Did anyone else just fail the second quiz for FINS1613? I thought I was mega-prepared.. then I walked in and got this ultra-weird question about IRR's that made no sense, and then had to do a sensitivity analysis that took up way too much time. *grumble*
-
YOU can help the next generation of students in the community! Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
FINS1613 Quiz 2 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Acid
- Start date
yeah, i remember that quiz last semester. went in totally prepared, then felt like to stuff up completely when i got out. but still did okay, got 8.5/10 when i felt 4 was more like it. i reckon they scaled the marks, but i dont know about that at all.
from memory i got the same some weird mirr q, n then a sensitivity analysis
from memory i got the same some weird mirr q, n then a sensitivity analysis
redslert
yes, my actual brain
this was the only test that they scaled for us last semester
It was weird. They gave us these cash flows, the discount rate and the corresponding IRR rates. And then they go, using the IRR method, which project would you accept?
Now that wasn't the strange part. The weird bit was that the question was worth 3 marks, and in brackets they wrote "include all working". I thought using the IRR method was as simple as choosing the cash flow with the higher IRR rate? I asked if the question really meant MIRR, but the tutor said no.
Now that wasn't the strange part. The weird bit was that the question was worth 3 marks, and in brackets they wrote "include all working". I thought using the IRR method was as simple as choosing the cash flow with the higher IRR rate? I asked if the question really meant MIRR, but the tutor said no.
Acid.. totally agree. They give us the IRR values already, so using the IRR method, you would pick the one with the higher IRR. I think (well this is what I did) is to examine NPV, and decide that they give different decisions, and apply the incremental IRR/NPV analysis.
The theory question was straightforward, the last calculating NPV wasn't too hard, just not enough space on the sheet of paper..
And they scale the quizzes? Thats interesting..
The theory question was straightforward, the last calculating NPV wasn't too hard, just not enough space on the sheet of paper..
And they scale the quizzes? Thats interesting..
redslert
yes, my actual brain
no that question wasn't about MIRR
it's simple if you think about it
but i did use MIRR during the exam and i was able to argue with my tutor who ended up only taking half a mark off because he thought it was a 'smart' method of working it out but wasn't what the question was asking
it's simple if you think about it
but i did use MIRR during the exam and i was able to argue with my tutor who ended up only taking half a mark off because he thought it was a 'smart' method of working it out but wasn't what the question was asking
what?!redslert said:no that question wasn't about MIRR
it's simple if you think about it
but i did use MIRR during the exam and i was able to argue with my tutor who ended up only taking half a mark off because he thought it was a 'smart' method of working it out but wasn't what the question was asking
come again?? you know your marks already??
or are you talking about last sem..? I'm so lost at times..
redslert
yes, my actual brain
oh dear god no! you have to think for uni and have motivation for your own learning!
no way!!!
mr_shittles get a clue....it's uni, no more spoon feeding
no way!!!
mr_shittles get a clue....it's uni, no more spoon feeding
redslert: agreed.
ezzy85: i scabbed 0.25 marks in genetics (out of 10 - and the test was worth 3%)
mr_shittles: You have made some somewhat valid points. Personally, I think the test wasn't terribly well written, but it was good enough for the purposes of testing us and forcing us to study.
1. Zhian said the content in Week 5 and 6 would be tested.
2. Agreed. But seriously, do you think that in a 20 minute quiz, they can cover the majority of the content? Your quiz may differ to mine but comparing the quiz questions to the learning outcomes:
Q1. This covered the differences between NPV and IRR, and you needed to know incremental cash flows.
Q2. (a) Straight theory - Monte Carlo and sensitivity analysis. I think this falls into the outcome 'Understand the impact of risk on capital budgetingy'
(b) Same outcome as above.
3. Sure, there was not a tutorial question on it in the direct sense. But essentially you calculate 2 NPV figures. And the lecturer did mention it in the lectures, and if you understood the lecture material, you would be fine.
4. True. But again, it was just calculating 2 sets of NPV. You could even treat the two sets of parameters as different questions altogether- just use the same methodology.
And actually, I think Kathryn (who taught capital budgeting) isn't a bad lecturer. In fact, I'd say she's one of the better lecturers I've had at uni.
The bottom line? Like redslert said. We aren't spoonfed at uni. Dont' expect lecturers and/or tutors to tell you exactly whats in the tests/exams, and give you a dozen different examples on that question. This is not the HSC. Independent learning, my friend.
And besides, if they had all the same questions as the tutorials, many people would do well- and then that would be a bad assessment- it would be difficult to separate the students into their various ability groups.
Disclaimer: I'm not trying to start a flame war or anything, just stating my opinions.
ezzy85: i scabbed 0.25 marks in genetics
(out of 10 - and the test was worth 3%)mr_shittles: You have made some somewhat valid points. Personally, I think the test wasn't terribly well written, but it was good enough for the purposes of testing us and forcing us to study.
1. Zhian said the content in Week 5 and 6 would be tested.
2. Agreed. But seriously, do you think that in a 20 minute quiz, they can cover the majority of the content? Your quiz may differ to mine but comparing the quiz questions to the learning outcomes:
Q1. This covered the differences between NPV and IRR, and you needed to know incremental cash flows.
Q2. (a) Straight theory - Monte Carlo and sensitivity analysis. I think this falls into the outcome 'Understand the impact of risk on capital budgetingy'
(b) Same outcome as above.
3. Sure, there was not a tutorial question on it in the direct sense. But essentially you calculate 2 NPV figures. And the lecturer did mention it in the lectures, and if you understood the lecture material, you would be fine.
4. True. But again, it was just calculating 2 sets of NPV. You could even treat the two sets of parameters as different questions altogether- just use the same methodology.
And actually, I think Kathryn (who taught capital budgeting) isn't a bad lecturer. In fact, I'd say she's one of the better lecturers I've had at uni.
The bottom line? Like redslert said. We aren't spoonfed at uni. Dont' expect lecturers and/or tutors to tell you exactly whats in the tests/exams, and give you a dozen different examples on that question. This is not the HSC. Independent learning, my friend.
And besides, if they had all the same questions as the tutorials, many people would do well- and then that would be a bad assessment- it would be difficult to separate the students into their various ability groups.
Disclaimer: I'm not trying to start a flame war or anything, just stating my opinions.
Last edited:
ezzy85
hmm...yeah.....
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2002
- Messages
- 556
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
If they really cared about that they wouldnt make it so easy to just ask your friends whats in the test. Regardless of the assesment, those doing the test later will always have an unfair advantage which defeats the whole purpose of separating students into any groups.t-i-m-m-y said:
Last edited: