In doing past exam papers I find that my answers tend to be more theoretically based and simple than the examiner's reports, although I am able to apply them. Would I still get marks or should my answers be very much like theirs? When the question warrants some theory the reports don't always use it - do we get penalised for this? I.e. how much variation in the answers do they allow for? (With particular reference to the 5 mark type questions.)
Varies by subject. On mathematical ones where there is clearly a right answer there is less scope. Now when it comes to 'written answers' there can be scope for you to get marks but you are expected to give mainly points on the exam solution. This doesn't mean you need to be verbatim but at least get across the same message. Its very hard to show without an example. Have you thought of getting some marking on the subject you are worried about? Even just a mock exam could give you some clear guidance on how your answer could gain marks or how it needs to be tweaked to score better. Hard to be more comprehensive without an example. But maybe this is of some help.
Well for instance one of the questions in the September 07 exam asks to explain why the historical cost accounting concept can produce misleading results in the financial statements. There are 4 specific points with a short explanation of each in the notes, but the answer in the report ignores these and only refers to two of the aspects, quite vaguely. My answer was to list the 4 points with a short explanation. Another example (in the same exam) is to explain the advantages and disadvantages of incorporating a partner into a consultancy. I mentioned aspects such as possible new capital brought in by the partner, skills and experience of the partner, being vulnerable to a partner's inefficiency/fraud/negligence, etc. But the report mentions only other things which were not at all touched on in the notes like the partner would have an incentive to make the business a success. Does this explain a bit better?
Is your problem that the course changes over time? I think your points were valid ones and could score so I wouldn't be disheartened. Worthwhile making a note of solution points you can see were valid to enhance notes. Unfortunately you are expected to think 'outside the box' rather than simply regurgitate ActEd -- this will become all too clear in the later exams.
