PDA

View Full Version : Half-exam pass ratios vs. Full-exam pass ratios


FourKicks
05-04-2011, 01:53 PM
the people sitting for 5A or 5B have already passed at least one upper-level exam. the people sitting for full exam 5 are likely to have never passed an upper-level exam. so you'd expect the pool of half-exam test takers to be, on average, of slightly higher quality than those taking full exam 5, having already passed an upper-level.

does the CAS account for this when determining pass ratios?

Ceej
05-04-2011, 02:08 PM
I do not know this answer, but my stance is...

There's never a "first time upper level" or "first attempt" consideration given before. Nor is there a measure to segment those that work in Reserving or Ratemaking and would therefore have an edge on folks that say work in Claims or just graduated with 4 exams and started working full-time. Why should there be any consideration for those things now?

Vorian Atreides
05-04-2011, 02:30 PM
the people sitting for 5A or 5B have already passed at least one upper-level exam. the people sitting for full exam 5 are likely to have never passed an upper-level exam. so you'd expect the pool of half-exam test takers to be, on average, of slightly higher quality than those taking full exam 5, having already passed an upper-level.

does the CAS account for this when determining pass ratios?
Why should they? The stance is basically "does the candidate know this?". Should it matter whether or not the candidate is "experienced" in determining whether they sufficiently know the material?

FourKicks
05-04-2011, 02:46 PM
Why should they? The stance is basically "does the candidate know this?". Should it matter whether or not the candidate is "experienced" in determining whether they sufficiently know the material?

i wouldn't say it's that simple. if that were truly the stance, then they'd set the same pass mark every year, and if nobody hit the pass mark, they'd fail everybody because none of the candidates knew the material. but they adjust the pass mark to achieve a certain pass ratio, so factors such as a candidate's experience are, at least indirectly, taken into consideration.

what i'm really getting at is, for this exam, if the pass rate for exam 5 ends up being, say, 70%, would the pass marks for exams 5A and 5B also be 70% (i am making the assumption that exam 5 was simply 5A + 5B, though i could be wrong)? i would think the exams would have to have different pass marks, otherwise you might get some significantly different pass ratios.

if exam 5 <> exam 5A + 5B, then i retract everything above.

anyway, just thinking out loud.

Vorian Atreides
05-04-2011, 02:50 PM
i wouldn't say it's that simple. if that were truly the stance, then they'd set the same pass mark every year, and if nobody hit the pass mark, they'd fail everybody because none of the candidates knew the material. but they adjust the pass mark to achieve a certain pass ratio, so factors such as a candidate's experience are, at least indirectly, taken into consideration.

what i'm really getting at is, for this exam, if the pass rate for exam 5 ends up being, say, 70%, would the pass marks for exams 5A and 5B also be 70% (i am making the assumption that exam 5 was simply 5A + 5B, though i could be wrong)? i would think the exams would have to have different pass marks, otherwise you might get some significantly different pass ratios.

if exam 5 <> exam 5A + 5B, then i retract everything above.

anyway, just thinking out loud.
Isn't the bolded statement an assumption made on either your part or the part of the candidate population? What's the source of this information?

crumbs in the butter
05-04-2011, 03:09 PM
The sum of the pass marks for 5A and 5B had better equal the pass mark for the full Exam 5.

If the sum of the pass marks for 5A and 5B is greater than that for the full Exam 5, then the CAS is basically saying "those of you who took the 1/2 exams are expected to know the material better than those who took the full exam." How could the CAS possibly justify a stance that some candidates need to know the material better than others? They cannot.

tommie frazier
05-04-2011, 03:23 PM
afaik, the pass mark for a and b are added to get the overall pass mark. someone taking thw whole thing could end up 5 points shy on A, but 6 points over on B, and come through passing in total. So it goes. that happens on every subtopic as it is now.

knowing above the baseline level is just that, and doesn't take into account other things.

FourKicks
05-04-2011, 03:29 PM
afaik, the pass mark for a and b are added to get the overall pass mark.

ah, ok.

in that case, it seems likely that the pass ratio for half-exam takers will be higher than that of full-exam takers.

folasona
05-04-2011, 04:54 PM
isn't this a little bit like having a mile race, where some of the entrants have to run the whole mile by themselves, but they are competing against other entrants made up of 2-man relay teams where each person only has to run the first / last 800 meters?

interesting.

snoo
05-04-2011, 04:56 PM
isn't this a little bit like having a mile race, where some of the entrants have to run the whole mile by themselves, but they are competing against other entrants made up of 2-man relay teams where each person only has to run the first / last 800 meters?

interesting.

