Study Tips/Inspirational: How Not To Upset The Examiner

How Not To Upset The Examiner

An examination marker gives a list of his pet candidates to hate and some interesting and valuable tips to those taking exams.

Dear Student,

Over the years I have listened to many grumbles about examination pass rates but few about students taking examinations! I have been marking exam scripts for some time now and have a few grumbles which I would like to share with you so that you may learn what examiners are looking for. Dare I hope that these comments may help a few students to pass their exams?

The candidates I love to hate

The road runner, who does not read the question carefully enough but rushes on to answer it anyway. This variety of candidate can be spotted because the answer is wrong.
The politician, who doesn't answer the question. (Perhaps candidates think examiners should ask the questions for which they have revised?) Examiners often set questions that appear obscure to candidates. That is because examiners expect candidates to analyse the question means. I often find:
(a) an answer about how something is done when the question asked is why;

(b) an answer saying everything a candidate knows about a key word in the question but bears no relation to the question asked;

(c) a candidate who discusses whether something should be done by telling me how they would do it.

(How would you react if, when you asked for directions to the airport, you were treated to an exposition on the benefits of train travel?)
The waffler, who spends the exam writing about anything but the question and bores the examiner to death. Waffling fools nobody except, perhaps, the student.
The correspondent - the candidate who writes notes to the examiner:
'This is my last chance to sit the exam... please pass me!' (means I know I have failed!)

'My calculator is not sophisticated enough to do the calculations...' (even in accountancy most questions can be answered without one!)
The brilliant answer to one question: with the other questions not attempted or answered only inadequately.
(A variant on 5) The two-hour (wrong) first answer: where a student obviously spent two hours on the first question and tried to do the other four in a panic in the last hour. The reason this differs from 5 is that the answer is not right.
The clairvoyant, who thinks that the examiner can understand a page of disconnected and unexplained figures. Although accounting is a numerate subject it demands some ability to present a reasoned argument using some words (and even drawings on occasion). Some normal problems:
(a) Are variances favourable of adverse?

(b) Where did the figure 45,789 come from?

(c) No titles to statements.

(d) A perfectly correct answer which is hidden in a mass of jumbled figures.

(e) A wrong answer with no workings (probably worked on a super-calculator).
The collage-maker (a variant of the clairvoyant), who tries to cover two or more pages with meaningless numbers and formulae.
The champion large (or small) writer, whose writing is so difficult to read that marking the script takes twice as long as it should (Please note that if a candidate is dyslexic he or she should tell the examining board about the problem.) A new variety of this candidate is the abbreviator, who wrts wrds as sht as poss. (Is 'A/C' all clear, account, accept, or accountant?)
The mantra chanter is a candidate who thinks that if something is quoted it will get marks even if it is not in context. There are three main varieties or mantra:
(a) the famous author (i.e. namedropping);

(b) formula dropping;

(c) buzz-word dropping;

Used in context to amplify, all these 'mantras' are likely to get extra marks, otherwise they fail to impress.
The exampler, who doesn't give a general point but instead gives a series of examples from which, presumably, he or she expects the examiner to glean the answer.
The tautologist, who answers the question by repeating it: 'We use opportunity costs because they are useful'.
The should-erer, who tells us what should be done. Most examination questions expect a reasoned argument, not a lesson. We need to be sure candidates understand why something should happen rather than that they have absorbed a set of rules.
The know-all: 'I know that you said do this but it can't be!' Remember that virtually all examination questions (particularly at professional level) are well scrutinized before use. Although there may be differences in interpretation, there are only very seldom fundamental question errors.

Aids to getting marks

When markers mark they do not begin at 100 per cent and work downwards, they start at 0 and work upwards. Most examiners like giving marks for anything approaching a reasonable answer. Candidates should therefore be trying to gain marks at every turn.

How do you gain marks? Some tips:

Manage your time. If the exam is three hours long then you have 1.8 minutes to gain each per cent. This is the opportunity cost of the mark, so choose the questions where you can gain marks most easily. If the question takes longer to answer than the allotted time then don't carry on with it.
Don't spend all your time writing. Examiners expect you to think and you can do this by not writing (unless you jot a few figures/ideas down). Answering questions can be split into three parts:
(a) working out what the question means (5 percent of time);

(b) working out how to answer the question (5 to 10 percent of time);

(c) working out the (numerical) answer or writing the (essay) answer.

Time spent on the first two parts is not wasted.
Answer the question set. You can only do this if you read the question and analyse what it means.
If you are not very good at doing this then practise it before the exam by working out past papers (not just looking at suggested answers and discussing problems with fellow students and teachers). Take care to link the question to your knowledge and use your knowledge to assist in analysis.
Write neatly and clearly, spell correctly and carefully, set out the work.
Answer the correct number of questions.
If a questions has an obvious mark structure (e.g. 'Comment on three areas of...') then allocate time accordingly and be sure to do the requisite number of parts.
Go for the Jugular! Don't spend time in a question 'setting the scene' with unnecessary background information. It is a waste of valuable time.
Stop studying at least two days before the exam. Exams are at least as much about analysis and discussion as they are about facts and these qualities are enhanced by rest and relaxation, not cramming.

So there is some advice. I suppose many will not heed it and next session's results will the same as before. But at least you can't say we haven't told you why!

An Examiner and Marker

Dr. Ken Ashford, a lecturer in Management Accounting at the University of Stirling.