APPEAL/SECOND REVIEW FOR ACCA OBU

Appeals are only upheld if it meets one of the following conditions: f it is believed an error has occurred under one of the grounds stated in this set of regulations: 1. the assessment was not conducted in accordance with the regulations for the programme 2. the judgement of an examiner(s) was affected by personal bias 3. there was an administrative error or some other irregularity in the conduct of the assessment causing the assessment decision to be significantly different Presumably you are trying to appeal under point 1? In which case you have to demonstrate that the assessment criteria were not applied correctly. In terms of Evaluation, Analysis and Conclusions the criteria are that there is "some analysis but a tendency towards description rather than analysis and evaluation" (C grade) whereas the marker is saying that your work was showing any of the following: "Descriptive lacking in analysis. Inaccuracies. Little or no critical evaluation" (any of which can lead to a fail) Just disagreeing with the marker's judgment alone is insufficient for an appeal to succeed

hi @farzana, when did you send the email and how long did OBU take to reply to your email? I have also sent the email but have not received any reply yet.

Hi @aa2754, I got reply from OBU on the next day, I was guided that my appeal was not strong and formal by one of the appeal officers. Send a gentle reminder to OBU, the appeal officer will reply, if your appeal is strong enough u will be passed on this stage.

Dear @GillianM – OBU Registered Mentor, I appealed OBU a week ago to reconsider my SLS as I was awarded fail in the SLS by the university and tonight I received an email of the Appeal Officer in which it was stated that the assessment criteria was applied correctly, however, I am still eligible to appeal OBU formally for second review of SLS. The comments of the marker regarding my SLS in the feedback sheet were, "The purpose of this statement is to demonstrate reflection, identifying your strengths and weaknesses, reflecting on how you overcame those weaknesses. Your answer to question 1 was more of a description of the process than any reflection. You begin answering question 2 by talking about your main research objective which is a personal goal rather than a research objective." On the contrary, all weaknesses and ways of using my strengths were already embodied in the SLS. Moreover, there wasn't any discussion of personal goal in the SLS and merely financial aspects of topic 8 were accounted for. I quoted almost 20 weaknesses in the appeal email together with my strengths for overcoming them, however, still the appeal officer says that "I understand that you are unhappy with your RAP result. Please be assured that this has been thoroughly considered by your marker and has been verified by the University's moderation process, and I have also reviewed the work on your request. I find that the feedback was appropriate, and designed to assist you to re-submit successfully. For your re-submission, I would advise you to think about how, for instance, you might do things differently on another occasion, the strengths you identified, and how they helped you, your weaknesses, and how you overcame them. Also, how you felt about working on the RAP and working with your mentor; did you have any problems you didn't expect?" Kindly advise me that under which criteria I can appeal OBU for awarding me pass in the SLS? Moreover, I referred the SLS exemplars given on the OBU website for drafting my SLS and the weaknesses coupled with the ways of overcoming those weaknesses were far more than the weaknesses entailed in the SLS exemplars. I really wonder that what kind of weaknesses the marker wanted me to incorporate in my SLS when already bulk of weaknesses, way more than the weaknesses and strengths given in the SLS exemplars, related to the point of time when my work wasn't reviewed by the mentor are self-evident in the SLS and the way I overcame them with the suggestions of mentor were already present in it. Obtrusively, there was no space to discuss my personal weaknesses and all weaknesses I discussed were solely related to RAP. Kindly help me with making my appeal successful.

@fatimafareed78692 can u share ur email id? May be we can help each other

I have to agree that some of the exemplars for the RAP fir the SLS are of a poor quality. When framing your appeal you need to point this out and state that you have done an assessment of your own strengths and weaknesses, citing examples of this from your work. Ask the point blank question - can they indicate the merits of the exemplar over your own work and that you want a second opinion. If you are still not happy address your issues to student disputes.

@gillianm – OBU Registered Mentor, I am extremely grateful to you for helping me with the matter.

