No one should fail aat exams

exam panic

t

Steve Collings

What makes you come to your conclusion?

exam panic

Idon't know

Steve Collings

exam panic wrote: »

Idon't know

OK. Well, did you pass your AAT exams first time round?

welshboy

If everyone passed the exams the qualification would be worthless.

Miss_HJ

exam panic wrote: »

That what I think . What do you think??

your comment is worthless. of course people should fail if they are not competant then they are not of AAT standard - no questions.

A-Vic

fe fi fo fum

Monsoon

Would anyone like a cupcake?

A-Vic

Monsoon wrote: »

Would anyone like a cupcake?

ooo yes please, am a bit fed up of fruit cakes lol

Primble

are the chocolate ones?

AK002

exam panic wrote: »

that what i think . What do you think??

lol.

Ok.

Monsoon

Triple Chocolate, folks


/me hands round a plate of cupcakes.

speegs

I didn't think anyone could "fail" an AAT exam. You are merely "not yet competent" you are certainly not a failure. Obviously this leads to the fact that if everyone was competent first time around then this would not be a suitable test of skill as nobody can know absolutely everything all of the time. Even once we are qualified we must still continue to test our knowledge with continuous professional development.

Sorry, but some people must be deemed not yet competent sometimes.

Speegs

PS I am not very keen on cupcakes, but a nice Starbucks muffin would be fine. Ginger stem I think.

SandyHood

Not passing, failing and not yet being competent are all used to describe the same situation.

The heading of the thread reminded me of the instruction AAT have for candidates sitting simulations (and I think it should apply to exams too)
Candidates should only attempt a skills test if it is likely that they will pass

It is an interesting scenario, but sensible. In other words, you need to be pretty confident that you will pass and (in the case of the skills test) your tutor should be confident too.

So if your preparation is thorough, and every one else adopts the same approach, then the only causes of not passing would be random and unexpected.

I think it would be excellent to see very high pass rates because candidates only attempt exams where the chance of passing is excellent - and why not. Good sports stars will leave no stone unturned to give themselves the very best chance.

I don't know whether high pass rates will then lead to sloppy preparation by people who merely think "anyone" can pass without recognising that the people who have passed are anything but "anyone". But over time the high standard message will get out and high standards and high pass rates could run together.

Just a thought.

Marga

this post is to see what people feel about the following


what about giving grades?

I mean for example if you pass with a 90% rate then you have a level 5a for example
85% would be level 5b
80% would be level 5c
75% would be level 4a
70% would be level 4b

and so on ,.... if you have kids in school that is the scale used to measure most of their knowledge


that way we would have people that if they have just achieved lets say 40% would be at a lower level than people achieving the level 5 but still they would have some knowledge


not sure if i explained myself well but what you think about that system?

Rinske

I would then still expect that a lower than say 60% is a fail to be fair.

It doesn't really show competence to me if you couldn't answer more than 50% of the questions right.

Does that make sense?

Marga

Rinske wrote: »

I would then still expect that a lower than say 60% is a fail to be fair.

It doesn't really show competence to me if you couldn't answer more than 50% of the questions right.

Does that make sense?

yes it does , of course there should be a threshold as well but it shouldnt be like black or white


i think it is not fair for students who have for example achieved 95% of the exam to be considered the same as students that have just merely achieved the pass (lets say it is 70%)

because the competence is not the same

Monsoon

Marga wrote: »

what about giving grades?

This was put to our tutor years ago and his response was:

Do you ask your brain surgeon what grade he got? If he told you he got a C-, would you still use him?

If the exams were graded, candidates for job interviews would be potentially rejected if they didnt' have the required grade - making, say, a C or D grade qualification next-to worthless.

Hence, pass or fail.

SandyHood

Some people drive well
Some don't
but they all passed the test

Now did the ones who drive well pass better than the others?

I doubt that the test discriminates well enough

I'd be surprised if any accounting body will start splitting out different levels of pass

If you are good enough to pass you should be good enough to drive (do someone's accounts)

So if you want to change anything, then raise the bar to be sure that competence means a very good exam mark but don't put in lots of little bars.

A-Vic

i agree to a point that grades shouldnt be given - but feed back for people who fail i feel is essential which i feel is unfare having to pay for the script then paying for a re-sit, even having to pay for exemptions when you move on to ACCA it seems all about money

Monsoon

A-Vic wrote: »

but feed back for people who fail i feel is essential

Agree with this 100%! Actually, I think feedback for all exams should be given - e.g. I would want to know in which areas I lost marks (even if they don't tell me my grade), so I could go and brush up on those aspects. Otherwise I might go about my business thinking I was calculating something correctly, when I wasn't. The bottom line has to be duty of care to our clients and I think this would be a beneficial step. I know it's more work - but I think it's important.

