Hi Alison,

no, speak your mind. There is a division on the site often with strongly held but diametrically opposed standpoints.

My flags in your camp on this and has been the basis of some recent debates in that if you have not been through the qualifications they do not know what they do not know.

Conversely of course how can one offer ones services to the public if all knowledge comes from a book.

Of course, such debate is getting away from Sonya's point about how does one know who has actually taken the exam if the person does not prove who they are... That said there have been many reported cases of the person attending an exam at a centre not actually being the person who should be taking it.

The difference is purely that the likelihood of discovery is higher.

People who con the system make a mockery of many qualifications as to my mind do qualifications that allow open book in exams.

Personally my viewpoint is quite Draconian (mmm, normally I'm talking about ACCA regulation 8 when I use that word!). In my opinion the following should apply to all qualifications :

- Centre based exams
- No exemptions (ever... If you can get examption then you should be able to pass the exam)
- No open book exams
- No multi choice

Of course a more practical difficulty needs to be addressed in order to go down this path in that attending exams for single parents can prove to be a logistical nightmare so centre based exams must be supported by a larger network of centres where the exams can be taken... And bless their little cotton socks the ICB have done that with using the centres where driving theory tests are taken.

I'll get off my soap box and post this.

looking forward to this one growing into a constructive debate. Nice post Sonya,

kind regards,

Shaun.

Fact is cheats get found out, it is possible to cheat qualifications but run a bad practice and your found out in no time.

Dave

Personally I disagree with it being the only method of testing, as does the ICB's official view.

Hence why the ICB is moving towards making sure everyone does a centre paper on theory/practical bookkeeping.

However, having online tests as part of an overall qualification/membership requirement helps test more and gives the student better feedback as they progress through the course.

There is another organisation, maybe the same one you are thinking of, that now gives membership based on 1 quick Sage course. The only assessment seems to be tutor marked as part of the course.

If the organisation is OfQual registered you could put in a complaint as they are supposed to have robust/measurable etc. examinations, not just online.

I have to disagree on that one Nick.

When we talk about real life situations are we not talking about the advice given across the desk without reference to the books whilst the client is in attendance? Is that not what the professional level exams try to prepare us for?

To follow the arguement pursued to it's logical conclusion would it not make sense to give internet access during the exam as that rather than the book is where we find the detailed answers for the questions avoided or glossed over once the client has departed the office.

I know that the ACCA make their papers really time presured to ensure that the proforma's and regulations are ingrained knowledge leaving only the bare minimum time for thought related to the cunundrums burried in the question rather than time to ponder formatting issues.

Maybe it's that I've only known that approach that I feel that it should be the only way for all qualifications.

Myy only issue with the ACCA on examinations is that I feel that they are too generous with exemptions and to my mind in many cases that actively works agains the best interests of the person who chose to take such exemptions. Or more to the point, took such guaranteed passesas one still needs to pay for every missed exam as though sitting it with the only difference being an assured pass without actually turning up at the exam centre on the day.

kind regards.

Shaun.

I did not know that they had dropped the fee Neil, many thanks for that.

That aside though I think back to when I first went down this path.

There were a few of us who had become friends whilst passing the OU B680 certificate in accountancy. That gave us exemptions from the first three ACCA papers (1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 at the time).

The other 11 that that went down the ACCA path all took the offered exemptions but, my work friends and colleagues many of whom were already chartered or certified accountants had been taking the proverbial out of me for my qualification "not being from a real university" so as much to prove to them wrong about the OU qualification as anything else I took the ACCA papers that I had exemption from.

ACCA questions are deeper than the OU equivalents (which I would say are more like you are used to with the AAT). Even at that level there are embedded tricks and twists meaning that you really need to be confident before attempting even that level paper.

I passed all three at first sitting but my results at the time were nowhere near the distinction that I had received with the OU.

It was a real wake up call.

The others who skipped the first three papers and started at 2.1 fared much worse.

Nobody passed it. Some dropped out, some thought the paper an anomaly and retook it six months later when a couple passed.

Within two years I was the only one remaining in the qualification largely I feel due to taking a step back and not taking the exemptions (think tortoise and hare here). I can assure that despite the distinction in B680 I did not feel myself one of the better students.

Between then and now I have come to the conclusion that exam exemptions are not the shortcut that some believe but rather route to a more difficult (and retake costly) path.

I would amend my post above with a minor clarification. I do not believe that exam exemptions should be allowed but I have no issue with membership exemptions based on attaining another bodies qualification.

For example. If someone can pass ACCA or CIMA then why would they need to pass the exams of such bodies as the IFA, AIA, AAT, IAB or ICB. Of that list all but the ICB embrace that concept. The latter has been the cause of much debate between James and Myself in the past.

Conversely I do not believe that ACCA qualifications should gain exemptions from ATT as that is quite a specific tax qualification.


Conclusion.

Yes, it sounds as though you could save £180 in taking the exemptions, but if that then costs you in multiple retakes due to building the house without proper foundation such has not been a saving but rather merely a deferred payment paid with interest to rival the payday loan companies.

talk later,

Shaun.

Hi

I agree with Neil, i got quite a few exemptions from ICAEW with my AAT.  I had put the work in previously and i didnt find that missing these exams held me back.  The exemptions were well mapped, in one case i had to sit a 1 hour exam instead of a 2 1/2 hour exam as i hadnt covered quite enough.

