When the 2023 and 2024 VCE Accounting exams are read side by side, a clear pattern emerges. The VCAA did not fundamentally change what it assessed, nor did it raise or lower difficulty in any meaningful way. Instead, it continued to refine how Accounting understanding is exposed under exam conditions. Students who understand this pattern stop treating each exam as a new obstacle and start preparing in a way that is far more reliable.
Both exams reward the same underlying competencies. Where they differ is in how those competencies are disguised.
The surface of the question changes, the logic does not
In 2023, many of the most discriminating questions were embedded in tasks that appeared routine. Establishing a double entry system, explaining carrying value, or recording inventory returns all looked familiar. Yet the Examiner’s Report showed that these questions produced unexpectedly weak performance because students relied on pattern recognition rather than interpretation.
In 2024, the same issue appeared in a different form. Questions involving supplier changes, depreciation graphs, and non-current asset disposals were not technically difficult, but they required students to slow down and make decisions. Students who rushed or defaulted to memorised templates lost marks steadily.
Across both years, the difficulty did not come from calculation. It came from decision-making.
Inventory questions consistently expose shallow understanding
Inventory appeared prominently in both exams, and in both years it revealed the same weaknesses.
In 2023, students struggled to correctly handle inventory adjustments when recording sales returns and purchase returns, particularly in distinguishing between selling price and cost price. Many students demonstrated that they could read an inventory card, but not that they understood how inventory valuation interacts with cost of sales and profit.
In 2024, the inventory issues shifted slightly. Students were asked to justify cost-assignment methods and explain why certain costs were treated as product or period costs. Once again, weaker responses defined concepts rather than explaining why they applied in that scenario.
Taken together, these questions show that VCAA uses inventory as a conceptual test, not a mechanical one. Students who understand inventory as valuation and cost flow perform well regardless of question format. Students who memorise rules struggle when justification is required.
Cash versus profit remains one of the strongest discriminators
Both the 2023 and 2024 exams included questions that required students to distinguish clearly between profit and cash flow. In both years, these questions produced high rates of zero or partial marks.
In 2023, students were asked to explain why net cash from operating activities could be more useful than net profit, using an example. Many students defined both terms without comparison or failed to apply the explanation to the scenario.
In 2024, students were again asked to explain why net cash flow from operating activities could be higher than net profit. The same errors reappeared. Students referred to loans or asset sales, confused operating activities with financing activities, or failed to identify non-cash expenses.
The persistence of these errors across years makes one thing clear. Students are practising these questions, but they are not understanding them. The VCAA continues to include these tasks because they separate conceptual understanding from rote recall extremely effectively.
Depreciation questions test meaning, not method
Depreciation featured in both exams, but not in the same way.
In 2023, students were required to explain what carrying value represented. Many responses stated the formula without explaining what the figure actually meant. This exposed a lack of conceptual understanding despite strong procedural fluency.
In 2024, depreciation was tested through graphical interpretation and explanation of residual value. Once again, students who relied on formulas struggled to explain what the figures represented. Students who understood depreciation as allocation of economic benefit were able to explain the graph clearly and accurately.
Across both years, the VCAA did not test whether students could calculate depreciation. It tested whether they understood what depreciation is.
Written questions cap marks more often than practical ones
One of the clearest insights from comparing the two exams is that written explanation and justification questions are where marks are most often capped.
In both 2023 and 2024, students performed better on structured calculation tasks than on short written questions worth only two or three marks. This is counterintuitive for many students, who assume that short questions are easy marks.
Examiner’s Reports from both years repeatedly note that students:
- describe instead of explain
- define instead of justify
- list instead of discuss
These responses often earn partial credit but rarely full marks. Over an entire paper, this pattern alone can account for a substantial difference in score.
What these two exams together tell us about preparation
The most important lesson from comparing the 2023 and 2024 exams is that preparation based purely on repetition is insufficient. Students must practise interpreting questions, identifying the accounting issue being tested, and responding precisely to the command term.
Students who prepare in this way are not thrown by changes in question style. They recognise the underlying task and respond accordingly.
How ATAR STAR uses multi-year exam analysis
ATAR STAR prepares students using cross-year exam analysis rather than single-paper drills. By identifying patterns that persist across multiple exams, we help students focus on what actually matters rather than chasing surface changes.
This approach supports students who are already achieving solid results and want to reach the top bands, as well as students who feel they are working hard without seeing improvement.
Understanding how VCAA uses Accounting exams over time is one of the most effective ways to turn effort into marks.