*** F9 December 2014 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***

@kevikraze said:
I agree with the above comments also and I too failed F9 last year unexpectedly with 47%. I think Acca have alot to answer for in general. For an accounting authority they lack much accountability. It is completely ridiculous that you can never see your exam paper and what marks were given for or not for, why should we trust the mark given when we know they aren’t going to want pass rate above a certain percent, and in my opinion some answers which can be correct but not the answer Acca want, I wouldn’t have mind paying extra for a full breakdown and copy of my exams marking instead they just have a recount that will never change your mark and take money from you. I think they should also review examinable content, like why do we study MM model when we know both versions are rubbish theory, id prefer to only learn things that would be of use to me as an accountant.

In terms of the new format I think they have made a mess of the Mcq. The fact we have tutors changing an answer and at least 3 others in debate is not reasonsable in my opinion, this is 8 marks worth that is difference between decent pass or fail in my opinion. To be fair I think they have then tried to make the Section B easier than past years but as it’s only worth 60% so if you haven’t got at least 10 marks in mcq then its likely to fail.

Well, everyone’s got their own opinion

The MCQ’s – yes they were not easy ! I don’t know what they are trying to achieve here because when covering a whole 40% is astonishingly tricky, I don’t see an expected pass rate globally better than old formats.

Section B – They might have tried to compensate by pretty much straight forward questions in Section B, but again an NPV question and an CASH analysis question all for 15 and 10 marks respectively would have been atleast a 20 or 25 in the old format, so more easy scoring opportunities..

I will say, I like the MCQ’s and written together, but a 40 – 60% ? and tricky as hell ? NOPE

I have also given F8, and I thought it was very unfair for a paper like F8 where u have so much theory to be just 20% MCQ’s and F9 where a lot of calculus is involved to be 40% MCQ’s….

F8 20% MCQ is absolutely nothing, should be something like 50% MCQ 50% Written,

Moreover I’d like to point this out especially: “I think they should also review examinable content, like why do we study MM model when we know both versions are rubbish theory, id prefer to only learn things that would be of use to me as an accountant.”, This was Exactly what I kept thinking everytime I came across an M&M during F9… I mean it is so so useless and has no value, no basis in reality, and everyone knows how their theories failed miserably.. and this is just one example

This also makes me feel like there is a lot more scope on this subject, a lot more to explore and theories to derive at as basically its very mathematical and there are just a lot of theories that have absolutely been contradictory to the recent economic development since recession.

I thought it was easier to work through and agree MCQ were tricky.

@priyankarasilva said:
good paper, enhance the capacity

What do you mean, enhance what? The only thing this paper enhanced was ACCA’s 2015 revenue due to the resits, ridiculous subjective MCQs.

Mcqs were difficuilt but section b was ok