C1
Furthest above the prediction: Grammar. Furthest below: Vocabulary.
| Skill | Correct | Predicted | Asked | % correct | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grammar | 6 | 4.1 | 6 | 100% | +1.9 |
| Inference | 5 | 3.5 | 5 | 100% | +1.5 |
| Comprehension | 1 | 0.7 | 1 | 100% | +0.3 |
| Vocabulary | 5 | 5.4 | 8 | 63% | −0.4 |
| Level | Correct | Predicted | Asked | % correct | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B1 | 1 | 0.7 | 1 | 100% | +0.3 |
| B1+ | 2 | 1.4 | 2 | 100% | +0.6 |
| B2- | 5 | 3.5 | 5 | 100% | +1.5 |
| B2 | 4 | 4.1 | 6 | 67% | −0.1 |
| B2+ | 4 | 3.4 | 5 | 80% | +0.6 |
| C1- | 1 | 0.7 | 1 | 100% | +0.3 |
| Word | Level | Strength | Difficulty | Reviews | Due |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| material | C1 | 0.18 d | 9.81 | 9 | 21 Jul |
| immaterial | C1 | 1.06 d | 8.92 | 6 | 21 Jul |
| impracticable | C1 | 1.32 d | 8.27 | 5 | 21 Jul |
| cumulative | C1 | 13.64 d | 7.83 | 5 | 03 Aug |
| disclose | B2 | 13.64 d | 7.83 | 5 | 03 Aug |
| voluntarily | B2 | 14.23 d | 7.39 | 6 | 03 Aug |
| subsequent | B2 | 22.45 d | 6.51 | 4 | 11 Aug |
| retrospectively | B2 | 22.45 d | 6.51 | 4 | 11 Aug |
| objective | B2 | 22.45 d | 6.51 | 4 | 11 Aug |
| exempt | B2 | 22.45 d | 6.51 | 4 | 11 Aug |
| transitional | C1 | 48.56 d | 2.12 | 4 | 07 Sep |
| restate | C1 | 48.56 d | 2.12 | 4 | 07 Sep |
| prospectively | B2 | 48.56 d | 2.12 | 4 | 07 Sep |
| comparative | B2 | 48.57 d | 2.12 | 4 | 07 Sep |
| comply (with) | B2 | 48.57 d | 2.12 | 4 | 07 Sep |
Strength is the number of days until recall is predicted to fall to 90%. Difficulty is the scheduler's 1–10 rating of how hard the card is to remember.
Reply to Daniel's email before Thursday. State which treatment you would apply to the Arcadia invoice — a change in accounting estimate recognised prospectively in 2026, or a prior-period error with the 2025 comparative restated — and explain the reasoning that leads you there. Say how confident you are, and acknowledge the argument on the other side. Rocío, the controller, will read your reply.
Daniel, I would treat the Arcadia invoice as a change in accounting estimate and recognise the difference prospectively in 2026. When we closed 2025, the accrual was our best estimate with the informations we had, and the higher amount only became clear when the final invoice arrived. I am fairly confident, but not completely. The auditor's argument is that we already knew in December the cost would be higher. If there are evidences of that, is a prior-period error and the 2025 comparative should be restated. Could we check the emails of December before Thursday?