‘OBU Marker-Speak’ - What the Marker Feedback really meant…

@ts1110 - it depends how different the figures are and why they have been restated. It may be possible to use the company's own calculated ratios from their own summary of the last 5 years (many companies produce a table of key ratios) as long as you reference this and are consistent. Regarding citing directors - don't do too many long passages and use quotation marks and reference to the directors report ABC, 2013 etc. or paraphrase using your own words + a ref

hi trephena my company restated its 2013 reports by 34m increase in profits due to new amendments made in IAS 19 employee benefits. So should i write these restated amounts in appendix or take it from 2013 annual statement? Do i have to state in my report that 2013 figures are re-stated? Also in 2014, company's issued annual report is divided into 2 parts with respect to page numbers i.e. 1st part start from page 1 to page 80 and 2nd part starts with page 1 and ends at 107 ( financial statements and notes to financial statements are in 2nd part). So what page numbers should i write while giving references?

I have choosen topic 6 2.Application of accountancy/business models Reasons for fail and advice for improvement: You have not provided the raw data results from your survey, and without this we cannot confirm your calculations and interpretation of ANOVA. which raw data i should have provided? 4. Presentation of project findings Overall technical and Professional skills Reasons for fail and advice for improvement: I think the subject matter is very interesting , and different for the RAP. However you must try to use your own wording to explain. I explained my finding and corroborate with the litterature review in my own words. i cant understand this. thank you, if you can shed some light.

@shadoweyescat - Obviously I can only comment generally as I have not seen your work: The marker wanted to see your results so that they could check them - raw data refers to the exact basic figures that underlie your work. In other words before they were turned into percentages . Without raw data how can the marker know that your calculations are correct? If your calculations are not correct then your findings would also be invalid. It is like with T8 where the marker needs to see the calculations behind the ratios and being able to compare these with the annual report. It students do not provide these workings then work invariably is failed. Note: Workings are part of the methodology (put them in the appendices) and are a protocol of good valid research. (ANOVA refers to 'analysis of variances'). There is a general problem with T6 RAPs because they normally depend on a survey and unfortunately surveys are usually badly conducted by students. (Personally I think T6 is not a good choice because the surveys are very rarely well done and the pass rate for T6 therefore is one of the lowest going - FACT. This is why I have tried to encourage students to consider T17 as long as they approach this in the right way as it does not require a survey). With a T6 you must set out your methodology as clearly as possible e.g. how many people were surveyed, how they were chosen, the response rate to the questionnaire, how long the whole process took, any problems that came to light after conducting it (e.g. a question was found to be ambiguous). See Phil Clarke's article in the Information Pack p.36 for further details on Primary research. The comment for (4) would tend to indicate that you made too many direct citations from textbooks and/or articles. The problems here are twofold: (1) there is a danger of unintentional plagiarism e.g. you are not doing sufficient original work of your own and (2) just quoting other people does not demonstrate that you understand what you are writing (this can lead to a fail in section [1] of the assessment criteria 'Understanding of accountancy/business models' as there is a lack of direct evidence of your own actual ability). You say you used your own words but from the marker's comment it looks like the electronic checking system identified passages as being virtually identical to something already published/ submitted. I am not saying that you did this but it is as well to know that just changing a few words here and there does not fool the system. It is a very clever program that examines patterns in the paragraph and will actually show the words that have been changed - I used this program when I had to submit my own work for my Masters degree and I know it uses colours to highlight copied text and the changed words remain in black (so it is very obvious to the reader exactly which bits have been changed where). Apparently some students try to change things using Google translate and the end result is often hilarious nonsense as the subtleties of English are not understood by those whose mother tongue is not English. The markers are aware of all the tricks and are not fooled for a moment. All I can suggest is that you go back to your original sources and paraphrase and precis and then the similarities should be minimal. If you cannot provide the original data then you must go back to the drawing board - do not try to invent any - again this is obvious to markers.

@trephena : thank you so much for your reply, wherever i have use the wording from the sources, i have quote it. sometime writting in my own would change the signification of the sentence. writing in my own was getting dificult. i found a light thru ur explanation though, thanks

shadoweyescat - maybe then there were just too many instances of this. Like I say they want to know that you understand what you are writing not just copy and pasting from books and articles... just bear it in mind.

