From my point of view (I never sat CA3 but heard what other people said and looked at several past papers in prep for this one) if they manage to get the advanced material right it is a big improvement.
Still more subjectivity in the mark scheme than I would like. For example they go on at length about not convoluting things or giving overly long explanations, then in their own specimen answer they give a long and, in my opinion, confusing explanation on profit margin for a non-technical person. Most people I know would automatically understand what profit margin represents but I think they'd have to stop and read that paragraph a few times to understand what they are trying to say on a simple concept, so I would personally mark their specimen answer down. Even in the course notes they harp on about being succinct and then when they get to the bit about inviting questions they decide for no discernible reason that "do not hesitate to contact me" is a cliché and that you should put something twice as convoluted instead. Not sure if I would get bonus marks for suddenly deciding "Dear..." was a cliché and writing "To The Most Esteemed, Honourable and Righteous..." instead.
So overall it seemed an improvement but even after their numerous teething issues are sorted still far from perfect. Still worried the difference between me passing or not could potentially come down to whether somebody thinks "business model" is jargon to a corporate lawyer with an investment portfolio. Especially since I disagree with bits in the official study materials and specimen answers. Still no confidence that they've solved the problem that potentially a lot of candidates, especially close to the pass mark, would have their pass or fail reversed if they had another combination of people marking their exam.
Last edited by a moderator: Oct 12, 2017