QUANTITATIVE TOOLS IN BUSINESS (PAPER 1.4)

INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT GHANA, ICAG

dc.contributor.author	INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT GHANA, ICAG
dc.date.accessioned	2022-07-25T10:06:34Z
dc.date.available	2022-07-25T10:06:34Z
dc.date.issued	2017-05
dc.identifier.uri	http://41.66.247.10:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/552
dc.description	GENERAL PERFORMANCE OF CANDIDATES The general performance of candidates can be described as above average. Majority of the candidates who wrote the paper at centres across the country performed averagely well with many scoring above 40%. Many of the above average performers recorded are found in Accra, Kumasi, Wa and Cape Coast. Indeed, the best two candidates who were from the Wa centre scored 92% and 93% respectively. Few candidates scored below 11%. There was no traceable copying by candidates except that some candidates did not number their answers very well, which made some examiners go through some difficulties trying to separate answered questions for marking and scoring. Few candidates also wasted their limited time trying to solve all seven questions instead of the recommended five and ended up scoring very high marks on few questions and almost nothing on some questions. Per the scripts submitted for marking this year’s May Examination diet, one would conclude that candidates’ preparation for the paper was very good and this has reflected in the general performance. In fact, few candidates scored 20/20 on as many as three questions in this diet.	en_US
dc.description.abstract	EXAMINER’S GENERAL COMMENTS The Quantitative Tools in Business, Paper 1.4, which was written in May adequately cover the Level One Syllabus and the ICAG Manual. STADARD OF PAPER The standard of the Paper was a little lower than previous Papers ( November 2016, May 2016, November 2015, May 2015) but it is similar in format and style to the aforementioned Papers. The questions were evenly spread over the topics in the syllabus The marking scheme was well-drawn; every sub-question had marks duly allocated and the marks were adequate for each question ( i.e. it followed the weighting in the revised syllabus. The marking scheme was straightforward and candidates were rewarded for any meaningful effort.	en_US
dc.description.sponsorship	ICAG	en_US
dc.language.iso	en	en_US
dc.publisher	ICAG LIBRARY	en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries	QTB;PAPER 1.4
dc.subject	MAY 2017 PROFESSIONAL EXAMINATIONS QUANTITATIVE TOOLS IN BUSINESS(PAPER 1.4) CHIEF EXAMINER’S REPORT, QUESTIONS & MARKING SCHEME ICAG LIBRARY NYARKO TWUM OSBORN ERNEST YAW DENKYIRA	en_US
dc.title	QUANTITATIVE TOOLS IN BUSINESS (PAPER 1.4)	en_US
dc.title.alternative	QTB PAPER 1.4	en_US
dc.type	Learning Object	en_US