Anyone else still worried about that 'batch' q in ECR

Chris023Chris023 Feels At HomeRegistered Posts: 93
hi Guys

I divided the Prime cost by batch

I hope it was a mistake on the exam paper and they mark either way as correct

this Q is still going around my head lol...I will be extremely peeved if I fail on this :ohmy:

Comments

  • ccreavenccreaven Well-Known Registered Posts: 119
    did you compare your answers with sandys email?
  • DillDill Settling In Nicely Registered Posts: 23
    My tutor told me that the AAT have confirmed one question was wrong.
  • kiwimogskiwimogs Settling In Nicely Registered Posts: 21
    Chris023 wrote: »
    hi Guys

    I divided the Prime cost by batch

    I hope it was a mistake on the exam paper and they mark either way as correct

    this Q is still going around my head lol...I will be extremely peeved if I fail on this :ohmy:

    This is Sandy Hoods answers
    :ohmy:
    1.6 a Prime Cost per batch £….
    Direct materials 14,870.00
    Direct Labour 42,206.00
    57,076.00
    b Variable (marginal) cost
    Prime cost 57,076.00
    Variable overheads 48064/15020 3.20
    57,079.20
    c Full absorption cost
    Variable (marginal) cost 57,079.20
    Fixed overheads 75100/15020 5.00
    57,084.20
  • Chris023Chris023 Feels At Home Registered Posts: 93
    thanks for that kiwimog

    yeah I divided the £57,076.00 (prime cost) by the number of batches to get 3.8
  • DillDill Settling In Nicely Registered Posts: 23
    There is no way that the answer *should* have been 57076 from prime cost. Is their labour really £42,206 per labelled can? I doubt it!

    But if you answered the question as it was written, then yes, the answers are the 57076/57079.2/57084.2 -- but I left a side note saying I thought it was unrealistic and used 3.8/7/12
  • MazzieMazzie New Member Registered Posts: 10
    I also divided the prime cost by the number of batches. If they've made a mistake, they may mark both ways correct? I hope so - I'll be gutted if I fail on that!
  • andrea1802andrea1802 Feels At Home Registered Posts: 43
    I also divided the prime cost by the batch.. so lets keep our fingers crossed that they will mark both ways correct.

    andrea:001_smile:
  • PencilPencil Feels At Home Registered Posts: 97
    I think they will have to mark both ways correct. I gave the answer according to their wording, but put a note on there to suggest that the figures appeared to be wrong and then wrote out the per batch figures had the labour and materials figures been totals.

    As I understand it, someone at another exam venue brought this to the invigilators attention, they then got in touch with AAT who confirmed the wording was wrong, but as they were then aware at this particular venue of the error then those students were expected to get the correct answer.

    HOWEVER, I still believe they will have to mark either answer as correct:thumbup:
  • *hayley-may08**hayley-may08* Feels At Home Registered Posts: 43
    I doubt you can fail on one thing?? It would only class as one error carried through aswell I think??

    *Ive got the 1st half of the stock record card wrong (last bit ok!)
    *the MOS written question wrong!! Grr. Hoping this isnt too many marks.
    *One Line of the apportionemnt/allocation task wrong...


    =( Is this a fail??? Hoping the top two arent worth too many figures, all my figures for those questions were ok, just rubbish at the "written" side of things!?

    x
  • Chris023Chris023 Feels At Home Registered Posts: 93
    I think we will be ok Hayley :001_smile:

    I hate the feeling of not knowing though :ohmy:

    I will be chewing my fingers off waiting for that email on the 19th!
  • mark130273mark130273 Font Of All Knowledge Registered Posts: 4,234
    dill i belive your answer is the one i got !!!!! 3.80 , 7, 12

    because if the direct labour per can was 42K how the hell are they going to make a profit ?
  • wilbosswilboss New Member Registered Posts: 5
    Exam Paper Typo

    I think the 'per batch' against materials/labour was definitely a typo! I mean think about it, if the prime cost was £57,076.00 PER BATCH, and they produced 15,020 batches a month, the total direct material/labour cost would be £857,281,520.00 ie £857 MILLION A MONTH. :thumbdown:

    Therefore logically the correct answers should be £3.80 / £7.00 / £12.00, however I'm sure that as it's their mistake on the paper they should accept either answer as correct. :thumbup:

    I reported this to the exam invigilators who in turn reported it to our exams office, so hopefully it will get fed back to AAT...
  • frenzyfeltonfrenzyfelton New Member Registered Posts: 14
    Not What I expected from the AAT

    Willboss
    I got the same answers as you, if AAT made a typo on the exam I think this is unacceptable !

