ECR Exam - Present Net Cost

miskysbabe

I have been using the Osbourne Books to study ECR, yet no where in these books does it explain Net Value Cost.
In the exam - admittedly i was rushing, I did the whole thing as Net Present Value. How much am I penalised for this considering it is not in the training books?

SandyHood

Full marks
Net Present Cost is the same as Net Present Value just it is a minus amount every time.

MWAUGH1983

miskysbabe wrote: »

I have been using the Osbourne Books to study ECR, yet no where in these books does it explain Net Value Cost.
In the exam - admittedly i was rushing, I did the whole thing as Net Present Value. How much am I penalised for this considering it is not in the training books?

I know what you mean as I use osborne with eagle and that was one of the first things I did after the exam - look at the books - tutorial and workbook and also my learning material and no where does it explain NPC - I personally find it disgusting as they should ensure that all books are the same in terms of what they cover and base the exam accordingly.

What did you get as the choice of van? - I picked the first one. Seems to be a common choice on here.

Cheers
Martin

miskysbabe

MWAUGH1983 wrote: »

I know what you mean as I use osborne with eagle and that was one of the first things I did after the exam - look at the books - tutorial and workbook and also my learning material and no where does it explain NPC - I personally find it disgusting as they should ensure that all books are the same in terms of what they cover and base the exam accordingly.

What did you get as the choice of van? - I picked the first one. Seems to be a common choice on here.

Cheers
Martin

No, that's what I mean, I went for the highest value and the second van, as i just didn't click it was saying net present cost. But I am looking at a June 07 exam which was similar to ours on this but the figures are not negative. I'm very puzzled.

MWAUGH1983

miskysbabe wrote: »

No, that's what I mean, I went for the highest value and the second van, as i just didn't click it was saying net present cost. But I am looking at a June 07 exam which was similar to ours on this but the figures are not negative. I'm very puzzled.

I wouldnt worry - admittedly thats easy to say but no doubt you have sims to get on with so I would advise yo concentrate on them like me.

I just think its disgusting that this is what we had to deal with - its like they expect people to be geniuses without looking at the infor - from my previous studies NPV has always been in financial accounting so fail to see why it futures in unit 6. It would appear that aat are getting to be commerical in that they try and rake in money any way possible.

I think based on what people have said they will either offer another sit free of charge or lower the pass rate to around the 40 to 50 mark - lower the better lol.

Cheers
Martin

stranger

NPC was in June 08, did you practice this paper?

MWAUGH1983

stranger wrote: »

NPC was in June 08, did you practice this paper?

Whether it is in the past paper is totally irrelevant so its a pointless comment. Point is its doesnt future in any learning material or texts so why the hell do the aat put it in is what people have an issue about. All texts and provider material should future in the exams!!

Bluewednesday

MWAUGH1983 wrote: »

Whether it is in the past paper is totally irrelevant so its a pointless comment. Point is its doesnt future in any learning material or texts so why the hell do the aat put it in is what people have an issue about. All texts and provider material should future in the exams!!

I don't believe it's totally irrelevant that it's in a past paper, past papers are an essential part of revision.

I wonder also if the examiners report mentioned that it wasn't done well before? Quite often if things aren't done well on one paper they feature in the next few papers.

miskysbabe

I take all your comments on board and thank you, but I was unable to practice all the past papers on the site.
AAT complain about Rote learning, so i believe it should be in the books with explanations, so that I could understand without copying a layout from an old exam. If I had taken it from the June 07 paper, why isn't it in brackets as Sandy says above? So surely this causes confusion.
I only started ECR and Reports and Returns on 22nd Sept 09 with my college and only finishing the tuition on 17th Nov, giving our class a week and a half to revise. But all the revision in the world wouldn't have helped if it is not in the book and only in one old exam paper.
Thanks MWAUGH for your help anyway.

MWAUGH1983

Bluewednesday wrote: »

I don't believe it's totally irrelevant that it's in a past paper, past papers are an essential part of revision.

