FAE Results 2009

Fairly sure they come out with the examiner reports usually after few weeks of results coming out.

alisuz

04072511 wrote: »

Well done all who passed!

But can somebody explain to me why 76% passed nationwide (and 86-90% in the Big 4)? Next year it will more than likely (If CAP 1 and CAP 2 are anything to go by) be around 50% nationwide and about 60-65% in the Big 4. Without trying to come accross as bitter (as it is not the fault of the people who sat the FAE's this year) this is grossly unfair!! And I for one feel absolutely cheated by all of this!

Hi, Guys,

For joining the Big 4, you need to have a minimum of 2.1 in 2nd yr of your degree and then must maintain it in your final year. That isnt always a requirement in a smaller firm. I think its a minimum of a 2.2. I know its not fair to generalise but the big 4 will have the brighter students on an overall average level. (not meaning to sound mean but you get where im going with this!).

For the study leave, I have friends in big 4 cos but they dont use the 3 months for study. Most head off on a holiday for a week or two. Its not possible for that much study to be done!

Also, in relation to the pass rates for this year and next year FAEs, I consciously didn't do a Masters so that I would remain in on the old course. In that sense I lost out on a Masters. I have friends that did the masters and now regret it greatly because they are stuck on the new syllabus!

alisuz wrote: »

For joining the Big 4, you need to have a minimum of 2.1 in 2nd yr of your degree and then must maintain it in your final year. That isnt always a requirement in a smaller firm. I think its a minimum of a 2.2. I know its not fair to generalise but the big 4 will have the brighter students on an overall average level. (not meaning to sound mean but you get where im going with this!).

I call shenanigans on this to be fair. I think it has more to do with the in-house tutorials, study days, lectures etc. that just aren't available to anyone in a smaller firm. What I will say is Big4 probably have more accountancy grads.

Hackysack

alisuz wrote: »

Hi, Guys,

For joining the Big 4, you need to have a minimum of 2.1 in 2nd yr of your degree and then must maintain it in your final year. That isnt always a requirement in a smaller firm. I think its a minimum of a 2.2. I know its not fair to generalise but the big 4 will have the brighter students on an overall average level. (not meaning to sound mean but you get where im going with this!).

This isn't definitive either.

You can still get in with a 2.2 average.

alisuz

Hackysack wrote: »

This isn't definitive either.

You can still get in with a 2.2 average.

It may have changed since I joined in 2007, but I needed a 2.1 in final year. The job offer for the big 4s were conditional on obtaining that.

As for in house training, I had one session for 3 hours. put it this way, i will never regain that 3 hours of my life!!! terrible. It was just 2 managers giving the "course".

I didnt think that big 4s got any more lecture time than other companies? That would be news on me.

It is true that we get an awful amount of study leave. What do smaller firms get?

8 weeks and its loads of time, Chillax for the first two weeks and hit the books for the last 6 weeks.

i would attribute the higher pass rate in the big firms to the following:

1) big 6 firms give much more study leave

6 weeks for prof 2's as against 4 in small firms

8 weeks for prof 3's as against 6 in small firms

12 weeks for fae's as against 7 in small firms

2) as has been stated above the big firms tend to hoover up the students with the best college results

intuitively it makes sense that on average the people who got better results in college would also get better results in the professional exams

with regard to an earlier point that was made, although it is correct to say that the contracts contain a condition that you must maintain a 2.1. i have never heard of someone losing a job when they got a 2.2. in fact i know many people who were or are in big 4 firms having got 2.2's.

from my experience what the firms care about is whether you arrive in with the exemptions they expected you to have. in my college course a 2.2 secured you full prof 2 exemption, once you got this there was never an issue. however, i do know of people who got a pass degree, didnt get their exemptions and had their contract rescinded. so i would say once you get the exemptions you told them you would have you are sorted, if you miss out on some or all of them however, you're probably in trouble

3) there's a culture in the big firms of passing.

call it a peer pressure or what have you. if you are on a team with 10 or 15 people who are doing the same exams and you know 90% of people will generally pass, you really dont want to be the only one who fails and looks like a tosser. passing is very much expected of you and at annual review time it tends to be the main thing their interested in, if you dont work that hard in the job and pass your exams you usually get on fine, but if you fail you tend to get slated regardless of your performance on the job.

passed all four

I work in a small firm and we get 14 weeks study leave, The pass rate is generally 90% and I think this definitely contributes to that level of success. As for the 2.1 rule in the big four I know plenty who have 2.2's and 2 who even repeated their finals in the Autumn college exams and retained their contract in the firm.

