- October 15, 2018 at 9:50 pm
Thanks a lot for the clarification.
I will post the confirmation email once I get it.October 17, 2018 at 6:35 am
I also failed my rap in period 36. Can i appeal now. Is it too late. I never knew we could appeal as well.October 17, 2018 at 7:13 am
i got failed in part 3(PERIOD 36) the reason being i used Annual report as a primary source. Now i did used only annual reports data for ratios becuz i evaluated ratios using balance sheet, cashflows and income statement. Thats the only short explanation i got failed for.
I just sent them an email for review becuz i never knew we could appeal as well.
what do u guys think ? Is there any hope?October 17, 2018 at 8:08 am
This is what ACCA replied when I asked the same question.
“You must appeal within 60 days of the release of your results at the very latest, although we would normally expect to receive appeals sooner than this. The time taken to answer appeals can vary. However, the sooner we receive an appeal, then the earlier you should receive a response as appeals are generally answered based on the order in which they were received.
If you want your results to be reviewed, please email firstname.lastname@example.org with details of the grounds on which you are appealing. You should try and be as specific as possible. It’s useful to quote the marker’s feedback and then detail why you disagree with a particular point and give examples of how your project meets the pass grade criteria. We will then pass this on to an academic member of the team to review your RAP.
Please note that students have to pass all nine sections of the assessment criteria before a degree can be awarded. Please also note that an appeal cannot be considered on grounds of academic judgement. However, an appeal can be considered for technical reasons. Technical reasons can include the marking criteria being misinterpreted, or that an uploaded element of the work has been missed by the marker. “October 17, 2018 at 8:09 am
The confirmation email :
“Yes, that is correct. Following the decision of our appeals officer, your online record has been updated to show that you have now passed the Bsc in Applied Accounting degree. However, please note that the online system will not show your correct award classification because you have been awarded after the results were released. We will be sending hard copies of your pass letter, award confirmation letter and transcript to you in due course and these will show your correct degree classification.”October 31, 2018 at 7:39 pm
Can anyone give me the list of documents(hard copies) that OBU will send via mail?How many days will it take approximately after the result date to receive the documents?May 24, 2019 at 4:36 am
I have been failed in one section of RAP i.e. evaluation, analysis and conclusion part; however i have also been failed in Technical and Professional skills.
I am going to appeal for a second review, but dont know what to mention for the technical and professional skills part.
How i challenge the markers feedback on the skills?May 24, 2019 at 8:02 am
There us a slight but common misunderstanding here in terms of the interpretation of the feedback sheet. Overall you have failed on Professional and Technical skills -which covers 4 aspects (if you look at your sheet you should see that the first 4 criteria are numbered). The particular criterion you were considered not to have met was number 3 – Evaluation of information, analysis and conclusions.
Most of the comments in this box were probably made by the first marker. All fails are reviewed and any comments put in anywhere in an unnumbered box would have been added by the Moderator (senior marker) who reviewed the work, (though they might have added to those in box 3 instead and left it empty)
Criterion 3 is the most common reason for a fail and is often because students tell the reader what has gone on but not really explained, analysed and evaluated the underlying implication or reasons that account for the facts they are relaying.May 24, 2019 at 11:59 am
Thanks @gillianm for ur guidance.
Marker said my report is good though but isolated… He suggested i should have change my year on year analysis and do the analysis for 3 years together..
I believe everyone has different ways to present their work, so is mine. I kept financial and business analysis straightforward. However, i made sure that i include various important factors.
For eg GPM fell by 13% due to higher COS. i explained 3 lines why COS was higher. However; sales increased by 2% mainly due to higher gold income from….. regions. Further i explained how gold income increased. Finally i wrote 1-2 lines on conclusion.
My each ratio started with trend, reasons and conclusion.
I need help on how to prepare my appeal, like is it appropriate to say that markers have missed the details (eg page 13) which displays the details about management decisions.May 25, 2019 at 8:49 am
I received my feedback for period 37 submission and the maker has failed me on 2 categories, info gathering and evaluation & analysis.
The reason given in the feedback is that I have not used shareholder ratios in my analysis and weakness section of SWOT is brief. most of my colleagues have submitted same projects but have passed.May 25, 2019 at 10:44 am
@farzana and @aa2754. I suggest you consult your mentor about this. A decent mentor should be prepared to help you. I guarantee on-going mentorship and/or include support for an appeal (depending on the marker feedback) as part of my mentoring contact and fee with my own students -obviously I cannot speak for other mentors.
With an appeal you cannot just disagree with the market’s comments, you have to show by examples that the assessment criteria have been met.
A SWOT analysis is key to the business analysis and it is essential to show linkages between the SWOT (and PEST) factors within the financial analysis. For this reason I always advise resubmitting students to first focus on these and do a thorough analysis at the start of Part 3 and then to try to apply these factors when evaluating performance and interpreting ratios
Good luck!May 30, 2019 at 1:44 pm
Obu sent me a form to fill in regarding the appeal for a second review.
The form has 3 sections.
1.summary of the main points
Kindly give details of the main points i should include in the above sections.
One of the appeal officer said that i am just disagreeing with the academic judgement; however i displayed markers feedback followed by my views where i stated that there is enough analysis, providing examples etc…May 30, 2019 at 4:55 pm
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 succeedJune 1, 2019 at 8:40 pm
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.June 8, 2019 at 8:30 pm
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.June 10, 2019 at 5:54 am
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.June 11, 2019 at 2:38 pm
@fatimafareed78692 can u share ur email id? May be we can help each otherJune 12, 2019 at 4:27 pm
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.June 12, 2019 at 8:33 pm
@gillianm – OBU Registered Mentor,
I am extremely grateful to you for helping me with the matter.September 30, 2019 at 7:53 pm
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?October 1, 2019 at 3:34 am
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 websiteOctober 2, 2019 at 1:22 pm
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:
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
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.October 2, 2019 at 2:50 pm
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.October 2, 2019 at 4:29 pm
@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??October 2, 2019 at 5:25 pm
Thank you very much for your comforting reply. I will contact you via email.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.