CAUTION - THIS POST RELATES TO THE CIMA 2010 SYLLABUS, SO IS NO LONGER VALID
Anonymous wrote:
I am doing P3, what if I can not answer say part a - a numerical part of a question - how do I attempt to answer part b the rest of the question if I don't have the numerical part in a to refer to - can I use theory for recommendations ?
Easy one! If you can't do the calculation at all, or get stuck part way through, just 'assume' an answer. Write at the end of the calculation (or instead of it) "Answer = ......". Then, answer part b (the discussion) as if the answer to part a (the calculation) had been what you assumed. The rule is that you must still be able to earn full marks for the discussion.
Can you use theory? Yes, of course - base your arguments on the theory, as it applies to an answer such as the one you assumed.
You can't be penalised twice for one mistake.
Anonymous wrote:
I am doing P3, what if I can not answer say part a - a numerical part of a question - how do I attempt to answer part b the rest of the question if I don't have the numerical part in a to refer to - can I use theory for recommendations ?
Easy one! If you can't do the calculation at all, or get stuck part way through, just 'assume' an answer. Write at the end of the calculation (or instead of it) "Answer = ......". Then, answer part b (the discussion) as if the answer to part a (the calculation) had been what you assumed. The rule is that you must still be able to earn full marks for the discussion.
Can you use theory? Yes, of course - base your arguments on the theory, as it applies to an answer such as the one you assumed.
You can't be penalised twice for one mistake.
Posts
