This was mentioned in passing quite some time ago, but the exam boards need to make the policy on this VERY CLEAR and very easy to find out. I get the very strong impression that it's not just students, but most teachers who are not at all certain about this: and, of course, those who mark the exams are recruited from those teachers. My understanding is that unless a specific method is asked for, or working is specifically requested, then a correct answer gets full marks. The method marks, together with follow through, are effectively a safety net which allow candidates who make a silly numerical slip up to still, deservedly get most of the marks. With the availability of GDCs students, and markers, need to be very clear on the rules. For instance, if one is given the mean, standard deviation, and a couple of values, then a GDC will allow you to get the area by simply plugging in these four numbers. Now, while it is often good advice to show working, the working out of normalised values is, in this case a waste of the student's precious exam time. This is just one of many examples I could cite. Of course, I realise that there are jealous and spiteful teachers out there who resent students using powerful GDCs, and thus relish this state of ignorance.