors making money?

this is strange to some extend, that even managers in big4 fail but tutors without practical experience in audit pass…

@druck said:

[we, students, are the stakeholders right? I believe we can change it considering we have high interest and high power (it is ultimately us, who pay for exams)?]

– so exams should be super easy – no? because all students want to pass! 🙂

[is exam technique for the sake of tutors making money?]

You can have 15 minutes lecture about exam technique.. read an article.. even on this site there are some.. do you think exam technique is some dark art!?

[this is strange to some extend, that even managers in big4 fail but tutors without practical experience in audit pass…]

maybe you need both.. knowledge and a good approach ..
Different approach (in the exam/or at work) for different scenario (exam/work) seems like a common sense..

It is strange you are trying to shoot a messenger, who is trying to help you pass the exam!!!

To be fair, Q1 was too lengthy and tricky even though students dont know it’s tricky – but not that tough. Qs 2 & 3 are fairly ok for students who received better lectures or prepared well.

A lot of students who sat AAA are either not working or not working in audit firms. You need a mind and experience of audit engagement partner/audit manager to quickly finish the questions.

These are works auditors do for over a month in clients’ office – with lots of audit staff. But they give the whole stuff to ACCA student to finish under 3 hours.

I feel if business risks were tested in Q1, it would not have been messier the way it was in audit risk because audit risks dwell more on corporate reporting/accounting standards.

May be that’s why the examiner diluted Q1 with two other questions which are a bit ok.

Students should have started from Q2 and 3 and grab maximum points which is closer to 37 marks and then go on to scavenge for 20 marks in Q1.

No it was not a new client. they had been auditing the client for five years and it was their first audit of PFI.

Let’s be practical & look forward to Dec 2018 session

i extract from this useful debate 2 points as possible solution of almost impossible P7 exam :

1- { Students should have started from Q2 and 3 and grab maximum points which is closer to 37 marks and then go on to scavenge for 20 marks in Q1. }

Begin with Q2 & Q3 while you are still fresh mind as its scenario is shorter than Q1 to guarantee at least 30 out of 50 points in 1st 105 minutes

2- { I sat four mocks before the exam all under exam conditions. 3 from the BBP kit and another from my college. When I was doing that exam, it was virtually like sitting it a fifth time. And I sucked hard my first two mock attempts believe me. }

Try mock exams under real timing & under real exam conditions , specially , try Q1
mocks only under 90 Minutes 4 times at least before sitting an exam as most of the complaints arise from Q1

CAN ANY ONES ADD TO THESE POINTS TO HELP TO PASS NEXT TIME ?

are u talking about Q # 3 a ?

@raoul7370 said:
I have now seen the actual paper (both INT and UK versions).

There is no problem with doing Q1 first, and to those saying it is too long, I was surprised (given comments on here) about how NOT long it is.

Now before the usual suspects moan, let me explain:

– The intro page, and requirements (Exhibit 1) take only 2-3 minutes to read and digest. Almost all of the marks are for predictable, frequently-asked requirements, and students should have techniques, tried and tested, to use immediately on these.

– Only 1 paragraph needs to be read from Exhibit 2 to be able to get going on the integrated reporting request. OK, this means you do not know it is a listed company yet, but there are plenty of other obvious E+PI marks from reading virtually nothing.

– Only a couple of paragraphs need to be read from Exhibit 5 to answer the audit strategy bit. No testing of controls (examined before, including on my mock exam, just saying) is an F8 level point. Using client’s staff to assist audit of a subjective area, far from a high level point to test. And also makes receivables an audit risk, if they go ahead.

There is only 1 exhibit which is large, and that is the FS. So leave it till last. Common sense. Just use it for some ratio calcs, then get out of there. Even saying that, the notes to the FS are usually the best place to find useful audit risk info, not the numbers, and the notes are in nice bite sized chunks.

Add to that the huge amount of this exam which is amazingly similar to the specimen paper (which I sense a lot of students did not know existed, let alone had practised), and I think this paper is fairly generous. If anything, I think the accounting in the other questions is the harder technical bit.