Ah. I see your point.

folasona
05-04-2011, 04:59 PM
not to mention the fact that half-exams don't have half reading preview periods (as u mentioned in the other thread)

FourKicks
05-04-2011, 05:02 PM
isn't this a little bit like having a mile race, where some of the entrants have to run the whole mile by themselves, but they are competing against other entrants made up of 2-man relay teams where each person only has to run the first / last 800 meters?

interesting.

yeah, that's a good analogy.

it's interesting to me, how are they going to come up with the pass mark for exam 5A? are they going to look at the results of exam 5A takers and also the results of exam 5 takers on the ratemaking portion? i expect these two results to be vastly different.

Vorian Atreides
05-04-2011, 05:04 PM
isn't this a little bit like having a mile race, where some of the entrants have to run the whole mile by themselves, but they are competing against other entrants made up of 2-man relay teams where each person only has to run the first / last 800 meters?

interesting.
Only if the race is measured against some max time requirement for each 1/2 mile . . . and the ones running the full mile can choose which 1/2 mile they want to run first . . . and that you only have to successfully run 70% (or whatever the established pass mark might be) of the distance within that max time requirement . . .

snoo
05-04-2011, 05:06 PM
I cant wait to talk about exam specifics. Hoping that i am sober at that point!

snoo
05-04-2011, 05:08 PM
Not looking very likely...

2M
05-04-2011, 05:10 PM
"exam specifics" discussions wouldn't do me any good. I wouldn't know what I specifically answered on any question. I finished mine with time to spare but would not have if I focused on writing down my answers on my exam (as well as my grader sheets) so that I could grade it afterwards

oblivious
05-04-2011, 05:11 PM
I was against having different pass marks for the exams, now im going to take the other side. From everything that's been posted it seems like exam 5 was done by exam 5a followed by 5b. With many comments saying that the exam was long for the half exam as well as the full exam, in which I share the same sentiment for exam 5a. Now considering this, I'm expecting the 5a portion for the full exam to have a higher % entered correctly and the opposite to be true for 5b due to people taking a little more time to answer all of the 5a questions and not having enough time for the 5b portion. As far as if this is true, I think the statistics of the exams as far as questions attempted vs answered won't lie, and that they'll take it into consideration (I hope). As far as the sentiment of the difference in reading period times, I highly doubt that it really made much of a difference, now if you want to say the part of focusing on a smaller portion of material you might have a point. I also agree with another posters comments of punishing the takers of a half exam though.

snoo
05-04-2011, 05:12 PM
I wrote a few answers in the booklet before time was called...

snoo
05-04-2011, 05:14 PM
So for those taking the full 5, did you have a choice wich part you started with?

oblivious
05-04-2011, 05:17 PM
isn't this a little bit like having a mile race, where some of the entrants have to run the whole mile by themselves, but they are competing against other entrants made up of 2-man relay teams where each person only has to run the first / last 800 meters?

interesting.

Your leaving out the part that the half marathon runners were essentially some of the best runners out there that already finished in the top half in the last mile race and were asked in a way to run again.

Tommie already stated that while they may be different, he didn't believe that the pass mark for the full race would be .5 and .6 for the half people, and that it would be similar to the pass marks in the past. Hopefully I'm not putting word in his mouth and hopefully how I'm interpreting it is correct.

2M
05-04-2011, 05:17 PM
I learned this from many failed attempts at part 6. In a test where every second counts bringing copies of your answers to this forum so you can grade yourself, is not nearly as important as having enough time to get the right answers for the graders.

Minutes spent recopying your answers is minutes that you could have spent on the one that you weren't able to answer for the graders

dukeblue2002
05-04-2011, 08:07 PM
I really have no idea how they're going to grade 5A and 5B vs. Full 5, but I think all three should be treated as separate exams with different pass rates.

My main reason for this is that both 5A and 5B were two hour exams, while the syllabus for Full 5 clearly stated that the exam would be 50-60% ratemaking and 40-50% reserving.