@trephena : can you please explain the meaning of this please " If you cannot provide the original data then you must go back to the drawing board" also, i have 50 questionnaires that have been answered. should i provide all the 50 questionnaires that have been answered in the appendix?

@shadoweyescat - you need to list out your questions and show the frequency of the responses in a table e.g. Q1.[set out what the question was] 32 agreed, 15 disagreed and 3 were not sure , Q2.[again set out the question] 38 agreed, 5 disagreed and 7 were not sure and give this type of information for each question. If you cannot provide this level of detail then you would have to do another survey as the marker wants to see the figures behind it and and if you don't provide them they will fail it again as they need to check it for themselves. (The expression 'back to the drawing board' means that you have to redesign something). The marker does not want to wade through 50 separate questionnaires but they want the information they contain in a user-friendly, easy to use form. So you need to provide a this table of the raw data as an appendix.

@trephena : thank a lot for those explicit explanation. trephena , can i be provided with journal related to the "Relationship between Employees’ Motivation and Students’ Attitudes", if possible, thank you,

@shadoweyescat - Most journals require you to be affiliated to a college or university that has taken out a group paid subscription (and then bona fide students are able to use their college login to access and download the relevant articles). At OT we are unfortunately not able to provide this kind of service. I suggest that you go on to google scholar and use a few key words to see if any articles are available that suit your purpose - look for those articles that indicate on the right of their listing that there is a pdf version available as these normally can be downloaded free of charge (this is usually because the author(s) have chosen to allow access to any interested individuals). However Emerald Insight, Springer, Jstor and Taylor-Francis invariably charge a significant amount for each article if you try to access via their websites. The trick here is once you have discovered the authors' full name(s) and the title of the article is to feed it into a search engine to see if the full version is available FOC elsewhere. (However this is time-consuming and not always successful). Of course if you have a friend or relative who does benefit from a group University/college subscription then you could try to ask them to help out! :-) PS Don't yo mean relationship between Students' attitudes and employees' motivation (rather than v.v.?)

Following are the extracts of my Feedback report.. 3. Evaluation of information, analysis and conclusions Fail This was a well presented RAP, you seemed to have invested a great deal of time and effort and achieved good results, meeting or surpassing the criteria in a number of areas. However your analysis did not quite meet the required standards. Your ratio analysis was largely descriptive, and did not contain enough real analysis. By descriptive, I mean that you spent a considerable amount of time saying how the ratio had changed, or which company's ratio was better, but did not provide sufficient analysis to explain the changes or variances. For gross profit - the one you tried to provide the most explanations for, you commented on a number of factors including currency depreciation and raw materials but did not adequately explain why Toyota's GP margin was significantly better - surely Toyota would also be faced by the same issues? For Toyota you made one reference to " Kaizen costing" but did not explain this. Your PEST analysis was too brief - one short paragraph for each section was insufficient. Also your "strengths" in your SWOT were not very strong - why would be "third in the industry" be a strength? Why would be affiliation with Honda be a strength, when both Toyota Indus and Suzuki also have similar affiliations with other Toyota and Suzuki? Overall Technical and Professional Skills:: Fail Your ratio analysis was too descriptive - with too many explanations of how the ratio changed rather than WHY the ratio changed. For inventory turnover on page 32 you said "In 2011 the inventory turnover days of HONDA improved to 48 days from 60 days in 2010. The stock in trade during the period increased by 47.82% whereas COGS increased by 35.62%. However, in 2012, its inventory turnover reduced therefore its turnover days increased to 69 days as stock in-trade and COGS decreased by 17% and 23.75% respectively on the back of reduced activity. In 2013, it declined again to 45 days as COGS increased to 73.20% in greater proportion than stock-in trade of 51.10%." This says what happened, but does not say why. At the bottom of page 31 for the Quick ratio you said "Its inventory levels kept increasing in the three year period but the corresponding reduction in current liabilities helped maintaining the inclining trend of quick ratio." However inventory is excluded from the Quick ratio - so there is no need to refer to inventory levels in explaining the quick ratio. 6. Information gathering and Referencing:: Fail Though you obtained a significant amount of information in presenting this RAP, you needed to obtain more information to enable you to present more effective analysis. For your ratio analysis it seems that most of your sources were from the Honda Annual Reports - you probably need to obtain information from a broader range of sources. Moderator Comments Moderator agrees with marker comments You have done some good work which is well presented and it should not be too difficult to bring it up to the pass grade. A main weakness in your work is the comparator analysis. You did a very good section on sales and production for Honda and whilst you have made a good attempt at explaining many of the ratios in connection with Honda, your analysis with respect to Toyota is fairly superficial. You should also try to expand your SWOT and PEST - you presented some parts of these like a 'shopping list' and did not fully explain them or their impact on the car industry / the company. Applying the models in the business context to your company is a critical part of doing a SWOT /PEST analysis.

