Hi, I'm currently thinking of doing the AAT qualification evening class at my local college starting September. While I have a very strong numerical educational background up to degree level, I've had not done any accounting / bookkeeping.
Because it would otherwise mean an extra year, and the fact that I know I will get so bored that I stop turning up etc. I want to skip Level 2 and start at Level 3. Spoke to one fo the tutor at the college, and after some discussion, say they would let me jump straight to Level 3 Diploma if i can do some self study these few weeks, and then do well enough in a computer multiple choice test to show I've gained the knowledge equivlent of Level 2. I'm assuming it's the one I've found online at aatskillcheck.org.
I've managed to get my hand on a recentably new copy of Business Accounting Vol. 1 by Frank Wood, and Mastering Book-Keeping by Peter Marshall. I've also ordered a copy of Computerised Book-Keeping by Peter Marhsall from Amazon.
My question is what chapters from those books (I don't have the time or the money to get others) would I need to know to be able to do well enough on the skills test to skip Level 2?
The books that you've purchased so far will get you started but the test that the examiner is referring to is the AAT skillscheck test that you can do only once.
Your tutor will then need to use this as evidence to justify to the AAT why they allowed you to start at a higher level so don't be fooled into assuming that the tutor has the last say on where you can start your studies.
I think that you need to get more than 85% to start at level II and more than 95% for level III but I may be wrong about those percentages and if I am I'm sure that someone else on here will correct me.
The book that you need is the AAT workbook for units 1-4 (but you will only need to do the tests in it for units 1-3).
The book is no good at all for learning from but you will need to be able to do the tests in it in order to be able to get through the skillscheck.
The book is :
AAT Foundation Revision Companion Units 1-4 (see here for a version : http://www.amazon.co.uk/AAT-Units-Foundation-Revision-Companion/dp/0751746320/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1311355323&sr=1-1)
Ok, now onto the burning question. If you think that you will get bored by the subject what is motivating you to study it?
You need to think of the double entry bookkeeping that you pick up in the first two levels of AAT as the foundations upon which everything that you do that follows will be built. A thougher understanding of why things happen as they do is very important to grasp in order to move forwards.
Normally I would only advise people who already have a firm grasp of double entry to consider skipping the lower level papers.
Hope that this helps,
Shaun.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
I think that you need to get more than 85% to start at level II and more than 95% for level III but I may be wrong about those percentages and if I am I'm sure that someone else on here will correct me.
Erm, the Level 2 is what used to be the Foundation paper, which has no entry requirements apart from basic numeracy and literacy. The Level 2 refers to the Qualifications and Credit Framework levels where 2 (in England & Wales) is equivalent to GCSE A* - C.
Ok, now onto the burning question. If you think that you will get bored by the subject what is motivating you to study it?
When I say I'll get bored of it, I don't mean necessarily with the subject in general. If the content is too basic or easy for me, even if I have never done it before, I will lose interest quickly and either end up failing because I haven't done any work or passing with a bare minimum amount of work which doesn't provides me with the foundation for more advance content. I even did selected GCSE & A-levels early when I was at school as a result, and it's also partly why I didn't do so well at university even when I'm easily capable of getting a 1st. The challenge of learning the equivalent of Level 2 in a couple of weeks intensive self study is enough to keep me interested, but if spread over a whole year, defitely not.
My question was framed in the sense of for those who have done AAT, especially the new system, or looking at say the table of content of the Kaplan text for Level 2: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Basic-Accounting-Combined-Text-Workbook/dp/0857322087/ http://www.amazon.co.uk/Basic-Accounting-II-Combined-Workbook/dp/0857322095/ http://www.amazon.co.uk/Basic-Costing-Combined-Text-Workbook/dp/0857322117/ http://www.amazon.co.uk/Basic-Costing-Combined-Text-Workbook/dp/0857322117/ http://www.amazon.co.uk/Computerised-Accounting-Combined-Text-Workbook/dp/0857322125/ What would be the chapters that cover roughly equivalent amount of topics?
I mean, if I am not capable of learning enough in the time frame I have, then so be it, but I want to give it a fair try. (The college does offer a fast track course for Level 2 and Level 3. 3 days a week 18 weeks for Level 2, and 22 weeks for Level 3 so both in one academic year. However that will add up to too many hours as I'm on jobseeker's at the moment which let me do the course for free. I wouldn't be able to pay for it myself as I have no job or money, and if I have a job, I wouldn't have the time to do fast track. )
p.s. A totally unrelated question. Is it a simple pass or fail in AAT exams or is there different pass levels like pass with distinction?
I know for sure in level 3 AAT your results are simply marked Competent or NYC (Not Yet Competent) ,i think all the exams are split into 2 sections and you have to achieve over 70% in each section to earn a Competent.
I had worked doing purchase / sales ledger and cash/ petty cash book on sage for about 2 years before starting AAT L2 and can say I struggled to get my head around manual double entry to start with. Once the penny drops it seems perfectly logical and obvious but it does take practice. I have just started L3 this week and it is alot faster paced.