SandyHood

I agree that feedback is very important

I think that one of the most useful revision days is the one where no one stands up and teaches you anything
Instead you revise and arrive with the subject knowledge, then pick up a question, attempt it and have it marked there and then while you do a second.

When you read the feedback you have a clear idea of gaps in your knowledge and exam technique and can then get on and do more questions applying your new knowledge.

It can tire you out doing 6 or more exam questions in a day but it is very useful to see what you know after the day is over.

In many ways it is this process that helps you turn up for the real thing very well prepared.

blobbyh

We've seen this proposal put forward a few times over the years Marga but essentially does it make any difference? A marginal grading system has little use outside the school/college world and most employers simply want to know whether you can or whether you can't. This also extends to our own personal lives. Does it matter whether an airline pilot can fly a 737 but not a 747 since if he's not qualified to fly the latter then he simply won't be allowed to. Or that a doctor can treat broken limbs but not perform heart surgery? How about if the dentist drilling into your teeth was to tell you he'd been assessed as only 45% competent to be doing that drilling but enough for him to qualify?!! We only care that they're qualified to the appropriate standard for the job in which they're employed and which we're trusting them to do, anything else is just theoretical.

When we pass our driving tests we're not graded, it's just a simple yes or no. Yes we are given feedback but we're not told we 50% passed or 40% failed! And the extra resources needed to accumulate and then pass feedback to every individual who sat an exam would need to be paid for somehow. Would the 80% who passed be happy to pay an extra £20 per exam so the 20% who failed can receive feedback?

And are people aware that the OP's first language seems to be clearly not English (from reading their other posts) so I'm guessing something was lost in translation there? And are we also saying that those lucky enough to find the AAT exams ridiculously easy aren't allowed a voice on the forums either? While many accept that boasting can be damaging to those who have failed (I'm very reluctant to use the word 'unlucky' as I will always maintain that those with adequate preparation should generally pass) it can also be argued that over the top negativity is equally damaging to those about to sit their own exams.

Marga

well to be honest i would like to have feedback even if i have passed hence the grading system...if i know that i have had a 80% grade that means that i have not achieved my full potential and that i have done something wrong therefore revise even if i have passed the exam i still need to have knowledge but of course that is just my opinion


On the other hand if i am selecting for a job someone yes, i would like to know how well prepared are they ie if there are candidate A with a 75% and candidate B with a 95% to me that means just looking at the figures that candidate B is well more competent then candidate A.
However, that doesnt mean that i would choose candidate B over candidate A. Candidate A has room for improvement which it is in my opinion very good if you are looking for an individual to accomodate to the job they will perform. Candidate B will know nearly everything but it will be more difficult to change his habbits or ways of doing things to comply with the company.


I do really believe that grades could be beneficial

blobbyh

Assessing employability on something that happened six, twelve, eighteen months previously is fairly discriminatory as person A may have improved more than person B in the time since the exam or B has deteriorated more than A. Therefore, if you're going to positively discriminate on grades, it's a better indication to offer an employment exam at the same time on the same day - maybe at second interview stage - to see how the candidates currently match up and how much knowledge has been retained/attained as opposed to what was once learnt and may now be forgotten.

Marga

blobbyh wrote: »

Assessing employability on something that happened six, twelve, eighteen months previously is fairly discriminatory as person A may have improved more than person B in the time since the exam or B has deteriorated more than A. Therefore, if you're going to positively discriminate on grades, it's a better indication to offer an employment exam at the same time on the same day - maybe at second interview stage - to see how the candidates currently match up and how much knowledge has been retained/attained as opposed to what was once learnt and may now be forgotten.

i have had interviews when this was done to ensure/check the candidate is fit for purposes so yeah not bad idea

Bluewednesday

I have to say that ACCA gives you scores and no one has ever asked for my average or scores so I don't think it is used as an employability factor!

RowanB

Wow, I'm enjoying these inane pilot/ driver analogies. I think the obvious point is, an accountant that can perform tasks with perfection is probably better than one that completes them with less accuracy, hence the logic behind Marga's advocation of graded AAT awards. Maybe it should just be pass or fail, but these laughable pilot/ driver comparisons don't refute Marga's suggestion.

blobbyh

Uh oh, I see someone's let the village idiot out again.

At least I now know how to add this user to my ignore list thus I can no longer see you Rowan.

A-Vic

took the words out of my mouth

RowanB

blobbyh wrote: »

Uh oh, I see someone's let the village idiot out again.

At least I now know how to add this user to my ignore list thus I can no longer see you Rowan.

Oh dear. Blobby's up to his old tricks of trying to bully people with childish put-downs.