One more point. Exams are NOT about knowledge, nor should they be. A parrot can memorise things. And now we have the internet, knowledge is far more freely available. To be useful in an office you need an ability to apply that knowledge under time pressure.

Oh and 1 more point. Students are a stakeholder, correct. But the aim of exams is surely to be part of the preparation that supplies useful people to the accountancy profession, thus protecting accounting firms and their clients and those who use financial statements. The exam process is to test you. It is not FOR you, if you get my drift.

Please be clear – I have complained about things in exams in the past and will continue to do so. But I cannot see anything to complain about for this paper at this sitting. Those complaining about time, length of paper, are hideously under-prepared, whatever they may believe.

Tough but fair, which is what it should be each time.

Good luck for results day everyone.

What do you mean by ‘If anything, I think the accounting in the other questions is the harder technical bit.’ Were there any catches in the other questions, which were hard enough, as I am getting worried?

@alayanic18 said:
I am really sick and tired of the exam technique topic that tutors and examiners are so keen of and keep bringing up. Nobody uses this exam technique in real life, hopefully. In 10+ years working in both internal and external audit, I had my share of time pressured audits. Thank God that I didn’t use the exam technique recommended of not reading anything about the client, blankly computing ratios and cherry picking the risks that I’m most comfortable with, or the usual standard risks for the respective type of engagement. Understanding and risk assessment usually took about 25-30% of the time allocated to the engagement. In a highly regulated, rapidly changing environment it is crucial to invest enough time to understand what you are assessing, instead of applying pre-defined knowledge. It could be possible that a risk which affects many similar companies from the industry is not relevant for the audited company, or that the audited company faces uncommon risks for that industry.
Regarding money laundering, maybe it should be a big deal for this exam with some requirements of applied knowledge instead of just defining money laundering / stages of money laundering. The number of fines applied by regulators is constantly increasing and there are some recent cases in which the fine value was so huge (several hundred million euros) that the regulator actually had to consider if the company will be able to pay it. Being able to identify ML is more important than being able to define it in my opinion.

@alayanic18 said:
I am really sick and tired of the exam technique topic that tutors and examiners are so keen of and keep bringing up. Nobody uses this exam technique in real life, hopefully. In 10+ years working in both internal and external audit, I had my share of time pressured audits. Thank God that I didn’t use the exam technique recommended of not reading anything about the client, blankly computing ratios and cherry picking the risks that I’m most comfortable with, or the usual standard risks for the respective type of engagement. Understanding and risk assessment usually took about 25-30% of the time allocated to the engagement. In a highly regulated, rapidly changing environment it is crucial to invest enough time to understand what you are assessing, instead of applying pre-defined knowledge. It could be possible that a risk which affects many similar companies from the industry is not relevant for the audited company, or that the audited company faces uncommon risks for that industry.
Regarding money laundering, maybe it should be a big deal for this exam with some requirements of applied knowledge instead of just defining money laundering / stages of money laundering. The number of fines applied by regulators is constantly increasing and there are some recent cases in which the fine value was so huge (several hundred million euros) that the regulator actually had to consider if the company will be able to pay it. Being able to identify ML is more important than being able to define it in my opinion.</block

Alaya..thank you for this..an insightful contribution from a “real auditor”

Teaching audit is definitely not the same as actually practising audit. I guess it must be the reason why ” an award-winning” tutor would recommend not reading the case scenario at all and prefer we just read the requirements and start to write the answer.

Very shocking to me when you consider that this is a very practical paper where you have to apply judgement, scepticism and understanding to details you have about the company..which must come from the scenario you have “not read”. This is what you have now confirmed is not the ideal approach in the real life of audit practice, which ACCA claims it is training us for.

And you are very correct when you say that fast&efficient does not equal pressurized. Time as an input will ALWAYS have an impact on quality of the output, and this applies in all aspects of life, not just audit exams.

One day our ” it’s all about exam-technique ” tutors and examiners+students will understand this. I hope.

For someone complaining about my apparent suggestion not to read the detail, it is ironic that your comments show you clearly have not read my detail!