Dear@GillianM I need your guidance on the following matter please I recevied my feedback for P38 and i need to go for appeal as they failed me only in one thing that i chose the wrong comparator. My feedback stated *2. Application of Accountancy/Business Models Fail J&P is not a relevant and effective comparator/benchmark. This should have been apparent from your initial ratio analysis. You should find another more successful comparator which is not relying on the sale of its land and building to rescue itself.* As my main organisation was seimens which also turned profitable after years of being in loss by selling its land and building. I chose the comparator who was also trying to turn profitable by the same method. Also these 2 organisations were taken by many students in p37 and they passed. I passed in everything else. How do i appeal for this?

Sorry about this is something you will need to discuss with your own mentor. I do not undertake mentoring for Topic 8 and therefore cannot offer specific advice There is information about appeals in both the I formation Pack and on the Oxford Brookes website

Hello Gillian, I have received my feedback for period 38 (after sending an email to OBU). I wish to appeal and would be very thankful for any advice or tips on the appeal process that you can give me. I did topic 17 and researched Carillion for a whole year. I was failed in the research report and the SLS and was given a pass for graduate skills. In the research report, I was failed in four areas - understanding of models, application of models, evaluation, and presentation of project findings. Can you imagine that under application of models, the marker stated that Carillion was 'an inappropriate choice of company' and further advised that for resubmission I should choose a different organisation? The research report feedback is as follows: Research Report Technical and Professional Skills 1. Understanding of Accountancy/Business Models Fail You haven’t applied your business models in sufficient depth to demonstrate understanding. The inclusion of the COSO model doesn’t add any value as it is the UK Code which the company has to comply with. 2. Application of Accountancy/Business Models Fail Carillion is an inappropriate choice of company as the weaknesses in corporate governance weren’t sufficiently evident before the collapse for there to be a response from management. Your application of the UK code is very superficial and doesn’t identify sufficient evidence of non-compliance that can explain the collapse or how improved CG could have prevented the collapse. The evaluations of leadership effectiveness and board structure and functioning in both the Table and in 3.3.1. are very brief and superficial. 3. Evaluation of Information, Analysis And Conclusions Fail Whilst it easy with hindsight to see the causes of the company collapse there is limited evidence of poor CG that would have justified an intervention by shareholders. The financial ratio analysis doesn’t reveal significant differences between Balfour Beaty and Carillion 4. Presentation of Project Findings Fail There is repetition in your presentation, e.g between the tabulated evaluation of compliance with the UK CG Code and the later narrative evaluation. Overall Technical and Professional Skills Fail Research Report overall assessment Fail For your resubmission your are advised to choose an organisation which has recognised the weaknesses in its corporate governance and has taken action to remedy them. Two or three business models should be adequate for an in depth analysis and focus more on CG rather than financial analysis. Gillian, I disagree with the marker's feedback. I actually did more critical evaluation and analysis of models than financial analysis. I have to say that I am disappointed in OBU. Thanks for your help.

I have just read the above feedback with incredulity! Since several of my students chose Carillion and passed it unfortunately demonstrates the inconsistencies of the P38 marking process - which I first mooted over a week ago. You may be interested to know that I have just sent an email to the Programme Lead on the subject of markers who are assessing Topic 17 who obviously are not fit for purpose. Please draw some comfort from the fact that I have just added an extract from your post and appended it to my email. I am suggesting that there needs to be a review of exactly who is assessing Topic 17 work and how knowledgeable they are of some of the organisations they are pontificating on - and my next suggestion is that all T17 fails from these aberrant markers need to be reviewed as a matter of urgency.

