1) Explain procedures for collecting accounting evidence,
2) Explain the use of sampling in performing an examination
3) Evaluate accounting evidence using analytical and inferential tools.
Taking those objectives talk about what they mean to you personally in a professional setting if applicable or maybe of the three objectives you may feel like sampling was more of a challenge or struggle to understand than analytically and inferential tools.
Explain procedures for collecting accounting evidence,
The procedures for collecting accounting evidence, such as analytical procedures to look for unusual patterns or amounts, inspecting client documents, tracing details from one document to another, counting inventory, reviewing approvals, confirming receivables and reading board minutes, all made sense to me and I can imagine collecting evidence in these various ways to verify management assertions. I also did not find it particularly difficult to discern that QUANTITY and QUALTIY of evidence were not the same. That is, documents provided by outsiders, such as customers, shippers, or bankers, were of higher quality than statements made by the client, documents they produced, or procedures they claim should happen. The hardest part about collecting evidence is knowing, in your judgment, when you have sufficient quality and quantity to stop and say "enough."
Explain the use of sampling in performing an examination
Sampling is likely hard as a decision but easy as an activity. Deciding whether to sample statistically or judgmentally ...
Your tutorial is 668 words and is a personal reflection about how each tools individually was not too hard but that the judgement required to use the tools and to know when the quality and quantity of evidence was adequate is the hardest part. Since this is a personal reflection, no references are given.