Resetting Business Paper to make it fair?

BeanoNotHere

On Rte1 radio at 7 they said that as there were 3 mistakes on the business paper they feel that resetting the paper for another day may be the fairest option. They have not come to comclusions yet but the commission believe some students were "put off" by the question and may not have done the best they could. So it may be re set.

How do you feel about that? :S

Glee_GG

BeanoNotHere wrote: »

On Rte1 radio at 7 they said that as there were 3 mistakes on the business paper they feel that resetting the paper for another day may be the fairest option. They have not come to comclusions yet but the commission believe some students were "put off" by the question and may not have done the best they could. So it may be re set.

How do you feel about that? :S

yeah because if that happens teachers soooooo wont get pissed off!!! i loved that paper!!! easiest questions ever!

soccymonster

Find it highly likely considering the costs of doing so.
And taking into account students that may have not done the questions with the mistakes may feel slightly cheated if they must resit the exam again.

Did they mention where the 3 mistakes were?
The users in this forum highlighted one I think in Q6.

DylanS09

soccymonster wrote: »

Find it highly unlikely considering the costs of doing so.
And taking into account students that may have not done the questions with the mistakes may feel slightly cheated if they must resit the exam again.

Did they mention where the 3 mistakes were?
The users in this forum highlighted one I think in Q6.

FYP!

tiernanmul_gos

id be really pissed off

soccymonster

DylanS09 wrote: »

FYP!

Where? :pac:

DylanS09

soccymonster wrote: »

Find it highly likely considering the costs of doing so.
And taking into account students that may have not done the questions with the mistakes may feel slightly cheated if they must resit the exam again.

Did they mention where the 3 mistakes were?
The users in this forum highlighted one I think in Q6.

I think that's wrong.I may be mistaken though!:o

BeanoNotHere

Q6 had a mistake, one of the accounts and also one on paper 1. Just saying what I heard

Parawhore.xD

BeanoNotHere wrote: »

Q6 had a mistake, one of the accounts and also one on paper 1. Just saying what I heard

Which accounts? I'm hoping balance sheet to account for why I was E50,000 out!

kevin12345

ID GO CRAZYYYY :mad:

BeanoNotHere

Parawhore.xD wrote: »

Which accounts? I'm hoping balance sheet to account for why I was E50,000 out!

I got that one wrong aswell?

Washington Irving

Our superviser only pointed out to mistakes:
The cover of Paper 1, Section A said 2009 instead of 2010 and on Paper 2, page 5 of 7 (can't remember what question it was, maybe 6 as previously mentioned) said May 2010 when it should have said December 2009.
I'd be really pissed off if we had to take it again, as I'm quite confident I did well on that paper

soccymonster

DylanS09 wrote: »

I think that's wrong.I may be mistaken though!:o

Ah, thanks
Everyone needs a grammar check once in a while.

:P

But guys, don't worry.
I'm sure the SEC won't be too harsh and mark your paper easy.

schtroumpf94

I would be really annoyed if I had to resit it. Paper Two went extremely well for me. The dates were corrected at the beginning of the exam and then I knew an obvious mistake had been made in the Cash-flow forecast. I asked the superintendent and he said the marking scheme would be adjusted to allow for this.

Vivara

Just so you know, there would be no 'cost' involved in resitting the exam. There is a second paper placed for ever exam and this is included already in the examination box, as requested in the report to the Minister for Education last year.

Superintendents already have agreed in their contract to attend on weekends for no extra compensation in the event of a problem as far as I am aware.

Ed.

soccymonster

Then why did it cost over 1 million euro last year for that english paper 1?

Genuine question by the way. Not trying to challenge you but I heard that was the figure.

edit: paper 2! sorry :P

kevin12345

Vivara wrote: »

Just so you know, there would be no 'cost' involved in resitting the exam. There is a second paper placed for ever exam and this is included already in the examination box, as requested in the report to the Minister for Education last year.

Superintendents already have agreed in their contract to attend on weekends for no extra compensation in the event of a problem as far as I am aware.

Ed.

Your taking the piss right? :cool:

schtroumpf94

Well it was English paper two, but anyway the reason it cost so much was that they had to get all the superintendents in and maybe had to print all those extra papers?

