ERB and student feedback December 2006
The CAT Examination Review Board provided feedback on the December 2006 CAT examinations.
The terms of reference of the Board are:
1. To review the questions, answers and marking schemes after each exam session to ensure that the papers are a fair and reasonable test.
2. To recommend changes to the syllabus and format of the papers.
Members of the CAT Exam Review Board are:
Rowena Morris BPP
Patrick Yan Jeff Wooller College
David Collingridge FTC
Comments on the Papers Overall
The Board felt that, overall, most of the papers were challenging and fair and adequately covered the syllabus. Some concerns were raised regarding individual papers; these are outlined below.
Comments on Specific Papers
It was agreed that Paper T3 was overall a fair paper, and very similar in content and style to the previous sittings. No major problems arose from Paper T4. It was thought some of the MCQs were challenging but it was agreed that well-prepared students should do well.
It was agreed by the majority that the questions in Paper T5 were well structured and their content clear giving good syllabus coverage . Paper T6 was felt to be very fair, with all expected areas covered, including accounts preparation; a well prepared student should have experienced no difficulties. Some concern was expressed about the 20 mark question on partnership dissolution, but it was squarely within the syllabus. Some felt that the Paper T7 was very well structured with good mark allocation, but that it differed in approach and form to the previous sittings. The examinability of "traceable profit" was questioned. In response, the examiner stated that he does not see this as a peripheral area in management accounting. It was noted that expected value was examined but was not included in the syllabus. This will be taken into account during the marking process.
Paper T8 was praised for its coverage of a wide range of the syllabus and fair marking scheme, however some felt that the paper may have been too challenging at this level. Paper T9 should not have caused any problems for well-prepared students, however it was felt that Question 1 (b) , testing furnished holiday letting, was very detailed for a very small area of the syllabus. It was agreed that Paper T10 was very similar in terms of content, style and level of difficulty as in the previous sitting. It was considered to be a very reasonable paper which should not have presented any problems. There should have been no problems in terms of time management.
All comments were passed to the Examiners for consideration in the marking process. ACCA should like to thank the Board for their helpful and constructive comments.