I took Full 5 today, and there was nothing in the instructions or in the exam book indicating where the 5A portion ended and where 5B began (of course you can figure this out, and it looks like the change happened around question 22-23 of 37 if I remember correctly).

In the reading period I used the back sheet to figure out what question number was the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles as far as cumulative point values to set time goals, and I think 50% of exam points were reached around question 19 out of 37 (before the start of the reserving questions).

Since both 5A and 5B were 2 hours instead of maybe 2:15 for a and 1:45 for B, I would think that those who took 5A were under much more time pressure than 5B. However, in general I thought the reserving questions had much lower points per amount of work required than the ratemaking questions (and I hope this played to my favor).

I would say the Full 5 exam today was very long, but I'm a very slow writer and calculator user (call me crazy but I like to use this high-tech thing called a computer to do actuarial work). I counted up my unanswered points at the end and I didn't answer 10.25 out of 79.75, but I feel very confident about what I did answer, and I'm hoping it's good enough since this was my 2nd time around.

nonactuarialactuary
05-04-2011, 08:12 PM
the people sitting for 5A or 5B have already passed at least one upper-level exam. the people sitting for full exam 5 are likely to have never passed an upper-level exam. so you'd expect the pool of half-exam test takers to be, on average, of slightly higher quality than those taking full exam 5, having already passed an upper-level.

does the CAS account for this when determining pass ratios?

I'm very curious how this pans out. As a 5B taker, I'm now selfishly hoping everything gets combined for grading purposes, because it seems like the general consensus on here was that 5A was longer/harder. From a theoretical standpoint though, it seems like it would make more sense to treat them as 3 separate exams, but I can see crumbs' standpoint that it isn't fair to judge half exam takers more harshly than their full exam counterparts on the same questions. Come to think of it, the best way to do it would probably be having three separate exams entirely, but I guess that means the CAS would have needed to develop double the amount of problems (assuming that 5A+5B=5; has this been confirmed?).

Back to the original point though, I think one could argue from the other side of the coin as well. You say people taking the half exams are more qualified because they already passed at least one upper level exam, but just to play devil's advocate, I could counter that many people taking the half exams have failed at least one upper level exam as well (especially people taking 5B). Amongst the best and the brightest (the people that never fail anything), I think it's more likely they'd be taking the full exam 5 than either of the half exams, depending on when they came out of the preliminary exams. You could have some never-fails taking 5A, but it's hard to imagine a scenario where the never-fails are taking 5B, given how important 6 was last fall.

nonactuarialactuary
05-04-2011, 08:17 PM
I really have no idea how they're going to grade 5A and 5B vs. Full 5, but I think all three should be treated as separate exams with different pass rates.

My main reason for this is that both 5A and 5B were two hour exams, while the syllabus for Full 5 clearly stated that the exam would be 50-60% ratemaking and 40-50% reserving.

I took Full 5 today, and there was nothing in the instructions or in the exam book indicating where the 5A portion ended and where 5B began (of course you can figure this out, and it looks like the change happened around question 22-23 of 37 if I remember correctly).

In the reading period I used the back sheet to figure out what question number was the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles as far as cumulative point values to set time goals, and I think 50% of exam points were reached around question 19 out of 37 (before the start of the reserving questions).

Since both 5A and 5B were 2 hours instead of maybe 2:15 for a and 1:45 for B, I would think that those who took 5A were under much more time pressure than 5B. However, in general I thought the reserving questions had much lower points per amount of work required than the ratemaking questions (and I hope this played to my favor).

I would say the Full 5 exam today was very long, but I'm a very slow writer and calculator user (call me crazy but I like to use this high-tech thing called a computer to do actuarial work). I counted up my unanswered points at the end and I didn't answer 10.25 out of 79.75, but I feel very confident about what I did answer, and I'm hoping it's good enough since this was my 2nd time around.

