AUDIT & ASSURANCE (PAPER 2.3)

INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT GHANA, ICAG

dc.contributor.author	INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT GHANA, ICAG
dc.date.accessioned	2022-07-25T13:45:44Z
dc.date.available	2022-07-25T13:45:44Z
dc.date.issued	2016-05
dc.identifier.uri	http://41.66.247.10:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/581
dc.description	GENERAL PERFORMANCE OF CANDIDATES The general performance or pass rate of candidates in the subject is 55%. That is, out of a total number of 418 candidates who wrote the paper 234 passed and 184 failed. The performance was above average. The reason could be that teaching and learning are improving at the moment. Performance or pass rate was higher this diet than that of November, 2015 High performers for this paper were evenly spread across majority of the centres. It is an indication that candidates are attending classes in most of the centres. Availability of learning materials has also contributed greatly to this performance. Low performers were not concentrated in a particular centre. They could be found in most of the centres. Teaching and learning in these centres are to be intensified. There were situations or scenarios of copying in any of the centres where the examinations were conducted. The level of preparedness of most of the candidates was adequate which culminated into over 55% pass rate.	en_US
dc.description.abstract	EXAMINER’S REPORT EXAMINER’S GENERAL COMMENTS & STANDARD OF PAPER The standard of the paper for May, 2016 was as high as that of November, 2015. The syllabus coverage of the paper was excellent with no material ambiguities or errors. In my view all the five (5) questions were of high standard at the level of examination. No questions were ‘too loaded’. In my view however, question two (2b) marks are ‘over-generous’. That question should not attract more than five (5) marks. This contributed in no small measure for candidates to score 80% in the examination. Marks allocation followed the weightings in the syllabus was fairly allocated to each sub-question. There were no questions or sub-questions in which mark allocation was contrary to syllabus weightings.	en_US
dc.description.sponsorship	ICAG	en_US
dc.language.iso	en	en_US
dc.publisher	ICAG LIBRARY	en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries	AA;PAPER 2.3
dc.subject	MAY 2016 PROFESSIONAL EXAMINATION AUDIT & ASSURANCE (2.3) EXAMINER’S REPORT, QUESTIONS AND MARKING SCHEME ICAG LIBRARY NYARKO TWUM OSBORN ERNEST YAW DENKYIRA	en_US
dc.title	AUDIT & ASSURANCE (PAPER 2.3)	en_US
dc.title.alternative	AA	en_US
dc.type	Learning Object	en_US