    Do they not test the exam out on a cross section of people within the AAT and take feed back from them and make necessary changes ?

    I think if both sets of answers should be marked as a pass !

    Just my thoughts any way

    Felton:thumbdown:
  • AndreaAndrea Settling In Nicely Registered Posts: 15
    I thought it looked very odd that the direct costs were in the thousands and overheads were like £3.20 & £5. But I just answered the question as it was given :glare: Surely they have to mark both right :001_unsure:
  • FuchsiaFuchsia Just Joined Registered Posts: 4
    The AAT really need to have a group of people reviewing their papers and editing them for comprehension and mistakes.

    This isn't the first time that I've noticed a misleading question; some of the written questions in the skills tests and past papers I went through have grammar or wording that contradicts the meaning that they were trying to get across.

    As regards this specific question, I read several of the Chief Assessor's reports for past papers, which repeatedly stated that students should use common sense to check their figures and tell whether they should be possible. As Wilboss stated, £857,281,520.00 per month is a completely nonsensical figure given the context of the question, and if you were provided with these numbers in a workplace environment, you would assume that they were incorrect and investigate why they were so ridiculously large.

    If anyone fails because of this question, they should kick up a real storm about it.
  • bigfootbigfoot Settling In Nicely Registered Posts: 19
    can get you into a lot of trouble thinking.

    i just answered the question as i read it and it already stated per batch next to the numbers.

    I tried not to think to much and just do it because things are often easier than u can make them out to be.

    I think if you noticed that it was per batch already but said that it seems to high and u were doing it to get a more realistic answer then should be fine.:cool2:
  • kiwimogskiwimogs Settling In Nicely Registered Posts: 21
    The FRA simulation we did a few weeks back had an error in it. We started it and were not told about the error until we had used it and got our simulations back the following week. It was to do with a disposal if I remember correctly. Its just not on when they tell us that its supposed to be hard its a serious subject then they make bloody errors.
  • bigfootbigfoot Settling In Nicely Registered Posts: 19
    monkeys write the exams!!

    i agree its unbeleivable how many mistakes that make it onto the exam papers.

    the simulation i did for ECR had silly grammatical errors on it notably it kept refering to the 'cheif account' the 'cheif account is away this week so could you explain.......' they meant cheif accountant but kept saying account.

    They must have monkeys doing these papers lol


    What have i told you about thinking!! it can get you into a lot of trouble!! so dont do it!
  • bigfootbigfoot Settling In Nicely Registered Posts: 19
    Also i remeber a fault with the FRA skills test it was to do with the subsidiary purchases ledger which we had to reconcile if i remember correctly one of the names of the account was wrong but the teacher discovered it and told us.
  • ccreavenccreaven Well-Known Registered Posts: 119
    the ECR Simulation had an error too, it said something on the lines of reapportion the stores to the other departments using labour hours, then the next question said now reapportion stores using the labour hours. Luckily I noticed and the lecturer said she would mark it right if we had correctly calculated it regardless of the answers given (which were for whichever method they ment first?).
    It's such a pain, we should be able to answer the questions without worrying if we have read them right!:mad2:
  • bigfootbigfoot Settling In Nicely Registered Posts: 19
    maybe they have 8 year old children from India writing and marking the exams to keep their costs down i.e direct labour lol. How could you AAT have no ethics!! :001_tongue:
  • mark130273mark130273 Font Of All Knowledge Registered Posts: 4,234
    i think if anyone is woried about it , they shouldnt , as long as you used the proper formula then you will be marked right !
  • Polymer xxPolymer xx New Member Registered Posts: 13
    Response from AAT

    Hi people

    Received this from AAT as a response to an email asking about this question.

    Hope it makes everyone feel a bit happier now as they'll mark both ways as correct.

    Ps. I've had to copy it into work because this attachment thing won't except outlook format!!

    Enjoy!
  • kjwkjw Just Joined Registered Posts: 2
    Any chance you could email me that document as I can't seem to open it. Thanks
    [email protected]
  • sidsid New Member Registered Posts: 7
    Batch Question

    I spent more time on this question than some of the harder calculations and came out with a variety of answers which i crossed through over and over again. I was relieved to see so many others were confused by the wording.
    In my opinion the whole question and answer should be disregarded from the exam and should not me marked at all. This would then be a fairer percentage of the overall paper for everyone.
  • garry_coombsgarry_coombs Well-Known Registered Posts: 108
    I'm really looking forward to seeing the chief assessors report!

    I wonder when it'll be released
Sign In or Register to comment.