FACT

For ANY acquired company, there will be a goodwill calculation to audit. There will be tests specific to the situation, but 80% of the tests (minimum) will be the same tests you would do on ANY acquired goodwill.

On this exam, every test gets the same marks. So why not go for the ones that always work first, and then add once you have read the detail? Reading detail takes time, so all I am proposing is an efficient approach. This is just common sense.

FACT

For any new acquisition of an overseas entity, as in the exam question, there will be common risks that always apply. All of these risks will score marks, every time this scenario comes up.

So, as above, as soon as you know there is an overseas acquisition, these risks can go into your answer.

FACT

In part (d) you are asked about a client wanting advice on something. Advice is at risk of being taken by a client without much thought, meaning we have done it for the client rather than advised, and that is a management threat every time. I do not need to read the scenario to know this. So I write it down.

All of these would get raised in the real world based purely on reading the intro and requirements (contrary to some posts, I have done an audit or tow, and in fact was head of training for a large firm of auditors, training them in the “real world” of audit that you seem to think I have never inhabited).

As I have said already (but has been conveniently ignored) I am not suggesting detail should not be read. I am suggesting that in all things in life we start with higher level and then drill down to details. It just so happens that on P7 the high level yields a massive amount of marks, and the vast majority of students thank me for pointing this out and helping them to pass the exam (which is my job).

But still the fact that saddens me the most is that the specimen paper, brought out months in advance of this sitting, is almost identical to the September paper. Any student who had practised it would have been very well set for Monday’s paper. The comments on here should be saying “nice of the examiner to ease us in gently to the new format with such predictable questions similar to the specimen”.

I can only assume those moaning had never attempted it, which is madness (especially as it is the only 50-25-25 format paper in existence before this week’s paper).

@raoul7370

I don’t usually reply to these, but isn’t the whole purpose of this thread to discuss how the exam went? I would expect to see many moaning comments.

If you don’t like it don’t argue and force your “expertise as an award winning lecturer” on others.

I had sat the P7 exam this sitting, I didn’t find it easy. I ran out of time, I know it’s my fault for poor time management. You do not need to remind us again. You just sound condescending and stubborn at this point.

@rogman228 said:
I absolutely agree planning is crucial in audits. And it is in this exam, too. Like I said previously you need to go in with a game plan. But not just that, you need to go in with plenty of practice of that game plan already under your belt.

I sat four mocks before the exam all under exam conditions. 3 from the BBP kit and another from my college. When I was doing that exam, it was virtually like sitting it a fifth time. And I sucked hard my first two mock attempts believe me.

Like raoul hinted, once you have plenty of practice under your belt you know exactly how to go about answering the question requirements before reading a thing. Then it’s all about highlighting and plucking as many points as possible from the scenario presented and explaining them well.

I am not going to be arrogant and pretend I know it all, I don’t, and it is not in my nature. I could even still get less than 50 come October if I am unlucky.

However, if I am reassured of one thing before then it is that I have done what many students on here failed to do. Writing as many points as I wanted for each part of each and every question. I planned how I could achieve this, practised it at home, then did it on the day.

It is not just audit you have to do this in but all the papers. It is just more important than most. But my plan, practice, and follow said practised plan on the exam day has worked for every paper so far. I have scored 84 in P3, 65 in P2, 69 in P1 and 51 in advanced Taxation. And practising your technique to get knowledge onto your answer paper as best as possible was very important to score well for all those exams, too.

With all due respect to those complaining about the time, you just didn’t prepare enough to be able to manage it.

Thank you for your advice, I appreciate it, but please keep your opinion regarding our preparation for this exam for yourself.

You are most welcome Alaya.

However, my notion that people don’t prepare right for this exam is not an opinion, it has become a fact. Read all the examiners reports on the website. She says it is every single one. People don’t prepare enough for this exam.

If they did, the time would be more than manageable.

In fact to anyone reading this sitting it in December I would highly recommend to read at least the three or four most recent reports from the examiner. She doesn’t write what she writes, or gives the advice she gives, for the fun of it.