@syedazmat - well the good news here is that both the marker and moderator thought that your RAP showed some good work. The moderator (senior marker) actually says: "it should not be too difficult to bring it up to the pass grade. A main weakness in your work is the comparator analysis..... you have made a good attempt at explaining many of the ratios in connection with Honda, your analysis with respect to Toyota is fairly superficial. You should also try to expand your SWOT and PEST.... Applying the models in the business context to your company is a critical part of doing a SWOT /PEST analysis " What I take from this is that in your resubmission you must not rely just on numbers to explain the differences in the two companies' performances. Instead you need to look at some of the PEST factors (they will normally have affected both companies) and see how the companies have dealt with these. Also look at the way management have tried to use the SWOT factors to their advantage by trying to build on the strengths and turn some of them where possible into market opportunities and minimize the weaknesses. Although you are not expected to so a SWOT and PEST for both companies (just the main company) it may be a good idea to do one for the comparator (load this as an appendix) and see if you can then see what the main factors that account for significant differences in their performances are. I would suggest that unless something is really significant that you do NOT just bring in lots of numbers. Let your graphs do 'the talking' - ensure they are clear and then the marker will be able to see the position for himself/herself. What they want are your explanations not lots of figures (as I explain in my article on Evaluation) as anyone can calculate ratios. Focus on sales, gross profit and net profit, and investor ratio explanations as these are the important ones and sort out your understanding on inventory and its impact on other liquidity ratios. Do that adequately (Business Recorder often has some useful up-to-date information you can draw on) and you should overcome the deficiencies that the marker and moderator noted and as long as you update to include the latest financial statements and reference adequately you should be successful. Good luck :-D

Thanks, appreciated. Although there is no specific mention of Referencing in the feedback, assuming I did OK on referencing. But the hard part was that I did the referencing without using any software. So it took huge amount of time in the end, I hope to cover it this time by using some software hopefully. Your input on this ??

@syedadmat- It would appear that your referencing was fine as neither the marker nor moderator made any comment to the contrary. It seems it really was the comparator analysis that let you down. So read my article on the Resubmission Statement and as mentioned, focus on improving the depth of drawing comparisons as your next marker will be focusing on this. I haven't used a software program for referencing (did it the hard way myself for my MSc) but one of our contributors, SalahUddin has referred to this (think it is probably on the Harvard Referencing Forum) so take a look there. Or possibly send him a private message to get more details as I don't know if he looks at the OBU Forum much now as he has the degree (click on his name icon and it should bring up the facility to enable you to contact him)

Dear Trephena, I have to resubmit the sls and the RAP( am not changing the topic for the rap, neither the work. i am just amending as per the markers instructions) I would like to know , when i am resubmitting the sls, should it consist only correct the sls based on the previous meetings, or should it be based on the new meeting, or should it be based of both meeting? Also, when i am submitting the RAP should I submit the powerpoint again, even though i have passed the powerpoint? thanks

@shadoweyescat - normally the SLS fails on lack of self-reflection so it is important than you do an assessment of your whole learning and development experience while doing the RAP. Whether you include just the original meetings or include your subsequent meeting(s) too is not the real issue, it is looking at what you learned especially about your own strengths and weaknesses you need to focus on - so do not worry about which actual meetings you include - it is their significance that matters. Rather than saying you did this or that, or the mentor said this or that is not important - it is HOW this affected you and how it might be important to you in your career or the life lesson learned from it which is what they will be looking for. I think from past experience you may need to load the Presentation just in order to be able to submit - but don't bother doing anything other than just loading the Presentation file. You have passed and that is the end of the matter. Good luck :-)

Hi guys, I failed my second attempt RAP and no feedback from the marker is attached this time as it happened in my first attempt. Does anybody know the reason of this? Who is the right person to contact and let them know about this? Thanks for your help, Praemo

Dear Praemo, There should always be marker feedback. You should contact OBU directly regarding this. I believe all the contact is currently centralised. If you need the email address, please message us privately. Regards, The Learning Luminarium

