文稿f5 examiners report-dec 2011F5审查员报告.pdfVIP

Examiner’sreport

F5PerformanceManagement

December2011

GeneralComments

Thestructureofthepaperremainedthesameasinprevioussittings–fivequestionsworth20markseach.The

paperincludedapurelynarrativequestion-questionthree–andoverall,theproportionofnarrativeto

computationalrequirementswas46%to54%.

Thepassrateonthispaperwasverysimilartotheprevioussitting.Theredidn’tseemtobeanyoneparticular

questionthatcausedaproblemtothemajorityofcandidates.ThebiggestsinglereasonforfailureintheF5exam

inDecember2011wasdefinitelythebigknowledgegapsthatmanycandidatesseemtohave.Thiswasobvious

fromthefactthatasignificantnumberofcandidatesmadereallygoodattemptsatoneortwoquestionsbut

then,afterthat,itwasobviousthattheydidn’tknowanyoftheotherareasbeingexamined.Totheircredit,

manycandidatesseemedtohavetakenonboardmyadvicetostartwiththeirbestquestionfirstandthen

continuetoanswerthequestionsintheorderoftheirbestquestions.Thisdidmeanthatitalwayscameasabit

ofashockduringmarkingwhenacandidatedidtwonearperfectfirstquestions,scoringmaybe36outof40,

butthenfailedtosecuretheremaining14marksoverthenextthreequestions.AsI’vealwayssaidbefore,don’t

tryandquestionspotinthiam.It’sadangerousapproachandunlikelytowork

Onthepositiveside,candidatesalsoseemtoakingadviceaboutgettingtheeasymarksfirstonaquestion.

Thisoftenmeantthat,forexample,candidatesansweredthewrittenrequirementin4(c)beforetacklingthe

numbersin4(a)and(b),whichtheymaynothavebeenquitesosureabout.

SpecificComments

QuestionOne

Thiswasanice,straightforwardrelevantcostingquestion,whichshouldhavebeenw