• We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
  • Please be advised that the SP1, SP5 and SP7 X1 deadline is the 14th July and not the 17th June as first stated. Please accept out apologies for any confusion caused.

Cp2 April 2020 Exam

G

GemmaHayes

Member
Hi,

I think the exams are finished for this session now so I wondered people's thoughts on this exam? I found paper 1 extremely difficult to complete to any standard with the time available. If it was a work piece I would have been fine as I would have taken the required time to complete appropriately to get to everything.

How did others cope? I found that I spent most of my time just doing the data checks and found it difficult to understand the method for the calculation on the day so I'm not sure if this was to do with panic of the time available and my laptop freezing a couple of times. Did others find it difficult too? I guess I am spending too long on each part and fear the worst again!

Thanks for your feedback :)
 
There was a mistake in paper 1 which might be what confused you. The paper says 'lambda_n for competitor n is simulated from an exponential distribution with parameters', whereas in fact it is rv_i,n that is the exponential random variable. lambda_n is a constant that is different for the 50 metre and 100 metre simulations.
 
Yes I agree with the above comments, Paper 1 appeared significantly longer than any other paper 1 going back to 2015 (the length of time the course is in it's current format, this includes some CA2 papers). There were also errors in the paper as mentioned above.
In addition I had issues with the platform on both days.
I did find paper 2 to be a fair paper though.
 
Yes, it required alot more work than usual but I was adamant to try and push on and get something done but couldn't keep the pace. I wonder if the statistics etc were part of the method rather than solely data checks. In the end it was extremely difficult for me to comprehend the confusing method description which seemed like a cryptic crossword (cards, distances, different variables etc) which cost alot of reading time (double reading) which reduced time available to complete a method and audit trail in the time available. Trying not to go down the excuses route but this paper was really a horror show in terms of timing and how confusing the method was described. Really wanted to have two sets of results to do a reasonableness check and goal seek sense check but was too little time for myself to complete. Really paid the price for lack of speed in completing so will need to work on this as the main skill for this paper.

Paper 2 wasn't so bad but it was difficult to even attempt a large portion of Paper 1 with the time available so that is likely to be costly overall. Disappointing but sure not the end of the world all the same :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top