Vivara

soccymonster wrote: »

Then why did it cost over 1 million euro last year for that english paper 1?

Genuine question by the way. Not trying to challenge you but I heard that was the figure.

Because these measures were not put in place last year! LOL, they were put in place BECAUSE of last year.

Ed.

decisions

And on the document question the two addresses were the same. Anyway I dont want to resit the paper it was sooo easy

soccymonster

Ok, didn't find my question very funny but thank you for answering it.

decisions

Saul-Goode9 wrote: »

Our superviser only pointed out to mistakes:
The cover of Paper 1, Section A said 2009 instead of 2010 and on Paper 2, page 5 of 7 (can't remember what question it was, maybe 6 as previously mentioned) said May 2010 when it should have said December 2009.
I'd be really pissed off if we had to take it again, as I'm quite confident I did well on that paper

That was the trial balence Q

Vivara

kevin12345 wrote: »

Your taking the piss right? :cool:

No. I direct you to the following text in the report:

• pre-packing of all alternative examination papers
• the provision of a full supply of alternative examination papers in each centre
• the establishment of a regional hub network for the storage of alternative papers to provide for easier access in the event of further problems.

schtroumpf94 wrote: »

Well it was English paper two, but anyway the reason it cost so much was that they had to get all the superintendents in and maybe had to print all those extra papers?

The reason was because the new procedures listed above were NOT in place. They are now.

soccymonster wrote: »

Ok, didn't find my question very funny but thank you for answering it.

Is there a problem or something? Have I done something to piss you off?

Ed.

Jack Groarke

I'd hate to have to repeat business it's sooooo tiring

kevin12345

Vivara wrote: »

No. I direct you to the following text in the report:






The reason was because the new procedures listed above were NOT in place. They are now.



Is there a problem or something? Have I done something to piss you off?

Ed.

Sorry to annoy you but do you have a link to where it says that, I believe you it's just for my parents :mad:

Thanks

suitcasepink

Eww I will in my eye repeat it.
Bit've a waste all ya have to do is give the marks for the date thing and for the cash flow as long as they've done ot as well as the question allows. Tbh its not *that* big a deal...

Vivara

RTÉ News article that mentions the thread in the Leaving Cert. forum and gives an official statement from the SEC on the situation today.

Ed.

Jack Groarke

woo free marks!:D

suitcasepink

Nothing there about even considering a resit, just gonna take it into consideration when marking

Vivara

deise_girl wrote: »

Nothing there about even considering a resit, just gonna take it into consideration when marking

I didn't say there was. Is everyone in the mood for contradicting me and 'annoying me' today or something, LOL?

soccymonster

Vivara wrote: »

I didn't say there was. Is everyone in the mood for contradicting me and 'annoying me' today or something, LOL?

deise was just making a statement not directly aimed at you

Looks like ye won't be resitting the exam guys from the reading of that article.

suitcasepink

My post wasnt directed at you? I didnt quote you!

suitcasepink

soccymonster wrote: »

deise was just making a statement not directly at you

Looks like ye won't be resitting the exam guys from the reading of that article.

I wonder if the statement about all 3rd years repeating exams throughout the summer was wrong too?

Damn I need to learn History... :mad:

soccymonster

deise_girl wrote: »

I wonder if the statement about all 3rd years repeating exams throughout the summer was wrong too?

Damn I need to learn History... :mad:

Were you serious about that?
Sarcasm doesn't come through well on the keypad :P

suitcasepink

soccymonster wrote: »

Were you serious about that?
Sarcasm doesn't come through well on the keypad :P

:P I made it up obviously!!!
Now srsly I NEED to learn history, gawd its long.. Imma just skip most the first year stuff...

kevin12345

deise_girl wrote: »

:P I made it up obviously!!!
Now srsly I NEED to learn history, gawd its long.. Imma just skip most the first year stuff...

im here typing up notes for myself because I seriously don't want to write them :P I'll get up at 8 tomorrow and learn the people in history's. Do you have french tomorrow too deise?

suitcasepink

kevin12345 wrote: »

im here typing up notes for myself because I seriously don't want to write them :P I'll get up at 8 tomorrow and learn the people in history's. Do you have french tomorrow too deise?

Yea I do, dunno when Im gonna learn that though Tomorrow Ill just look at a few phrases for the letter and postcard, shur it'll be grand..