Its not a question of which firms are smarter its the pressure and support your given by your firm.

Pisco Sour

I wasnt asking why the Big 4 have a higher pass rate.

I'm asking why is this years FAE pass rate so high, while next year we will all be getting absolutely shafted!

If you look at the number who sat them this year you will see that it is up alot on last year, percentage of people passing first time has actually dropped I tink.

alisuz wrote: »

It may have changed since I joined in 2007, but I needed a 2.1 in final year. The job offer for the big 4s were conditional on obtaining that.

Not anymore.

alisuz wrote: »

As for in house training, I had one session for 3 hours. put it this way, i will never regain that 3 hours of my life!!! terrible. It was just 2 managers giving the "course".I didnt think that big 4s got any more lecture time than other companies? That would be news on me.

We had continuous assessment exams during the year and I heard that one Big4 in particular had full day seminars/lectures for their students prior to sitting the continuous assessment, where the info was presented and the likely questions and solutions given. Bit of a help when a manager is giving you suggested answers / solutions etc.

alisuz wrote: »

It is true that we get an awful amount of study leave. What do smaller firms get?

Bare minimum. I ended up using my holidays as study leave. Also there's no such thing as time in lieu for overtime etc which makes a huge difference.

Accountant spud wrote: »

If you look at the number who sat them this year you will see that it is up alot on last year, percentage of people passing first time has actually dropped I tink.

The percentage of people passing is not related to the amount of people in each sitting

If ten people sat it last year and four passed, thats 40%....... if one hundred people sat it this year and 40 passed that's still 40%

They have broken it down into first sitting etc on results, You can see from this how many were sitting for the First time and how many passed. pass rate is down.

04072511 wrote: »

I wasnt asking why the Big 4 have a higher pass rate.

I'm asking why is this years FAE pass rate so high, while next year we will all be getting absolutely shafted!

it's unfortunate for you but you have to play the hand your dealt and get on with things.

if you are that worried about the lower passrate you'd be better applying your energy to starting studying now rather than cribbing and moaning about how easy we had it

it could always be worse. i'm studying for an exam at the moment where the passrate is often as low as 35%.

Well said ofjames

ofjames wrote: »

if you are that worried about the lower passrate you'd be better applying your energy to starting studying now rather than cribbing and moaning about how easy we had it..

Irrelevant tbh seeing as how repeat results are yet to be received, and nobody was "cribbing and moaning" but asking for an opinion. But once again thanks for reinforcing my opinion of people in the accounting sector.

ofjames wrote: »

it could always be worse. i'm studying for an exam at the moment where the passrate is often as low as 35%.

it's often that low being the important part of this example. I wonder how you'd feel if one year it was 65% pass and the next year it was 35%. :rolleyes:

prinz wrote: »

Irrelevant tbh seeing as how repeat results are yet to be received, and nobody was "cribbing and moaning" but asking for an opinion. But once again thanks for reinforcing my opinion of people in the accounting sector.

what impact would repeat results have on things? the comparison is between passrates under the old and new icai syllabus. repeat results have zero relevance to the point under discussion

besides my response was aimed at 04072511 who described the 2010 fae class as being 'completely shafted'. if you dont think that counts as cribbing and moaning than you must be on crack.

prinz wrote: »

it's often that low being the important part of this example. I wonder how you'd feel if one year it was 65% pass and the next year it was 35%. :rolleyes:

actually i attempted the exam in question last december and the passrate was 35%. i came in the top 40% so didnt get it.

in the june sitting of the same exam (which i decided not to attempt do due to my fae's) the passrate jumped to 46% (the highest its ever been) meaning i would have passed comfortably on my december 2008 score. am i moaning about being shafted? no, i'm busy studying hard to make sure i come in the top 30% this december and leave nothing to doubt. life sucks sometimes, get over yourself and get on with things!

ofjames wrote: »

what impact would repeat results have on things? the comparison is between passrates under the old and new icai syllabus. repeat results have zero relevance to the point under discussion

Neither does telling people to study :rolleyes:

ofjames wrote: »

...besides my response was aimed at 04072511 who described the 2010 fae class as being 'completely shafted'. if you dont think that counts as cribbing and moaning than you must be on crack.

