ACCOUNTANCY TESTS

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 54, 5 March 1923, Page 2

ACCOUNTANCY TESTS

TO THI EDITOR Sir, —I was greatly interested in an article that appeared in your columns recently -.vith reference to the recent accountancy examinations, and would like to place a few facts before the readers of your widely-read journal, with I your permission, which may help to explain why only 5 per cent, of the candidates who sat for the examination in question were able to "satisfy the examiners." I have had eleven years' practical experience as a bookkeeper, was trained privately by one of the leading accountants of this city, have, been in the omploy of three firms of public accountants during the above period, and at the present time ;im keeping nine sets of books to the satisfaction of the. principals and auditors concerned. At one time whilst in the employ of a certain

firm of public accountants, I was responsible for the" entries in twenty-seven sets of books, covering a wide range of businesses, yet I failed to "satisfy the examiners" that I know enough about bookkeeping, at least to the satisfaction of the examiners. . I am in entire agreement with the remarks made at the Wellington' Technical Board of Governors, to the effect that the majority of the questions set for oacdidatus to answer in a limited time were quite out of the reach of the ordinary candidate at snch an examination, and would humbly offsr the. opinion as a practical man that the papers were not a fair teat of a candidate's knowledge oi the principles and practice of doubleentry bookkeeping. However, the examiners thought otherwise, and the students who nave put in years of study., to the detriment of health and pocket, iiftve to thank the whim of the examiners in queitfcr, for the ,factthat they have been put tc all this trouble for nothing. I am prepared to assert that many ai the public accountants practising in this country, had they been required to p»M the examination in question, wonld have failed to "satisfy the examiners" in the time at the disposal of less practical men. The public are entitled to hear mor* of this matter from, the authorities concerned, as it is a well-known fact that j many business firms pay for the tuition of their employees with the object of promoting efficiency amongst their staffs and who will naturally be under the impression that they have been wasting their money on "brainless idiola," who would do better employed, in the store than in the office, thereby doing an injustice to many competent men who have a sound and practical knowledge pf common-sense and practical bookkeeping. ■ ' In conclusion, I would like to ask why the papers of all candidates who fail at an examination of this sort are not returned to them by the examiners, in order that unsuccessful candidates may see where their weaknesses lie, and profit accordingly. A man is simply informed that he has "failed to satisfy the examineis," but is quite in the dark as to whether his failure is due to lack of knowledge or lack of speed, would be of great assistance to a man who has failed, and contemplates sitting again.) In the meantime I lift my hat to those chosen few who were able to satisfy the examiners, as they obviously must be supermen so far as accountancy is concerned.—l am, etc., ! TRIAL BALANCE. 2nd March.