@1331 although I can only handle any appeals that involve students I have mentored if you email me via my website I will keep you posted of any significant developments. As I have pointed out to the Powers that Be that unless there is faith in the fairness of the RAP assessment system there is little point in having it at all. At the moment for Topic 17 it is a lottery - your fate depends on who assesses your work as the assessment criteria are not being applied consistently, fairly and appropriately. If you are unlucky and end up in the hands of a brutal marker you stand no chance as they seem to be looking for 'reasons to fail' whereas a decent and fair marker will assess your work on its merits. All of my students who did Carillion passed except one (he is still waiting for his feedback so I await this with interest to see if he has been told that Carillion was 'unsuitable'). Any system that has movable goal-posts like this is deplorable - Carillion is the 'Enron of the UK' and of course it is appropriate! I do believe the Programme Lead is fair and reasonable, soI trust that in the end common sense will prevail..... However it does beg the question - What planet was your marker on??

Dear Gillian, Thank you very much for your comforting reply. I will contact you via email.

Anyone who did Carillion for their organisation and has been failed and told this was not a suitable organisation for Topic 17 MUST appeal . In Period 37 I had 3 students who used Carillion and all passed, and in P38 I had 5 people who submitted on Carillion (one of whom 1 got an A) however one was told: "Because Carillion went into liquidation there was no adequate response to the emerging financial problems. For this reason Carillion is not the most suitable choice of company for RAP Topic 17". 'Emerging financial problems' ???? Excuse me - but there had been signs of weak governance for YEARS and the Board response was to ignore them and pay themselves handsomely and pretend that 'everything in the garden was rosy': there was no impairment of goodwill, the deficit on the employees pension schemes were increasing, debts were rising, the cash was decreasing, the Auditors were negligent and failed to spot the aggressive accounting policies, short-sellers were shorting the shares and as my student who failed pointed out, institutional shareholders had for several years been divesting their shares. No response then from the company at all then? The House of Commons Report must also have got it all wrong then when they concluded that "The mystery is not that it [Carillion] collapsed, but how it kept going for so long

Dear GillianM, Today I have received this email from OBU. I have failed to apply formulae in spreadsheet cells as per their initial feedback. I emailed them to update me some information regarding resubmission and they sent me this today. " I have looked at the excel document and there may have been a problem with downloading the document on the first occasion of marking, as I have manged to find some evidence, albeit very little, of formulae being used. Therefore, I will ask the administrative team to remove the fail grade for the I.T. section of the Research Report, for technical reasons; this means that every section has been given a pass. This will take some time to show on your results sheet. " Would you please tell me what that this mean? Waiting for your valuable reply

It means that your fail for IT has been reversed. If that was the only part of your report that failed it means that it will now be passed. If that was the only thing you failed overall then as this is now pass it means that you will have passed - but the last bit of the email is a bit confusing..... My interpretation of the last bit is that however if you failed the SLS or presentation previously I think it means that although pending the change this may show as pass the changed grade will only affect your report - and any previous fails in SLS and presentation will remain - at least that's what I think they are trying to say!

Thank you for your reply. This was my first attempt and I have passed all the elements of RR and SLS except this IT section. In that case can I consider myself now that I have passed in overall RAP? And what will be their next? I mean will they mail my updated RAP result and grade in the next email or they will confirm that I have passed? Pls answer as I am very tensed. thank you again.

Then it looks from all of the evidence that you have passed and they will probably formally confirm this shortly. Let us know the outcome but in the meantime please chill baby, chill!

@Trephena, Thank you for ur reply. I will post the final outcome as soon as I receive it. And thank u for giving me some hope. I am feeling better now :)

@GillianM and @trephena, Alhamdulillah finally today OBU confirmed that I have passed in my RAP and it will take a while to amend my pass result. Thank you for ur supports...

Can anyone tell me how long does it take to get the answer? I had emailed my appeal last friday so its more than a week now and there is no reply. I am afraid if the appeal is not successful i may not have enough time to edit my RAP for re submission next month.

It takes up to 10 working days before they tell you whether your appeal is admissible or not. If it is admissible - great, you need to wait extra 20 working days now. so if you sent your appeal on Friday 11th, then you will get: - initial response by Oct 25th, and - final response by Nov 22nd.