No it doesn't, it's a perfectly legitimate issue as evidenced by the CASSI with record numbers of complaints this year. Both after the summer and autumn sittings, and during the year. I take it that you don't actualy know the amount of BS that went on during the year, that's not your fault.

Pisco Sour

prinz wrote: »

No it doesn't, it's a perfectly legitimate issue as evidenced by the CASSI with record numbers of complaints this year. Both after the summer and autumn sittings, and during the year. I take it that you don't actualy know the amount of BS that went on during the year, that's not your fault.

Well said!

And I'm fully entitled to complain about the situation. It is not equitable to have 76% (86-90% in Big 4) to pass in 2009 while in 2010 have an expected pass rate (based on how the CAP 1 and CAP 2 have been going) of 50% (60-65% in Big 4).

Add to that the fact that this years FAE have 3 attempts within a 14 month period. What a lovely consolation for the few people who didnt already pass. We dont have this. If we fail, then tough luck, and try again in 12 months.

In addition, if you fail one subject, you repeat just that one subject. If we fail the core course? well we repeat the entire core course again (80% of the FAE workload for next year).

Also having compensation must have been lovely. Have a bad day, as long as you get over 40%, then you can make up for it by doing well in another exam. You could in theory fail 3-4 of your FAE subjects and still pass. Next year its either "you pass" or "you fail". If you fail, its "tough luck, do it ALL again".

Also, lets not forget that within the companies we are being compared to previous years. The year of our CAP 1 results, there was company wide uproar in Big 4 firms due to the low pass rate compared to previous years. It didnt matter that we were doing the new course, and that it was much harder. They expected a pass rate in line with previous years.

Theres people who are out there who would be feeling sorry for themselves no matter what course there on, saying 09 students had it handy might make you feel better but it wont pass the exams for ya :rolleyes::cool:

Accountant spud wrote: »

Theres people who are out there who would be feeling sorry for themselves no matter what course there on, saying 09 students had it handy might make you feel better but it wont pass the exams for ya :rolleyes::cool:

For about the 18th time I fail to see the relevance in, or the point behind, one of your posts. :rolleyes:

crapmanjoe

04072511 wrote: »

Well said!

And I'm fully entitled to complain about the situation. It is not equitable to have 76% (86-90% in Big 4) to pass in 2009 while in 2010 have an expected pass rate (based on how the CAP 1 and CAP 2 have been going) of 50% (60-65% in Big 4).

Add to that the fact that this years FAE have 3 attempts within a 14 month period. What a lovely consolation for the few people who didnt already pass. We dont have this. If we fail, then tough luck, and try again in 12 months.

In addition, if you fail one subject, you repeat just that one subject. If we fail the core course? well we repeat the entire core course again (80% of the FAE workload for next year).

Also having compensation must have been lovely. Have a bad day, as long as you get over 40%, then you can make up for it by doing well in another exam. You could in theory fail 3-4 of your FAE subjects and still pass. Next year its either "you pass" or "you fail". If you fail, its "tough luck, do it ALL again".

Also, lets not forget that within the companies we are being compared to previous years. The year of our CAP 1 results, there was company wide uproar in Big 4 firms due to the low pass rate compared to previous years. It didnt matter that we were doing the new course, and that it was much harder. They expected a pass rate in line with previous years.

Unfortunately when ever anyone (any this isnt just ICAI this is life in general) makes a change to a system then the "guniea pigs" are always going to feel hard done by! Its a fact of life and unfortunately there is nothing you can do about it.

As an example a few years ago when Bank of Ireland changed their pension scheme from defined benefit to defined contribution for all new joiners, the new joiners get done over but the people in the year before them get the old juicy bonus. And there is 100 of other real life examples.

