Hi, I have a couple of questions regarding the consistency of marking questions. 1) Q3 (vi) Suggest alternative methods by which the Society could manage its liquidity risk. In the examiners report (Page16) - below. Implement active liquidity monitoring/management processes [½] Actively manage creditor/debtor balances [½] No marks given for any points about “monitoring” Literally monitoring is mentioned two lines above, what are the examiners on about? 2) Q3 Propose two other risk optimisation metrics, relating to economic capital, that the board could use to enable it to assess this option. [2] Answer Economic Income Created EIC [1], Member value [1] ,Member value added [1] My issue: How these 1 mark each, for stating something directly from the book work, when for other items direct from the book work would be [1/2] marks. And more generally how does this set a precedent for the exams coming up, does this mean all book work copy paste questions are one mark each now? Thanks
1) yes, this is somewhat frustrating. Fortunately there are plenty of other marks available for discussing the managing of risk. 2) these are unusually generous marks, for simply stating the name of a measure. I would not see this as a precedent at all. I would normally expect perhaps the name plus a definition or outline of the measure to earn a full mark.