5B was 39 points in 17 questions. 5A was 20 questions, and assuming 5=5A+5B with a total of 79.75 points, this implies 5A had 40.75 total points. Looks like you're right that 5A people were under more time pressure, but at least they decided to make it closer to a 50-50 split than a 60-40 split between the segments.

tommie frazier
05-04-2011, 08:20 PM
on the surface, the amount of material on each part the MQC is supposed to know doesn't change based on whether a person took half or whole. that is linear and doesn't consider overall length of exam. If there are adjustments to make based on exam length (which I believe have happened before, although recently they have been slight at best) there could be some differences. but like I said, they really haven't deviated that much from the expectation afaik lately.

chicken_po_boy
05-04-2011, 10:04 PM
5B was 39 points in 17 questions. 5A was 20 questions, and assuming 5=5A+5B with a total of 79.75 points, this implies 5A had 40.75 total points. Looks like you're right that 5A people were under more time pressure, but at least they decided to make it closer to a 50-50 split than a 60-40 split between the segments.

I remember reading somewhere the CAS saying that, for the sittings when 5A and 5B were offered, they were going to try and keep it very near to a 50-50 split.

Guest
05-05-2011, 03:53 PM
Very simple reason why passmark 5a + passmark 5b should <> Full 5:

If the same person took 5a and 5b on two separate days, with no different knowledge, but with time to rest, and additional 15 minute reading period, their combined score is expected to be higher than if they took a full. This is all assuming that knowledge of the material is the same.

A fair approach would have been to keep it split like MFE / MLC for a two years (you can take two at a time should you choose). Everyone loses all credit after two years if you don't pass both, including those who passed old 5 or old 6 before.

JasonScandopolous
05-05-2011, 04:45 PM
I think us 5Aers and 5Bers had a tangible advantage with the extra 7.5 minutes of reading time. One could make a case that we had an advantage because we only had to know half the material, but it's not our fault that the CAS changed exam structures on us; we shouldn't be penalized by being held to a higher standard of knowledge on those questions than other candidates are. I do agree that we should have had only a 7.5 min reading period, but this was not possible for the CAS to do, logistically.

nonactuarialactuary
05-05-2011, 04:57 PM
I think us 5Aers and 5Bers had a tangible advantage with the extra 7.5 minutes of reading time. One could make a case that we had an advantage because we only had to know half the material, but it's not our fault that the CAS changed exam structures on us; we shouldn't be penalized by being held to a higher standard of knowledge on those questions than other candidates are. I do agree that we should have had only a 7.5 min reading period, but this was not possible for the CAS to do, logistically.

It would have been possible at my site - they had all full exam people in one room, and all half exam people (both 5A and 5B) in another. Did anyone have a testing center where everyone was combined?

Ceej
05-05-2011, 05:05 PM
Hey I'd take a 7.5 minute reading period if it meant 5B had a separate room from 5A. I don't know about y'all but having to start an exam (reading period) and then pause for 30 minutes while someone copies a PAM was painful. Not to mention a bunch of sketchy candidates that don't know the meaning of "stop reading" and candidate ethics.

oh and jts, crossing out the 5 already? Good for you - I wish I had that much confidence to declare that.

Rice
05-05-2011, 05:53 PM
There is an advantage that the Full 5 takers had. If they were to finish the reserving portion in less than 2 hours, they would have those extra minutes available to use for the ratemaking portion. The 5A takers had only 2 hours total, and given that 5A seems to have been more difficult than 5B (although each was long), that reallocation of time may have been a great benefit to the Full 5 takers.

In any case, I would not expect the % of candidates passing to be equal among all 3 exams because of credibility issues. If the passmark goal is 70% and Full 5 has 1000 candidates while 5A and 5B have, say, 450 each, there would be greater statistical volatility for the half exams.

nonactuarialactuary
05-05-2011, 06:09 PM
Hey I'd take a 7.5 minute reading period if it meant 5B had a separate room from 5A. I don't know about y'all but having to start an exam (reading period) and then pause for 30 minutes while someone copies a PAM was painful. Not to mention a bunch of sketchy candidates that don't know the meaning of "stop reading" and candidate ethics.

oh and jts, crossing out the 5 already? Good for you - I wish I had that much confidence to declare that.