The simple fact of the matter is that there is way to many accountants going through the system, an extra 300/400 qualified this year compared to the previous year.

They had to draw a line in the sand and make the exam difficulty on par with CIMA and ACCA (pass rate of 35-45% for the final set).

So to summarise is it fair that I passed in a sitting with 76% sitting and next year will prob be 50%? No probably not!

But in the long run, when accountancy numbers drop off and everyone who does qualify has really put in the work it will be better for everyone!

gmcnams

Folks, there is no point in crying, bitching and moaning on here about pass rates and blah and blah. Its well known saying that empty vessels make the most noise. My advice is get your head down, pull your finger out and do your work.
So what if the pass rate is only X%, so what if such and such get X more study leave or X more courses, you seem to be well aware of this so rather than use it as an excuse maybe realise you need to put in that bit of extra effort when you can.
No one is going to hand you a pass, regardless of exam and regardless of syllabus. Each and every one of you have the potential to pass your exams so go and fulfil it. Can I ask a question of Prinz etc? What is your attendance at class like? ..or don’t you go because you don’t have to go and ach sure no one else goes?

gmcnams wrote: »

Folks, there is no point in crying, bitching and moaning on here about pass rates and blah and blah. Its well known saying that empty vessels make the most noise. My advice is get your head down, pull your finger out and do your work.

Easy to say tbh. Like I said record numbers of complaints. I suppose they were all just bitching.

gmcnams wrote: »

Can I ask a question of Prinz etc? What is your attendance at class like? ..or don’t you go because you don’t have to go and ach sure no one else goes?

I go to every lecture I can.

djdeclan

There seems to be a lot of beef with this syllabus change and a lot of talk about the overall pass rate falling. Every year there are complaints about something; 2007 & 2008 it was the MABF paper, this year it was something else, next year it'll be the change of syllabus and the following year students will find another reason to feel hard done by.
My view is as follows: at present (I don't know how it works under the new syllabus) if you get 50% or more in each exam you will pass. Regardless of how many people are doing the exam, what the pass rate is etc. As long as you have enough marks to pass you will pass. The pass rate could be 1% but as long as you have passed what do you care?!
So nevermind the statistics, put in the hard hours during study leave, do the exam as best you can and hopefully you'll pass.

Pisco Sour

djdeclan wrote: »

There seems to be a lot of beef with this syllabus change and a lot of talk about the overall pass rate falling. Every year there are complaints about something; 2007 & 2008 it was the MABF paper, this year it was something else, next year it'll be the change of syllabus and the following year students will find another reason to feel hard done by.
My view is as follows: at present (I don't know how it works under the new syllabus) if you get 50% or more in each exam you will pass. Regardless of how many people are doing the exam, what the pass rate is etc. As long as you have enough marks to pass you will pass. The pass rate could be 1% but as long as you have passed what do you care?!
So nevermind the statistics, put in the hard hours during study leave, do the exam as best you can and hopefully you'll pass.

Nonsence! The old course didnt even need 50% in each subject to pas. You could fail more than you passed and still get the pass overall!

viconia

04072511 wrote: »

Nonsence! The old course didnt even need 50% in each subject to pas. You could fail more than you passed and still get the pass overall!

So. For some reason, You're annoyed at the institute, and are bitching at those people who did the exams earlier?

Perhaps, make a thread about your annoyance about this but last time I checked, this was a thread for people who did the exams in 2009, who were happy for passing or discussing how to appeal.

If we get away with 48% and 52%, then take it up with the institute. I don't understand what you're trying to achieve. Are you trying to feel some kind of justice by telling us how "easy" we had it.

We studied for 3 months, in libraries, at home, with books. Everyone has hard exams and everyone deals with them. Yours will be hard and be the "hardest", like ours were the "hardest" and seemed impossible at the start of June.

If you're here waiting for all of us to say, "Oh, my god, I am so sorry for you to be sitting the new course, it's so unfair on you!". I'm not going to say it, I'm glad I had compensation, and I'm glad I had 10 years of exam papers. and hey, I wouldn't want to be in your shoes, but I had a new course when I was in University, so I know it's hard when you don't have old papers, or some previous stuff to go by.