I've managed to get through on the phone. If anyone else has the same issue you can call the online exams team (01865 268 255) and they can confirm if your paper has been uploaded, or that they've received it attached to an email.
I thought the 3-hour time slot was far more reasonable, as was getting some material to read beforehand.
The requirements and expectations are succint clear. The student committee must write a letter to thank them for paying attention. Pass or fail, this is what we wanted!
The ratio won't change at all...but it makes sense to pitch up on the day! You know what is expected of you to pass.
I thought it was fairly clear from the notes and guidance what was expected from us - in terms of tone, layout, language used etc. So in that respect I think the setup of CP3 has taken into account many of the CA3 queries. I'm not going to go into specifics of the exam, as the session is still running, but I did struggle with selecting information to include/exclude, and I understand there was less focus on selecting/sequencing in CA3. It seemed fairly clear what to include from the question, but upon further thought/planning, only a certain number of things could be included to keep within the word count. Especially as I wanted to take care to avoid jargon and define terms if they were necessary. Did anyone else struggle with this? Or perhaps I am being pessimistic/hard on myself, now I've had time to carry out the "post-mortem" of the exam. P.S. A few minutes ago I received email confirmation that the submission was successful - it wasn't automated, it was from the online exams team.
Albaluna, I welcomed the new Q2 part where we get a chance to justify the decisions we've made. However this is a separate exercise worth only 10 marks from the whole paper. It's not clear to me if making a good justification of including / not including something in Q2 will affect marks already given in Q1. Since if the examiners have already decided that some information should not be included then it seems no matter how good you would justify its inclusion in Q2 you could lose marks then in Q2 and Q1 for including it? A step in the right direction anyway to give us a chance to justify our submission.