Hi Hassanhere, Strictly speaking, according to the Harvard Referencing system, websites are referenced rather differently from what you're doing. We have a video on our website that illustrates how you can take advantage of the in built referencing system on Microsoft Word to avoid issues with referencing. I agree that the infopack appears confusing over this, and should certainly be updated. As for the top comment, we might need to look at your graphs to understand what the marker meant. As for SWOT, we usually advise students to separate each section into manageable subheadings like "Strong Brand Name" or "Poor Internal Controls" to ensure the message is made clearer.

thanks a ton..i was gutted..i guess ill hafta give it all once more..thankx for ur support :)

Hi, I'm wondering whether the markers feedback is only given when you are unsuccessful or is it given regardless of what your outcome was?

Hi Sameed, It's given only in the event of failure, to explain the reasons for your failure. As such, it is sometimes referred to as a 'fail sheet'. Regards, The Learning Luminarium

hi i wanted help because i failed my Rap second time and i am literally in tears. my topic is 8 and i failed in two points , Evaluation of information, analysis and conclusions and Information gathering and Referencing ,following is my feedback ( Evaluation of information, analysis and conclusions) You have addressed some of the points made by the last marker and moderator, however your analysis is still not in line with the required standard to pass. Your SWOT is unbalanced. There is no rule that says that all four elements of a SWOT must be of equal length, however there should be some symmetry or balance between the sections. You had no Weaknesses, one opportunity and two threats - ideally you should try to have say between 3 - 5 of each of the four elements of a SWOT, though this is just a guide, and not a rule, you can have more than 5. If readers see an unbalanced SWOT they will be believe that either you have not researched your topic, or that you are biased, and have chosen to overlook the elements that are omitted or shorter. Your ratio analysis also needs a lot of work to reach the required standard, currently it is very descriptive and contains very little analysis. By descriptive I mean that you often describe the changes in ratios of say which company has the better ratio but do not analyse the reasons for changing ratios or variances between both companies. Continuing my comments from above, for the GPM on page 25 you said \"The above table and graph show the gross profit margin ratio of FCCL which has an increasing trend showing that the ability of FCCL to make profits is continuously increasing. After the production expansion in 2011 and 2012 the increased output of the manufacturing unit has substantially increased the profitability of FCCL.\" This is inadequate to explain the changes in ratios over three years - what are the reasons for the changing ratios? More details are required. For most of your ratios you described the changes but seldom analysed the underlying reasons. For operating margin you said \"The above graph and table clearly shows that Operating Profit Margin has an upward trend and FCCL is making adequate profits on sales. Therefore the management of FCCL is generating adequate profits from the operations of FCCL.\" We can see from the graph the trend, so you do not need to repeat this, you need to analyse WHY the ratios are changing. For the comparator analysis on page 32 you said \"The Gross Profit ratio provides that KOHC is the leader when profit on sales is concerned.\" To say which company is the \"leader\" or has the higher margin is not analysis, it is just description, you need to provide analysis - why is one company performing more effectively than the other? You are advised to reverse the order of your business and financial analysis as this will allow you to link the two together more effectively. In addition you need to concentrate on the two key indicators of revenue and profitability, if you analyse these effectively the reasons for changes in the other ratios will become more evident. ( Information gathering and Referencing) Your referencing is still inadequate, though you reference the theoretical aspects - like the explanations of certain ratios, for example this "The profitability analysis also shows how effectively the managers are employing the corporate strategy of the firm (Wahlen, Baginski, and Bradshaw, 2011).", however you do not provide sufficient references for the information you have used in the analysis section of your Research Report, you need to reference the source of the information you have used in your analysis, you also need to provide references for information presented in tables and graphs. Though you have gathered a significant amount of information in presenting this report, you need to obtain more information to enable you to provide more useful analysis. plzzz help me on this ,there were no moderator comments

Dear trephena, Thanks loads for the support and luck. I had choosen topic 6, and i had choosen a school as my organisation. this time i am doing topic 6 again, and my organisation is a school again but a different school, i mean another school. so it will be as if i am submitting a new RAP, isnt it, even though the RAP will be on school again? and my grade will be a new one, not a C? and should i submit the resubmission form, and answer about the markers comments?

