July  2011  By  email    Technical  Manager  International  Accounting  Education  Standards  Board  IFAC          ACCA’s  response  to  the  IAESB  Exposure  Draft    IAESB  Exposure  Draft:  Proposed  Revised  International  Education  Standard    IES  6,  Assessment  of  Professional  Competence    ACCA  (the  Association  of  Chartered  Certified  Accountants)  welcomes  the  opportunity  to  comment  on  the  above.  ACCA  is  the  largest  and  fastest-­‐growing  global  body  for  professional  accountants  with  over  147,000  members  and  424,000  students  in  170  countries.      We  aim  to  offer  the  first  choice  qualifications  to  people  of  application,  ability  and  ambition  around  the  world  who  seek  a  rewarding  career  in  accountancy,  finance  and  management.  ACCA  works  to  achieve  and  promote  the  highest  professional,  ethical  and  governance  standards  and  advance  the  public  interest.    General  comment    ACCA  agrees  that  the  principles  of  assessment  methodology  should  apply  to  both  IPD  and  CPD.    As  such  the  assessment  scope  and  approaches  must  be  more  flexible  to  take  into  account  the  differing  needs  of  initial  learners  and  those  validating  or  updating  their  knowledge  in  continuous  professional  development  as  members.      An  example  of  this  would  be  the  need  to  have  more  reflective  learning  at  the  CPD  stage.      We  felt  that  the  extant  version  was  too  detailed  in  its  content  and  effectively  involved  a  lot  of  repetition  with  content  within  IES  2,  IES  4  and  IES  7.    The  fact  that  this  is  recognised  in  the  revised  document  is  therefore  to  be  welcomed.      

 

 

Specific  Comments    

1. The  objective  of  the  extant  IES  6  is  to  prescribe  requirements  for  the  final  assessment  of  a  professional  accountant  before  qualification,  whereas  the  proposed  IES  6  considered  assessment  across  all  the  career  stages  of  a  professional  accountant.      

Question  1:  Is  the  change  in  the  scope  of  IES  6  to  assessment  across  Initial  Professional  Development  (IPD)  and  Continuing  Professional  Development  (CPD)  appropriate?      Yes,  this  is  a  sensible  logical  approach,  simplifies  matters  considerably  and  is  consistent  with  the  lifelong  learning  ethos.    

2. The  extant  IES  6  focuses  on  the  formal  assessment  of  competence  using  a  comprehensive  final  examination  just  before  qualification,  whereas  the  proposed  standard  recognizes  that  this  assessment  may  be  achieved  in  several  ways.  For  example,  a  series  of  written  examinations  that  focus  on  different  areas  of  competence  held  throughout  IPD,  or  assessment  activities  over  IPD  that  includes  written  examinations  and  assessment  of  workplace  performance.    

 Question  2:  Does  this  change  accommodate  the  different  approaches  taken  by  professional  accounting  organizations?      As  mentioned  above,  consistent  with  amending  the  IES  to  cover  lifelong  learning,  the  standard  must  take  a  less  prescriptive  approach  than  contained  within  the  extant  standard.  It  is  also  appropriate  to  recognise  within  the  standard  that  there  are  many  different  assessment  approaches  which  can  achieve  the  same  objective  of  assessing  the  attainment  of  professional  competence  of  aspiring  professional  accountants.    To  be  consistent  with  the  content  of  the  IES  4  Exposure  Draft  we  suggest  that  A4  includes  reference  to  assessment  of  the  reflective  activities  listed  in  paragraph  A17  of  IES  4  e.g.  record  of  learning,  reflective  record,  personal  development  portfolio  or  critical  incident  diary.  This  would  also  better  accommodate  CPD  assessment,  which  may  well  have  more  emphasis  on  reflection  than  IPD.  

 

 

 3. The  approach  taken  in  the  draft  IES  6  is  to  focus  on  the  principles  of  

assessment  that  apply  across  the  career  stages  of  an  accountant,  and  for  the  other  education  standards  to  cover  specific  aspects  of  assessment  relevant  to  that  standard.    

 Question  3:  Are  the  principles  of  assessment  sufficient?      Yes,  the  principles  of  assessment  are  sufficient  and  explain  the  differences  between  reliability  and  validity  clearly.      

4. The  proposed  IES  6  has  also  been  redrafted  according  to  the  guidelines  provided  in  the  IAESB  Drafting  Conventions.    

 Question  4:  Is  the  objective  to  be  achieved  by  a  member  body,  stated  in  the  proposed  revised  IES  6,  appropriate?      Yes,  but  the  final  sentence  on  ‘Applying  the  principle…’  appears  superfluous.  It  could  be  re-­‐written  as  ‘Applying  the  principles  of  assessment  in  the  standard  contributes  to  public  confidence  in  the  competence  of  professional  accountants’  or  deleted.    Question  5:  Have  the  criteria  identified  by  the  IAESB  for  determining  whether  a  requirement  should  be  specified  been  applied  appropriately  and  consistently,  such  that  the  resulting  requirements  promote  consistency  in  implementation  by  member  bodies?    Yes,  we  feel  that  the  requirements  have  been  applied  appropriately  and  consistently.    Question  6:  Are  there  any  terms  within  the  proposed  IES  6  which  require  further  clarification?  If  so,  please  explain  the  nature  of  the  deficiencies.    No,  the  terms  are  explained  clearly.    

 

 

Comments  on  Other  Matters      Translations—  no  comments.    Effective  Date—  We  consider  an  effective  date  of  12  –  15  months  after  approval  of  the  final  revised  standard  to  be  appropriate.    Detailed  drafting  points    A3  –  Change  ‘and’  in  the  second  bullet  point  to  ‘or’  to  indicate  that  each  of  these  assessment  strategies  is  valid  in  its  own  right.    A6  –  Is  this  necessary  given  that  paragraph  4  has  already  explained  that  specific  aspects  of  assessment  are  dealt  with  in  other  standards?  If  this  paragraph  is  necessary,  it  should  not  single  out  IES  7.    A14  –  These  examples  read  rather  strangely.  Suggest  redrafting  as  follows:  There  are  many  ways  assessment  can  be  designed  to  increase  its  equity,  including,  for  example:    •  Ensuring  that  assessments  which  rely  on  web  technology  are  accessible  to  all  candidates;    •Reviewing  examinations  to  ensure  that  assumptions  relating  to  cultural  knowledge  not  commonly  shared  by  all  candidates  are  removed;      •  Designing  ….