Hi, everyone.. I would like to ask how is the mark allocation for P3 paper. Let say : the question want us to identify the consequences for the management reward system of the company. ( 15 marks ) . Do i need to write 8 main problems and elaborate the point to achieve 15 marks? And whats the mark allocation if i included the model or framework ?( Is it 3 marks per model given with explanation ? ) Quite confuse for it ....

This post has been edited by denccl: Jun 16 2009, 12:15 AM

well i took P4 under micheal (sunway) . he reads from his notes . and many students dont know what he teaches. he does simple examples in class and makes the paper looks easy when its not .

I suggest you go to Adam Arshad at Inti (i guess he is there ).

This post has been edited by ahpek78: Jun 16 2009, 12:25 AM

I've never attend his F7 class so far. But F9 yes. Base on last semester i attended his F9, frankly he didnt finish the F9 syllabus. As assume that the part where last sitting already tested so thats why he didnt teach that particular topic. His class break kinda long for me. Maybe other students is ok with it.

hi guys!
i have gone through few hundreds posts ( 500++) of this thread for the past few days

im currently left with P papers(5 papers)

can i sit for either Case below?
1.Case: P1 P2 P3 P4
2.Case: P1 P3 P4



and about Daniel Ho, how is his teaching method differ from Andrew Pang?
i have been with Andrew for F9 and i can say he is one of the best lecturer of my life (including Philip Woo)

Andrew is very good in explaining the true scene behind the calculation and theory
and he only say it once ( sometimes he do repeat for our sake)
he also teach student the tricks of the exam question which is very helpful in exam
(how students got tricked)
to me he is just a perfect one

but suddenly i see so much recommendation on Daniel Ho
so im just wondering you can help me out?

Daniel Ho OR Andrew Pang for P4?

thanks alot




This post has been edited by BABIyat: Jun 16 2009, 09:08 AM

For professional paper I will recommend to give as many key pointers as possible & elaborate on those pointers.
For 15 marks my advice is to write for least 2 page of answers.
I think 5 main problems will be enough : 1m for bringing the key pointer, 1m for theory explanation (general) & 1m for application to case.
I dont think there is a model for such answer on rewards (correct me if i am mistaken).
In my Dec 08 sitting there is similar question like that on last question which touch something on performance based remuneration.
However such question is like P1 so i am not sure how they will mark it.

yeah ,i know-just that i might join m.m. if his class longer.wonder if he can sum up that muchin 15 classes?
anyway i probably pop in at his revision class.

mat salleh XD

This post has been edited by icyblue: Jun 16 2009, 11:15 AM

It seems you really like andrew pang by putting P4 as a must for your selection
Okay here is an advice a lecturer (few lecturers) gave me for P4. Do not use your F9 marks as a yardstick for P4 since both paper is very different in terms of scope & exposure. The things you need to calculate in F9 you need to be 3x times faster in P4 for example.

Please ignore pass rates for P4 as its the deadliest paper in optional if not entire acca. You can go to Mco & look at their mark for top scorer (50 I think). My advice is please complete all your core papers before doing any optionals. I had known somebody through someone else that after doing badly for P4 he has also lose confidence in core papers & squandered them as well.

Case 2 out of question since you need to complete or taking your optional paper with all due core papers. For case 1 its acceptable but are you serious about this ? Part 3 is not like part 2 anymore & taking 4 professional paper is strictly not recommended. I have never seen / heard anyone taking 4 Professional papers. & pass all of them.

However I think you are more interested in the comparison of Andrew & Daniel.
I have a classmate who have attended andrew pang class before & i always had discussion with her about both lecturer performance. Then I also approached other classmates who have attended andrew class b4 & gathered their views.

I think you are already familiar with Andrew's methods so I will focus more on Daniel for convenience sake (or else it can span more than 1000 words). First of all :
1) Student feedback from Andrew class (opinion from > 10 ex students)
- He didn't really teach the theory portion of finance (which is very important), he only highlight for student to read back at home.
- He has many fast & good techniques of the calculational portion of finance, but normally exam only required a few.
- He is not patient enough when dealing with finance questions by students during class session or break time or after class.
- His class fees is quite low compared to Daniel's.

2) Student feedback about Daniel class (opinion from > 15 ex & current student)
Personal note : I noticed a lot of students in Daniel class have attended andrew class before so i left the issued of WHY to you.
- Daniel will cover the theory portion with student by discussing the key & fundamental areas, although its not in depth but at least he will explain it in class.
- In contrast with Andrew many & fast technique, Daniel focus on format & systematic. For each question he has devised his own format which is very simple to understand & comprehend even if you have not attended his class in F9 before. He practice a step by step approach by gaining all the minimum & easy marks b4 venturing into difficult part. In that way you will at least gain some marks even if you dont understand the question.
- A very patient & friendly lecturer, I think this is the one point agreed by most of his students. He will answer every question during class sessions & during break time. You will see a very lively class in which every student will actively participate by asking questions. Actually of all the lecturers I have been through, his class is the liveliest once since you dont need to incite the phrase of "Any question b4 i move along". In Parmindar class I hear it hundreds of times & no one dare / will ask any questions.
- FTMS college is really conducive for study & the environment is really stress free (the lecturers is another issue). You dont have to grab seats or compete with another person for it. The seats & chairs are really comfortable compared to KSA. Since you have attended Phillip class you will know what I am talking about.
- Like most chinese lecturers his english is not perfect or fluent compared to the likes of Parmindar or Haneef.
- Like Parmindar (both are close friends actually) he likes to boast about himself in a funny way (why you need to pay premium for his class instead of discount.....etc) Most of my friends find it funny & relaxing but there is always one who may dislike it which is why I always put "MOST" not "ALL".

Strictly speaking in this forum most prefer Daniel class & most of my friends (both his student , ex-andrew student, none) also prefer him. I will not say who is better or perfect for the paper but it just depends on what you seek or suit your style. However Daniel will most likely quit FTMS soon which is why many on this forum are seeking where is his next destination.

Totally agree with you !!

Confirmed by Daneil ho , he will teach in Hongkong FTMS for next 6 month , stopp teaching in kl and singapore.

should i thanks gOd? no need to make decision

or

OMG? no chance to give him a try

i guess is OMG

but daniel ho is still at FTMS KL his name is printed on the Timetable for july 2009

and i have paid my fees already . are you all sure he is no longer there ?

This post has been edited by ahpek78: Jun 17 2009, 12:07 AM

U can refund money from ftms, the another lecturer will teach in p4.

So now P4 only got 2 choice, either Chan Tze Kang (MCO) or Andrew Pang (KSA)

andrew pang i have attended before . I think he is not my solution for P4 (Sorry Andrew)

Anyone know if there're any changes in the syllabus for Paper F4, F7, F8 this coming Dec 2009 compared to last sitting ? Only F8 examiner changed ?

I beg to differ.
He is good. Well, different people has different appetite maybe.
I can fully understand what is being taught. However exam came out shit.

Spencer is a Good lecturer overall. At least he able to deliver difficult thing in a simple way. So , u understand the class.

But, his coverage in syllabus is insufficient for Paper P2 especially Theory part,
Calculational wise, he is GOOD.

Few feedbacks about Michael P3. In INTI timetable schedule for tests and case study practice will be good. Comments please !

Yalo, he is main focus in calculation, but student can't pass P4 just with calculation.

But if not much choice, then need to consider him oso.

So, how about Chan Tze Kang for P4? I know last time he is very good in P5/3.3, but P4 not sure.

Anyone ?

Yes. Agree with you.

i heard from friend that taylor's university college is offering acca professional level for july 09 intake. they have philip woo teaching P1 & P3, Haneef (p2), chow kim tai (p4) and ian lim (p5).