PQ ACCA December exam feedback
Pass the chocolate! How bad was the December ACCA exam sitting? Was your paper so awful you had to eat a whole packet of Tunnock’s biscuits, or did you opt for the Nutella? Here’s what you told us
TX: Sitters found TX hard this time around, but then it always is! FR: There was a lot of consolidation questions throughout this paper, for some. But, generally, sitters thought the December test was tough but fair. PM: Not many sitters thought this was an ‘OK’ exam! Some 62% of PQs in the Open Tuition post-exam poll said the December exam was either ‘hard’ or a ‘disaster’. The exam left many students with not a clue about how it went. One sitter said: “I honestly don’t know what to feel after this. Not a lot tested on the major topics. My performance was not okay, I have done other papers and never felt this way.” Students also pointed out that the paper did not reflect any of the past papers: “There’s 4 past papers on the ACCA platform for PM, Paper 1, 2, Specimen paper and December 21 mock. Out of all 4 papers only like 5% came up in this exam.” And another explained: “It was very hard, and to be frankly honest it was pointless to release the pre-December mock exam. The amount of information in every question was overwhelming. Section A was OK, but section B was so hard. I am not pleased with the exam and not motivated to retake it for quite a good while. It is so frustrating that all my hard work is gone down to drain.” There were also complaints about the size of the computer screens. FM: December’s sitting was described as ‘fine’, ‘pretty good’ and ‘surprisingly easy’. “The exam was a lot easier this time around, but weird at the same time,” said one sitter. The fact that it was OK 20
still scared some as “I have never had an easy ACCA exam – let’s see what happens!” AA: This sitting was deemed OK by 57% of December sitters, according to the Open Tuition post-exam poll. One in four (25%) found the exam ‘hard’ and another 9% said it was a ‘disaster’. Some students said they felt quietly confident coming out of the exam hall, but after rehashing their answers at home they started to get paranoid that they had failed. Sound familiar? SBL: As one PQ said: “It wasn’t difficult or tricky, but I ran out of time and left the last question incomplete.” Another admitted: “I didn’t get to Q4 as I ran out of time!” Many other sitters admit they overran on time too, especially with Q1, and they were then forced to “hastily answer the rest of the questions”. Feedback generally, however, was that this SBL exam was ‘OK’ and ‘a fair paper overall’. One worry was some students found it hard to link to the exhibits when answering questions. Sitters seem to almost enjoy answering about the scientism
on acquisition and big data. SBR: Over 40% of sitters responding to the Open Tuition post-exam poll said this paper had been a ‘disaster’. It was not surprising then that many students said this was a ‘tough’ exam, and ‘just not fair’. It was so bad that one PQ admitted to going home and eating a whole packet of Tunnock’s wafer bars. It was that horrible! This was only matched by someone who ate four Nutella sandwiches. Another sitter vented: “What a complete mess of a paper. An entire question based around cryptocurrency which does even have an accounting standard, what a joke… There were just too many out of this world scenarios and I fail to believe how we are expected to link them back to what’s taught in the syllabus.” For yet another PQ this was “the worst ACCA exam I’ve sat. The B questions were stupidly hard, the scenarios were way too complex and I ran out of time. This is the first ACCA exam where I have struggled with time management. It took about 15/20 mins to understand what was actually going on in the question.” AAA: Sitters struggled with time and many found it ‘honestly tough’. “It was the hardest paper I have ever sat,” said one sitter, and they felt the examiner intentionally wants to reduce the pass rates. AFM: The exam was deemed ‘fine’, and even the theory ‘wasn’t that hard’. For others it was “too close to call”, and on the Open Tuition post-exam poll one in five said the exam for them was a ‘disaster’ (21%). Top tutor Sunil Bhandari told us: “AFM candidates should be content with what they saw on their screens. The topics tested across all the exam variants were as expected. You would say it looked like the questions set by Father Christmas rather than The Grinch!” APM: Many felt this was a challenging paper and struggled with their time management. Some PQs just didn’t know what was being asked in some of the questions: “What about the Q3… I read it like 10 times and I couldn’t tell what was being asked.” Another sitter said: “Overall I don’t expect to pass and I am completely exhausted.” Another complaint was the narrow scope of the December paper “considering how broad the syllabus is. It only tested almost only on three areas.” ATX: One in four sitters said the ATX December paper was a ‘disaster’, according to the Open Tuition post-exam poll. One called it “a weird one”, another thought it was fair, but they were afraid they hadn’t written enough. And, for yet another, the whole thing was just a blur, “as there is so much to do in 3 hours and 15 minutes!” PQ Magazine February 2022