Definitely not that confident, I just never updated the sig line from the fall. I passed old 5 but not old 6. With any luck, I'll have passed 5B this time around, which will catch me back up to where I was last year around this time. :shrug:

The copying in our room went pretty smoothly actually. The 5A people called out the PAM issue, but the proctor just told them to hang out and skip any of those sorts of problems for later. About 5 minutes into the exam itself, they passed out the PAM to the 5A people.

booyah81
05-05-2011, 06:10 PM
oh and jts, crossing out the 5 already? Good for you - I wish I had that much confidence to declare that.

balls. i won't cross it off my list until i see my candidate number on that beautiful CAS website... :love:

Guest
05-05-2011, 06:18 PM
I think us 5Aers and 5Bers had a tangible advantage with the extra 7.5 minutes of reading time. One could make a case that we had an advantage because we only had to know half the material, but it's not our fault that the CAS changed exam structures on us; we shouldn't be penalized by being held to a higher standard of knowledge on those questions than other candidates are. I do agree that we should have had only a 7.5 min reading period, but this was not possible for the CAS to do, logistically.

7.5 minutes for each. That adds up to a deficit of 15 minutes of thinking time total for a full 5 taker. Assuming the full 5 exam is about 80 points, that's 3 minutes allocated per point. That means time for 5 additional points, which is huge given the tight range around passing. This also doesn't doesn't include the advantages of stamina. It would be great to take 2 hours to take one half, go home and fully rest, then take another for 2 hours.

Perhaps for practical reasons this is the best solution. But IMO a disadvantage does seem to exist.

periculum
05-05-2011, 06:36 PM
I don't think CAS cares about reading periods or difficulty of ratemaking vs reserving.

Looking at older exams, they pretty much seem to zero in on a 70% passmark, at a minimum.

You could argue a few percentage points, to the upside, but it is what it is.

enactuary
05-05-2011, 06:59 PM
A couple points:

1) Just because 5A had an additional point or two and 3 or so extra questions does not mean it was longer than 5B. The reserving questions tend to require many more calculations. Plus, I would expect some bias toward the opinion that 5A was longer because most of the exam-takers probably started somewhere near the beginning (the 5A questions). In a 4-hour exam, if it takes longer than 2 hours to complete the first half, at least you have the possibility of making up time on the 2nd half. A 2-hour exam has less margin for error...getting hung up on a single problem can mean you don't finish.

2) There is no valid case for the opinion that the half exams should be harder. If you know the material, you should pass, regardless of how much material the exam covers. You could, however, make a valid case for why the half exams should be easier if you believe it would be easier to pass the full exam 5 than to pass the old exam 5 and exam 5B. Both routes get the same credit (except for the module).

Kongo
05-05-2011, 08:33 PM
So everyone is throwingi n their two cents, I will too.

If they grade everyone in the same boat, IMO 5A ppl get screwed.

I took full 5 and finished the whole exam 5A took me 2:20, 5B took me 1:40. If I was only taking 5A I would have missed out on 3 problems.

In addition, for ppl takign the full exam, the problems that they left out would be 5b problems, which would there inflate the scores of the 5b test takers.

In other words, advantages are as follows: 5B>5>5A

Brodderick
05-05-2011, 08:59 PM
Reading this thread leaves me feeling a bit happier than I was already feeling because I, too felt the exam was a bit lengthy. I've sat for both 5 and 6 previously and failed with scores in the 3-5 range.

After 4 short hours I put my pen down frustrated by the fact that I didn't attempt the last 5 questions on the exam. Thanks to the reading period I know I could have answered those questions. Alas, my frustration didn't last long. Despite my inability to finish the exam, I've never felt more confident about the questions I actually answered. So I'm in the boat with the rest of the full 5 takers claiming the exam felt long-ish. Here's hoping for good results. :band2:

doop
05-11-2011, 12:56 PM
A couple points:

2) There is no valid case for the opinion that the half exams should be harder. If you know the material, you should pass, regardless of how much material the exam covers. You could, however, make a valid case for why the half exams should be easier if you believe it would be easier to pass the full exam 5 than to pass the old exam 5 and exam 5B. Both routes get the same credit (except for the module).

By the same logic, shouldn't 5A be harder, since 5A + old 6 = two exams?

I think all 3 have to be graded separately, since they were all different exams. The a priori pass mark may be the same, but I would be amazed if they have the same final pass mark. I say this for a few speculative reasons.

(1) all else equal, the reading period clearly makes the 2 half exams easier.
(2) due to varying point totals, you may be able to get for instance a 73% on 5A but only either a 72.7% or 73.3% on 5B. So where do you set the pass mark? They must consider each pass mark in 3 scenarios (3 exams), which almost seems like more work than just doing it separately for each.
(3) I have heard (but can't confirm) that some people taking 5B couldn't get a PAM at all during the test. If this is true, that question must be thrown out for 5B only, leading to further inconsistencies in point values.

