PEV Monday 13 June 2005

I have completed this paper and will shortly be asking whether anyone would like to look at how I think it could be answered.<BR><BR>I have commented on the paper already (and a forum user called angellic felt I was offensive).<BR><a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.aat.co.uk/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=44&threadid=6913">http://www.aat.co.uk/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=44&threadid=6913</a><BR&gt; I hope nothing on this thread is misconstrued as being personal, (except of course, my personal opinion).<BR><BR>Task 1.1<BR>a b and c Fine<BR>A departure from the past when operating statements were previously a central feature.<BR>Task 1.2<BR>a and b<BR>Fine and a fair test<BR>I'd be interested to know about how candidates who chose to not use bulk purchase discounts to explain the price trend, subsequently developed their answers into implications for purchasing officers and the company as a whole.<BR>Task 1.3<BR>a This really ought to be well answered. It was top of my shortlist.<BR>b i I liked this. I think most people teaching ABC use the opportunity to show how the overhead per unit changes. Multiplying this by a known closing stock is a natural development.<BR>ii Nice (if any exam question can be)<BR>2.1<BR>a I think that this sort of management report is far more realistic than the sets of final accounts that have dominated this section in the past. Well done examiner.<BR>The contribution and GP ratios were fairly mechanical division sums using the data provided. The fact that budgeted production was exactly the same as actual made the efficiency ratio the reciprocal of the capacity one. This is the 3rd out of 3 exams from Andy Royle and the third time activity ratios had been tested. Who knows what's coming up? I will be including a practice question in my classes where budget and standard labour hours are different, just in case this is on the agenda.<BR>b An excellent opportunity to show off understanding of gross profit as a far less useful factor in decision making compared to contribution. <BR>2.2<BR>A new style of task, but hopefully not a worry. Here I refer back to my pre-exam postings about bringing forward Intermediate knowledge. I expect more of this as both PEV and PCR exams develop over the next couple of years.<BR>I have used a break-even approach to the comparison of incremental variable cost per unit of Model H with the monthly savings in fixed costs. I think this leads into some qualitative factors to produce an appropriate report. I'm sure that there are other equally appropriate approaches.<BR><BR>General points about time. This exam is written for students, rather than me. But I double my times as an indicator of how long I expect students to need. <BR>Section 1 40 minutes<BR>Section 2 35 minutes<BR><BR>But remember if section 1 has 100minutes allocated and section 2 has 80, then the mark allocation will reflect this.<BR><BR>So my verdict is a thumbs up.