I wonder also if the examiners report mentioned that it wasn't done well before? Quite often if things aren't done well on one paper they feature in the next few papers.

Well of course its relevant - you pay money for books, tutition and exam fee so how come it isnt relevant. If I am paying hard earn money for books and tutition then I expect that all stuff covered in exams has been studied - if its been in the past exams then so what it means people last time would have had the same problem.

If a few people were complaining then I would just accept it as hard luck but when the vast majority of students sitting the thing have the same opinion then it isnt really good enough to be honest!

Bookworm55

MWAUGH1983 wrote: »

Whether it is in the past paper is totally irrelevant so its a pointless comment.

No, it's extremely relevant. If it's been assessed before, it will be assessed again. Especially if, as BlueWeds says, it was answered poorly in previous sittings.

Point is its doesnt future in any learning material or texts so why the hell do the aat put it in is what people have an issue about. All texts and provider material should future in the exams!!

I think your logic is backwards. The AAT does not publish textbooks of its own. It certainly doesn't write its exams to match third-party learning material. If anything, it is the writer of the learning material who has not covered the entire syllabus.

MWAUGH1983

Bookworm55 wrote: »

No, it's extremely relevant. If it's been assessed before, it will be assessed again. Especially if, as BlueWeds says, it was answered poorly in previous sittings.



I think your logic is backwards. The AAT does not publish textbooks of its own. It certainly doesn't write its exams to match third-party learning material. If anything, it is the writer of the learning material who has not covered the entire syllabus.

HAHA Funny comments that especially as the aat who run the qualification have a duty to ensure that - they would have to give authorisation for publishers I would imagine so it would seem a little odd that books are printed and dont cover 100% of the exam content.

Bookworm55

MWAUGH1983 wrote: »

HAHA Funny comments that especially as the aat who run the qualification have a duty to ensure that - they would have to give authorisation for publishers I would imagine so it would seem a little odd that books are printed and dont cover 100% of the exam content.

I'm glad I amuse you, but I think you misunderstood me. I am saying that if there is any fault, it lies with the textbook writer who omitted material, not the AAT for examining something not contained in a particular book. Do the publishers even claim to cover all the possibly assessable material? The AAT do not have anything to do with the publishers. You should consult the written standards syllabus document for what is examinable.

This is the disclaimer from the intermediate reading list page of the AAT site. (https://www.aat.org.uk/myaat/content/item14014/) I have added emphasis.

The resources listed above are suggestions only and will not necessarily cover all the areas assessable under the Standards, and, indeed, may also cover areas which are not assessable.

Tutors and students should be guided at all times by the Standards of Competence for Accounting rather than by particular text books and manuals.

Students should also read as widely as possible in quality daily newspapers, Accounting Technician, in-house circulars and the trade press.

In-house resources such as annual reports, individual company balance sheets etc should not be overlooked.

All published workbooks and manuals covering individual units are produced by independent publishers.

The AAT does not publish manuals or text books or endorse publishers' material.

Students should not rely on a single textbook in isolation. Most tutors have a book they prefer to use, so ask yours for advice before buying.

It's also worth checking out the discussion forums since other AAT student members may have textbooks available they no longer need.

SandyHood

At a recent Masterclass Les Nightingale was asked by a lecturer to recommend a text book for ECR. He recommended a book that is NOT specific to the ECR unit: Colin Drury Cost and Management Accounting.

Text books do their best, but I always start my revision sessions by talking through the unit standards.
These Masterclasses help lecturers to see whether they have interpreted the standards in the same way that the examiner has. Generally there is very little difference.

But text books that try to write to the standards are someone's interpretation of those standards.

I think it is a shame if a candidate has made an assumption that the text book will be perfect in terms of how it interprets the standards. Perhaps this is a lesson in its own right. To put yourself in with the best chance of success, work towards the standards and try to enlist the help of lecturers who try to keep their interpretations as up-to-date as possible,