Sorry for this going OT..

patakadarragh

They wont bother for the jc id say....there were 2 mistakes that werent mentioned in the q's i did....the first was they only gave the one adresss for two diff people...the 2nd was a right mess on the cash flow forecast question completely threw my answer.....tbh the mistake in qst 2 didnt make a huge difference and they will probably just give the marks for whatever people write down, however the mistake in the cash flow qst completely affects your answer and the right answer was impossible to get afaik.
The fairest thing the can do is give full marks to everyone for the cash flow forecast as because of the way the way the qst is laid out(continous balance or whatever you call it)that one mistake would lose you like 7/8 marks me thinks.

How in gods name did they get that figure for the cash flow forecast its completely wrong like!

padocon

Vivara wrote: »

RTÉ News article that mentions the thread in the Leaving Cert. forum and gives an official statement from the SEC on the situation today.

Ed.

Thanks for all the posts in this thread Ed. Very interesting!

Anamchara72

Someone failed to check the two B S papers before printing that's not good enough the person in charge must take responsibility but the buck will probably be passed down the line!!didn't affect me it was obviously sloppy my teacher would go mental if I made all those mistakes

_rebelkid

patakadarragh wrote: »

They wont bother for the jc id say....there were 2 mistakes that werent mentioned in the q's i did....the first was they only gave the one adresss for two diff people...the 2nd was a right mess on the cash flow forecast question completely threw my answer.....tbh the mistake in qst 2 didnt make a huge difference and they will probably just give the marks for whatever people write down,

Question two wasnt a mistake, the person who was filling out the form lived with his parents all his life, so having his father as guarantor would obviously result in the same address.

Question six actually had two mistakes, the figure was written as 69000 when it should have been 39500, but they calculated it as 69500, which took me 20 minutes to figure out!! :mad:

patakadarragh

huh if he was living with his parents why was he hogan and they keogh?

BeanoNotHere

_rebelkid wrote: »

Question two wasnt a mistake, the person who was filling out the form lived with his parents all his life, so having his father as guarantor would obviously result in the same address.

Question six actually had two mistakes, the figure was written as 69000 when it should have been 39500, but they calculated it as 69500, which took me 20 minutes to figure out!! :mad:

This is what im talking about. They are thinking of resetting it for people like this who wasted 20 minutes of the exam trying to figure out if they were wrong or what. So its only fair we re sit it

Vivara

BeanoNotHere wrote: »

This is what im talking about. They are thinking of resetting it for people like this who wasted 20 minutes of the exam trying to figure out if they were wrong or what. So its only fair we re sit it

I think what they should do something similar to what they do for Latin unseens with Paper II. If you answers are 'reasonably in tune' with what's there, and you haven't left any blanks, they should scrap the marking scheme and give full marks plus extra for overall impression. Only kidding.

Seriously, just because you couldn't figure it out doesn't mean you should waste your time that eat's into other questions. What if everything was correct and you couldn't figure it out? You seriously would not move on? That's a time management issue and nothing really to do with the paper.

I do however agree that this error may throw people off a bit but I don't think it would drastically affect the other questions unless you had poor time management. I think they should certainly take the stress of something like this into account, but resitting a Junior Certificate exam is a bit over-the-top.

Ed.

_rebelkid

patakadarragh wrote: »

huh if he was living with his parents why was he hogan and they keogh?

whoops, i did the wrong question:( sorry!

_rebelkid

BeanoNotHere wrote: »

This is what im talking about. They are thinking of resetting it for people like this who wasted 20 minutes of the exam trying to figure out if they were wrong or what. So its only fair we re sit it

but even with that twenty minutes wasted, i still came out early!:D

Read in the paper today that a re-sit was out ruled by SEC Although some teachers were protesting for a re-sit :eek: Silly teachers, we get our compensation, leave it that way :rolleyes:

Kevin!

Deleted User wrote: »

Read in the paper today that a re-sit was out ruled by SEC Although some teachers were protesting for a re-sit :eek: Silly teachers, we get our compensation, leave it that way :rolleyes:

There are allot of people who are happy with there overall examination in buisness, so the teachers would have been protesting for them. This year it was a particularly easy exam so with a second shot, we might not have been that lucky.