Hi, Does anyone here know how long does administration team take to send you your pass letter with your class of degree once your appeal succeeds i.e. when you are passed by appeals officer decision? Thanks

@GillianM @Trephena Hope you are well, I just needed clarification regarding the following How exactly does the appeals procedure work? Do I need to make a payment for this procedure? What is the timeframe for the procedure? Regarding the matter to be appealed, the following are the marker comments and my reasons for appealing; 1) ''You need to apply a wider range of ratios to your work. Currently there are only 6, with 2 very similar (Quick and current ratios). There is no consideration of efficiency ratios, working capital ratios and limited application of risk ratios.'' a) The marker commented I have only done 6 ratios, which is not enough to cover the topic, when in fact I have done 8 ratios, they explicitly mention I have not done efficiency when I have. b) They mention I have not done working capital ratios and in the same statement say my quick and current ratios (which are working capital ratios) are similar??? 2) "On page 34 of the Information Pack it states that “It is not acceptable to edit a preprepared template for either the Research Report, spreadsheet or presentation (even if this has been provided by your mentor)”. Your spreadsheet appears to be based on a template that was created in 2015." a) So I worked on the same EXCEL FILE that my mentor provided and saved my work on it, however I changed the structure of the template and the file radically but still saved the file on the same excel (because of this the excel properties shows as created by my mentor). Is this appealable? I have the original file my mentor sent and my file, can I show the differences and argue my case? Lastly if the appeal for the excel part [(2)] is heldup, is it possible they change the fail for the part mentioned in [(1)] regarding ratios?

Someone please help me out, my topic was 17 in recent submittion period 17. The examiner told me that they failed me on a technical aspect that I WAS UNABLE TO SUBMIT A SPREADSHEET which was a requirement of the project. But, my mentor told me that do not need one for this topic. Please guide me on how appeal as I have worked so hard on this project. Following are my remarks: Feedback is provided where a criteria is a Fail Research Report Technical and Professional Skills 1. Understanding of Accountancy/Business Models: Pass 2. Application of Accountancy/Business Models: Pass 3. Evaluation of Information, Analysis And Conclusions: Pass 4. Presentation of Project Findings: Pass Overall Technical and Professional Skills: Pass Graduate Skills 5. Communication: Pass 6. Information Gathering and Referencing: Pass 7. Information Technology: Fail You have not submitted a spreadsheet. It is a project requirement to include a spreadsheet and within it demonstrate your proficiency in generating data from the use of formulae. Overall Graduate Skills: Fail Research Report overall assessment: Fail Skills & Learning Statement 8. Self-reflection: Pass 9. Communication Skills (inc Presentation): Pass Skills and Learning Statement overall assessment: Pass Overall Overall RAP Result: Fail You have produced a competent project and reflective statement but unfortunately this is a technical fail for the lack of the submission of a spreadsheet. Moderator agrees with Marker’s comments

Sorry it was period 39 @trephena @GillianM

This has been answered already elsewhere as you have posted the same question on 3 threads

@trephena I apologize, I posted the same question to 3 forums as I wasn't sure which forum was the correct one.

@trephena @gillianm Would appreciate your response to my query above

Very few appeals succeed because you cannot argue with 'academic judgement'. Investor ratios (ESP, P/E ratio) would be expected (and also gearing ratios). In essence you are questioning academic judgement as to which ratios are appropriate and therefore you are unlikely to be able to appeal successfully. Regarding the spreadsheet unless you can prove you did the work this is open to doubt but possibly more likely to succeed here - it depends though on whether you set up the formulae or the mentor. They will have access to all the spreadsheets used by your mentor's other mentees so yours would have to show it was significantly different especially in terms of formulas If you succeed on one point it won't quash the fail for both points -you need to succeed on both for the appeal to be upheld