FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT (PAPER 2.4)

ICAGSpace Home
→
Past Questions & Solutions
→
NOVEMBER 2019 PAST QUESTIONS AND SOLUTIONS
→
View Item

dc.date.accessioned	2022-07-20T15:43:24Z
dc.date.available	2022-07-20T15:43:24Z
dc.date.issued	2020-11
dc.identifier.uri	http://41.66.247.10:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/483
dc.description	PERFORMANCE OF CANDIDATES The performance of the candidates showed significant improvement with the overall pass rate improving to 23% compared to the 13% in the previous sitting. This could partially be attributed to the improvement in confidence level on negative impact of the COVID 19 on candidate’s preparation and nervousness towards safety. Better preparations might have also accounted for this development. The possible reasons for some poor performance which have been highlighted in prior reports still persist and include the following:  Poor preparation and complacency  Poor time management and question answering approach.  Poor and incoherent thoughts exhibited in answering questions  Uncoordinated and incoherent answers to theory or essay questions  Inability to identify and apply the right formulas provided to the right questions	en_US
dc.description.abstract	STANDARD OF PAPER The standard of the paper was considered good and commensurate with the level and expectation. Regarding the distribution of questions, it was consistent with the syllabus in terms of coverage and there was an improvement in skewness in favour of quantitative aspect compared to the qualitative or essay aspect noticed in the last sitting. The quantitative aspect covered 70% whilst the theory or essay aspect covered 30%. This was a shift from the last sittings where it was quantitative (78%) and theory (22%) but below past trends of about 60% to 65% quantitative and 35% to 40% essay or theory. The questions generally appeared clear and unambiguous for candidates to understand and answer. There were no noted sub-standard questions in the paper except few instances of overloaded background information that required a lot of reading and concentration to pick the relevant portions needed to answer the questions. The allocation of marks was generally good and where there was need to relook at the allocation of marks in the scheme it was done. The marking scheme was relooked at and aligned to the question paper. Where alternative answers were necessary it was recognised and provided.	en_US
dc.description.sponsorship	ICAG	en_US
dc.language.iso	en_US	en_US
dc.publisher	ICAG LIBRARY	en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries	FM;PAPER 2.4
dc.subject	NOVEMBER 2020 PROFESSIONAL EXAMINATION FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT (PAPER 2.4) CHIEF EXAMINER’S REPORT, QUESTIONS AND MARKING SCHEME ICAG LIBRARY NYARKO TWUM OSBORN ERNEST YAW DENKYIRA	en_US
dc.title	FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT (PAPER 2.4)	en_US
dc.title.alternative	FM PAPER 2.4	en_US
dc.type	Learning Object	en_US