My friend has A-level accounting but was not allowed to skip Level 2 due to not having done the costing unit that is in level 2.
I would suggest started at level 2, as Shamus says it provides the foundation that future levels are based on.
Erm, a bit too late for that. I managed to answer enough of their direct entrance exam questions to enrol onto the Level 3 course. Incidentally, it wasn't the one available online but an internal one focused on double entry bookkeeping. My course started earlier this week. We'll see how it goes. :)
Just a thought KTC, you are learning a PROFESSION not an EXAM. No bookkeeper or accountant skimmed through a book or skipped a year just because they thought they would get bored with it.
If you had done a level 1 or 2 Bookkeeping course, then it would be fine for you to skip Level 2. I would advise you to keep learning Level 2 from your books all the way through Level 3 because anything you have missed will come up. The whole class (that did their level 2) will be flying through the work, and at that point, you'll lose interest and start to not attend.
Level 3 is hard work and with level 4 you don't have a life! Without the foundation level or any previous Bookkeeping knowledge you may have just scuppered your plans of getting through this qualification. People that do a bit of double entry and get the hang of it think its so easy, believe me it is the tip of the iceberg.
Will be interested to know how you get on. Good Luck.
While you are perfectly entitled to your opinion, I just don't see why I should spend a year sitting in a classroom learning things I can learn in a few weeks on my own. (I'm not working at the moment, so I have plenty of time.) If I had the money to pay for the college fast track course where they offer L2 & L3 in one year (L2 first term, L3 the next 2 terms), I might have done that. As it is, from what I have seen so far, I would be one of the one "flying through the work" compare to some of the rest of my class.
Anyway, the argument is moot now. Only time will tell whether I'm right or you are. :)
that idea goes back to the thing that I've quoted about ACCA a few times in the past.
When I started out I started with the old OU course B680, the certificate in accounting (excellent introduction into accounting but became way too expensive so eventually got divided down into three courses).
Most of us (but not all) in my group passed the exams and went on to ACCA or CIMA. I quickly lost touch with those that went down the CIMA route so have no idea how things went with them.
Of the ACCA contingent everyone but myself took exemptions from papers 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 (F1, F2 and F3 under the new sylabus). Once you have taken the exemptions you cannot then go back and change your mind.
The others hence started at a higher level but in true hare and tortoise fashion I did the papers that I could have been exempted from and this very much got me into the ACCA way of thinking.
I passed all of the fundamentals papers, caught up with the others on the skills papers and passed them as the fundamental level studies had set me up for the higher levels.
Over the next two years everyone else from my group dropped out of the ACCA qualification following failure after failure which I completely put down to taking the exemptions.
The above is really not intended as blowing my own trumpet but as something for people to think about in that quite often it's the tortoise that wins and you really need to think about what you are doing before taking exemptions.
On a seperate note I think that there is very much two different mentalities. One for passing exams and the other for learning the subject matter.
That issue is not as simple as it seems as whilst everyone would agree that to consider bookkeeping and accountancy as a profession you really have to know your stuff. The examiners make the exams so time pressured that you cannot possibly hope to convey your level of knowledge so you end up learning how to pass exams by putting accross enough to get through but nothing compared to the answer that you would give if the question scenario was in the real world.
I think maybe that the supervisory bodies appreciate that which is why they put such emphasis on post qualification practical experience.
Hope that I've made a few people sit back and think about exemptions but that said, for some, escpechially where the person works in the business already taking exemptions is absolutely fine.
Right that's my two penneth,
back to the forum,
Shaun.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
KTC, I fail to see how level 2 is easy enough to wrap up within a few weeks, otherwise there would be no need for colleges to spread it out over a year. There is only so much your brain can take in within a short period of time. But well thats your choice and opinion. I hope it all works out for you.
I am learning accountancy at the moment, whereas you learn everything to get you through the exams, I have bought loads of accountancy books, because I like to know that extra knowledge which you would use in the real world, and not just the topics the examiners want you to learn to pass the exams. The indepth knowledge not the basics can be hard to get your head around, nevertheless I think it is good grounding to go that much further into why you are doing something, rather than learning it to pass an exam. Kind Regards Sue
no arguement from me on the you can never have enough books or enough knowledge... Eight full size billy bookcases creaking at the seams with study texts, accountancy books and magazine files filled with articles printed from the web.
I think that there is an issue though in that exams are too short to convey you're level of knowledge of the subject matter so you tend to have a different learning style for exams as opposed to work.
I think however if I started a campaign for exams to be five hours long rather than three I would be lynched by both students and markers! And anyway, the longer the exams are the more the examiners expect you to do so they would just close the gap with more complex scenario's.
Sometimes it feels as thought the exams are just something that you have to get through before you start learning properly!
Kind regards,
Shaun.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
)