In my course at Kaplan i couldnt tell the difference between students who had taken the AAT fast track route and those that had started at the bottom and took all the exams.  In fact my tutor said that those who took the AAT had actually spent more time learning the basics, than those who took all the ICAEW exams, and so faired better.

I dont think exemptions are an quick or easy way, alot of time and effort has been previously put in, and it should be recognised.

Maybe me and Stevie baby, have them kind of faces that are once seen never forgotten lol.

 

Or "only a mother could love"

 

even loller.

-- Edited by Spamkebab on Thursday 4th of October 2012 06:34:57 PM

Hey, you've got a horse as big as mine and Kris's Alison. Mines so high that I have to climb on my soap box to mount it (lol).

I agree with everything that you have said but the one thing that I would put top of my list is that the bookkeeper must understand the accounts.

I'm not saying that bookkeepers should be accountants but I just feel that how can the bookkeeper hope to understand the impact of their input unless they understand how, and also why things appear as they do on the balance sheet.

Certainly with myself when I am learning new software I push everything through to a full set of final accounts to know that my input was correct but what would I do if I was not already in my head thinking well I've put x here so y needs to appear there and when it doesn't tracking down why.

For that reason I would actually say that one needs to have a minimum of ICB level IV knowledge at least before considering setting up as self employed where at the moment people are going from nothing to self employed inside a few months and that's just a PII claim waiting to happen.

Don't confuse the last statement however with a generalisation about AICBs as there are very many who just go that far in order to gain their practicing certificate and cheaper PII but have a lot more knowledge behind that either from experience or other qualifications.

That however makes such really difficult to police as put two bookkeepers with the same qualification next to each other and their knowledge bases will invariably be completely different with some towards the accountant level of the spectrum and other the data entry clerk which renders the qualification almost superfluous when determining a candidates skill level.

On the Sage front do you remember the old Sage advertising campaign of learn our product and make £25 per hour... No experience requirement, just do the course and there's a well paying job for you.

I've seen similar from some of the less reputable training companies promising unachievable levels of income for all based on a couple of quite specific case studies.

The real issue that I see it is that there are a large number of people who need to make money quickly. They've been made redundant from a desk job and assume the skills are transferable (which of course some of them will be). They then plough their redundancy payments into a false belief of a better tomorrow but often don't even recoupe the cost of the training back out of their business.

I've heard that some franchise companies do that as well (not a franchise company on this site) where you are taken from no knowledge to an accountant (yer, right!) in 12 weeks intensive training which consists predominantly of courses on how to sell.

The real emphasis I feel needs to be that to go down this path is not a job but rather a lifestyle choice. Its a business where you don't learn and then earn but rather its constant learning throughout your entire career.

We are selling expertise, we are not selling a willingness to do something from a basic knowledge base and that I feel is where many fall down when they go down the self employed route which lets be honest is often the only route in an industry closed off to anyone lacking experience in it.

Right, sure that Kris will be needing the high horse next,

talk later,

Shaun.

Hi Hal,

as also indicated in my reply so no arguement from myself. (I think my reply may need a second read as it does try to look at the arguement from different perspectives as this is not a simple right or wrong sort of debate).

The issue as I see it is not with those QBE although there is an issue there in that one does not know what one does not know in that a person will have been taught one way of doing things in a business where there are often multiple alternatives so as pushed byy many of the professional bodies qualification and experience need to go hand in hand.

Much of myown experience has been gained in industry rather than practice which also causes some issues yet eradicates others.

As I say put two people with the same qualifications next to each other with the same qualification and you will invariably find two compeletely different skill sets as we are the sum of everything that led us to where we are to day, not just the bits of paper that we picked up along the way.

kind regards,

Shaun.

Spamkebab wrote:

---

Hey c'mon guys, i'm trying to fly under the radar here lol.

Been in the test centre 11 times now and had my proof of ID checked twice

 

 

---

 I go to the same one and never have I been asked for my ID

Spamkebab wrote:

---

Maybe me and Stevie baby, have them kind of faces that are once seen never forgotten lol.

 

Or "only a mother could love"

 

even loller.

-- Edited by Spamkebab on Thursday 4th of October 2012 06:34:57 PM

---

 Thinking on, I should have walked in with one of them Groucho masks on to see what they would do :)

Hi Dave, The only thing that keeps me sane sometimes in business is the belief that people or organisations who are deliberately manipulative and dishonest in order to gain will not benefit long term. Here's to honesty and integrity! Cheers! P.s mines a red wine :) Sonya

Hi Shaun Interestingly I didn't complete CIMA because I thought time pressured exams were completely and utterly pointless. At the time I wrote to CIMA and a magazine to express my frustration with the system! I passed all the ones I took (4 mid level at the time) with good marks first time but I felt I was demonstrating my ability to earn max marks as possible in the time available rather than demonstrate my ability and competence. I actually passed one management accounting exam after leaving out a compulsory 30 Mark question. I was astonished! I have lots of personal gripes with professional studies including degrees. As somebody said at a meeting recently: yes they can do your tax or Vat return but it will only be x% accurate. I'm not for one moment suggesting 100% pass rates of course. But there seriously needs to be some balance. Sonya

Ooh, talking of study.... *MUST STOP READING FORUM AND FINISH PROJECT*... See you all later.