Hi Saad, The moderator usually doesn't comment. To help you: 1) A SWOT analysis must usually be somewhat balanced as the marker highlighted. Bear in mind that Strengths and Weaknesses are a critique of the company's internal workings, while Opportunities and Threats are a critique of the external environment the company operates in. For each heading, I usually recommend students to list and explain a few factors. For example: Strengths: Strong Brand Name Company XYZ has been vastly successful in crafting a strong presence on the global market. Forbes (2013) valued the brand at.... Streamlined Business Operations Integral to Company XYZ's operations is the removal of the 'middle man' (ACC, 2014). This substantially lowers the costs of operations which lends it a competitive edge compared to.... 2) What the marker is looking for here is an in-depth explanation of the changes in the ratios, and the reasons for differences from its benchmark. Much of your current work describes the trend. A description is something that goes like this: "The current ratio has fallen over the last three years. This shows that Company XYZ is now less capable of repaying short-term liabilities." This is a problem, as this comment can be very easily extracted from textbooks, and merely explains the implications of the ratios, rather than the CAUSE for their change. You're required to go beyond that. That is what the marker meant by analysis. So something like this should work: "It is clear that Company XYZ's current ratios have fallen, and pales in comparison to Company DEF. This is due to its increasing level of short term payables, which increased by 58% over the last three years. This is a result of a change in corporate strategy to take advantage of interest-free credit lines provided by suppliers as the cost of debt has increased for Company XYZ (News Network, 2014). In contrast, Company DEF has constantly maintained a healthy current ratio above 1. As Smith (2011), the CEO explains, this is a result of a consistent effort to generate goodwill with its suppliers..." 3) You're required to show the sources for the reasons you have highlighted. This is particularly important for part 3. For example, if I say that Company ABC's profit margins have fallen due to increasing costs of raw materials, I need a reference to support the reason I'm offering here. What you're facing is a common mistake many students attempting topic 8 commit. Hopefully this comment can help you! Regards, The Learning Luminarium

3. Evaluation of information, analysis and conclusions Your analysis is mainly descriptive and does not explain the performance. Because it is lacking in references, this may be because you have carried out insufficient research. Referencing enables us to identify the source material and your analysis of that material 6. Information gathering and Referencing See above. Look at the guidelines and the link to Harvard referencing and also extend your research to the media as well as company reports to get a balance to your research Haiz, is this all means 1 thing insufficient research? but the information are limited out there due to competitive issues. what should i do? Sometimes really confused because some matters you actually don't need reference because u simply know it is reasonable and just use common sense to give your ideas to answer why the trend look so based on the definition and some events which you must reference because they are simply facts and you can't be able to describe by your own. This is actually what i did in my report and i also included in my report the limitation of the report is access to management information because i could able to explain the whole trend more accurately provided more info provided, isn't it insufficient?

I understand what learning luminarium said to other students. It applies to me, so no need any reply for me now. But last 2 questions for learning luminarium- 1) u said microsoft word 2007 onwards got harvard 2008 style, i using 2010 don't have so i use chicago style instead for period 29 which i feel is similar, so maybe the feedback above means this issue. 2)How to gather information, really difficult...... I am not detective, auditor or police. i am doing Del Monte Inc. . i using mainly report from company, annual report (main source) ,bank analysis which i have already used but it still need more "external" information, i don't have license to get more privacy from others other than published information. Said easier than done.

Hello this is the comment that I've got. Reasons for fail and advice for improvement: Why did you not use powerpoint? How did you show your slides at the presentation? There are rather a lot for a 15 minute presentation because you included in the early slides unnecessary information on why and how you wrote the report. Within the guidelines there is an article that advises that the presentation should be about your results and conclusions rather than the process. I did exactly what my mentor told me to do and she even asked me to put the slides into microsoft word which I had no idea why.I'm so lost!

@learningluminarium said: @Allop: Presentations must be submitted separate from your Report, and the submission website (if I am not mistaken) allows a separate upload slot for your presentation. A lack of a presentation is a ground for failure. The resubmission guide highlights that.

Hi...The presentation is submitted separately under one slot.It's just that the slides are not in powerpoint.

@Allop: Therefore for the next submission, keep it in the PPT format. Also, the second concern the marker highlighted is the length of your slides. You're only required to present your findings (i.e. focus on Part 3 and 4). Do bear in mind that your presentation is only 15 minutes long. The length of your slides should be appropriate for a 15-minute presentation.