Oddly, ACCA professional papers for SBL / SBR / APM / AFM / ATX has not been published for all 4 sittings.
This are new papers and there is a need for good cases bank to be provided for the students to prepare for the paper.
ICEAW publishes all their 4 sittings for their students and ACCA examining team has yet to do this. CPA does not publish any exams because their exams are mostly MCQ based.
This goes against basic transparency requirements that stakeholders of the exam required.
It also leads to a situation where there is an unfair level of playing field as markers who teach the paper have "insight" into the paper that they marked that will not exist for those that are not markers.
It also leads to a situation where students get feedback in their examiner report for sitting, and no way to understand their mistakes - their post-mortem of the exam is half cooked at best and highly irrelevant.
Using Tucker 5 question view of the decision by ACCA Examination team not to publish all 4 professional paper
Profitability - 1
This goes against profitability as it leads to weaker pass rates overall, which in turn slows down the progress of students to membership
The savings in terms of PDF and data storage is insignificant.
The long-term benefit of improving overall student performance against short-term savings seems to be questionable
Legality 0
There is no law that requires publication of the exam papers.
Fairness - 1
It is not fair to the students as those that sit for the exams in March and September only get a partial understanding of the failures compared to those that sit for June and December sitting
It is not fair to students that have set for December paper only to be shown the September sitting paper for SBL - there is zero feedback that is vouchable to their experience in the exam.
It is not fair for the lecturers who are not markers of the paper as they will have no insight into the papers that are not published compared to lecturers that are involved in the marking process.
Right - 1
ACCA values states " We’re ethical, honest and accountable and encourage the same from others. We act in the public interest and focus on long-term value."
The act of publishing all papers for professional papers would be consistent with transparency requirements, which is closely linked to the idea of accountability.
Lack of transparency reduces accountability.
In making the decision to withhold papers for professional papers would be a breach in the value system of ACCA.
Sustainability - 0
There is a limited impact in terms of environmental damage from this decision
Overall the decision was 3 negative scores over 5; indicating that this decision would fail Tucker evaluation.
In fact for ACCA to consider proctored exams during the current COVID crisis - it highlights that the threshold for the examination can be re-examined when circumstances change.
CPA Australia and ICEAW examinations are open-book exams for the finals compared to close-book exams for ACCA.
In my exposure to both; it seems that examination in ACCA has a long way to change before they get any better. However, the current question remains - what is ACCA afraid of in terms of publishing all their examinations for professional papers?
The views expressed in this blog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of other organisations.
This are new papers and there is a need for good cases bank to be provided for the students to prepare for the paper.
ICEAW publishes all their 4 sittings for their students and ACCA examining team has yet to do this. CPA does not publish any exams because their exams are mostly MCQ based.
This goes against basic transparency requirements that stakeholders of the exam required.
It also leads to a situation where there is an unfair level of playing field as markers who teach the paper have "insight" into the paper that they marked that will not exist for those that are not markers.
It also leads to a situation where students get feedback in their examiner report for sitting, and no way to understand their mistakes - their post-mortem of the exam is half cooked at best and highly irrelevant.
Using Tucker 5 question view of the decision by ACCA Examination team not to publish all 4 professional paper
Profitability - 1
This goes against profitability as it leads to weaker pass rates overall, which in turn slows down the progress of students to membership
The savings in terms of PDF and data storage is insignificant.
The long-term benefit of improving overall student performance against short-term savings seems to be questionable
Legality 0
There is no law that requires publication of the exam papers.
Fairness - 1
It is not fair to the students as those that sit for the exams in March and September only get a partial understanding of the failures compared to those that sit for June and December sitting
It is not fair to students that have set for December paper only to be shown the September sitting paper for SBL - there is zero feedback that is vouchable to their experience in the exam.
It is not fair for the lecturers who are not markers of the paper as they will have no insight into the papers that are not published compared to lecturers that are involved in the marking process.
Right - 1
ACCA values states " We’re ethical, honest and accountable and encourage the same from others. We act in the public interest and focus on long-term value."
The act of publishing all papers for professional papers would be consistent with transparency requirements, which is closely linked to the idea of accountability.
Lack of transparency reduces accountability.
In making the decision to withhold papers for professional papers would be a breach in the value system of ACCA.
Sustainability - 0
There is a limited impact in terms of environmental damage from this decision
Overall the decision was 3 negative scores over 5; indicating that this decision would fail Tucker evaluation.
In fact for ACCA to consider proctored exams during the current COVID crisis - it highlights that the threshold for the examination can be re-examined when circumstances change.
CPA Australia and ICEAW examinations are open-book exams for the finals compared to close-book exams for ACCA.
In my exposure to both; it seems that examination in ACCA has a long way to change before they get any better. However, the current question remains - what is ACCA afraid of in terms of publishing all their examinations for professional papers?
The views expressed in this blog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of other organisations.
No comments:
Post a Comment