- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hi MikeLittle
What I have noticed is that audit question and risk of material misstatement questions generally carry 2 marks for each case. Will the following method be appropriate to follow:
1/2 mark – Identification
1/2 mark – Determining Materiality
1/2 mark – Stating the relevant accounting standard and its relevance to the situation
1/2 mark – Impact on financial statement (Understated, Overstated or Misstated)Also, would you advice to write P7 answers in the form of paragraphs or bullet-points?
I would change slightly your mark allocation – from what I gather it’s more in the nature of 1/2 mark for identification and 1.5 marks for explanation
I wouldn’t get excited about stating relevant accounting standards by name or number but by all means identify what the standard says or requires by way of treatment
“would you advice to write P7 answers in the form of paragraphs or bullet-points”
I cannot think of many situations where bullet points would qualify as ‘professional’ and most certainly an answer to a P7 examination question is not one of them
The only exception, I suppose, would be if a question asks you to ‘list’ or ‘name’ (possibly ‘enumerate briefly’)
Otherwise, it’s paragraphs … but short paragraphs (no more that 3 lines long) and effectively, therefore, a sentence
OK?
- The topic ‘Audit/RMM Questions’ is closed to new replies.