Final point: IMO, we're talking about a difference of 72% vs 74%, probably not 68% to 78%. The differences will be due to nuances in the test, not due to different interpretations of "MQC." If a candidate is qualified, they are qualified, regardless of how much material was on the test.

I really can't see how it could be all the same. If so, I guess I stand corrected. We'll see in 7 weeks...

JasonScandopolous
05-11-2011, 02:54 PM
doop: I think we already know for a fact that they are being graded together. (the reason 'I think' is that i think that somebody from the CAS has said as much on here. it's possible that I have fabricated this memory, though, as that sometimes happens).

tommie frazier
05-11-2011, 03:55 PM
i don't know for sure, but as I understood the discussion: the MQC standard is linear. the MQC for half the exam is the sum of the MQC scores for every problem on that half. the MQC score for the whole is the sum of the MQC score on each half. the persons grading #4 will grade #4 on all papers the same way using the same methodology.

I see no way that they grade the halves separately, or have passing scores different for half than whole.

JasonScandopolous
05-11-2011, 05:26 PM
i don't know for sure, but as I understood the discussion: the MQC standard is linear. the MQC for half the exam is the sum of the MQC scores for every problem on that half. the MQC score for the whole is the sum of the MQC score on each half. the persons grading #4 will grade #4 on all papers the same way using the same methodology.

I see no way that they grade the halves separately, or have passing scores different for half than whole.

I agree with you tommy as I've said above. I did want to add a new thought, though: The graders have an opportunity to subconsciously grade us differently, since there is a "5A", "5", or "5B" in a box at the top of every answer sheet. There are probably some graders that may, subconsciously, grade the 5A and 5B with more scrutiny (if they hold the belief that 5A/5B had an advantage going into the test).

tommie frazier
05-11-2011, 05:40 PM
those graders would have to do so in concert, and then failing to do so in concert with the partner for borderline cases would have to reconcile. and so if the comparison was other papers, the consistency would matter.

doop
05-11-2011, 06:11 PM
i don't know for sure, but as I understood the discussion: the MQC standard is linear. the MQC for half the exam is the sum of the MQC scores for every problem on that half. the MQC score for the whole is the sum of the MQC score on each half. the persons grading #4 will grade #4 on all papers the same way using the same methodology.

I see no way that they grade the halves separately, or have passing scores different for half than whole.

Just trying to follow this approach...

Didn't we also establish that certain questions are only found on the combined test? From what I vaguely remember in previous comments, 5A was shorter than the ratemaking half of 5, and 5B was longer (or the same??) as the reserving half of 5. So for this "addition" of MQC scores, what happens to these questions that fall out?

Where I'm going with this is that it all depends on which questions were left out. If the questions that got left out of the half-exam were extremely hard, it's unfair to grade 5A with the same passing mark as 5. If the questions that got left out were easy, the opposite could be said. I think since the tests were different tests (although based on mostly the same questions), there is no way it would be "fair" to have the same passing mark.

Alternatively, think about 5A and 5B alone. They were different tests, and you can't really compare the difficulty of tests with completely different questions. If the average on 5A is 50% and the average in 5B is 80%, do you think it's fair for the pass mark to be 70% for both?

All speculation, and the funny part is, what I think really doesn't matter! Interested to hear your thoughts tho

Number Theory
05-11-2011, 06:19 PM
Alternatively, think about 5A and 5B alone. They were different tests, and you can't really compare the difficulty of tests with completely different questions. If the average on 5A is 50% and the average in 5B is 80%, do you think it's fair for the pass mark to be 70% for both?


This is a really good point. I suspect that the average for 5A is going to be much worse than 5B.

snoo
05-11-2011, 07:25 PM
Just trying to follow this approach...

Didn't we also establish that certain questions are only found on the combined test? From what I vaguely remember in previous comments, 5A was shorter than the ratemaking half of 5, and 5B was longer (or the same??) as the reserving half of 5. So for this "addition" of MQC scores, what happens to these questions that fall out?

I think that all the questions on exam 5 were either on 5A or 5B.

oblivious
05-11-2011, 07:27 PM
I have to say, I thought I whined a lot, but you newbies definitely out-whine me :toth:

So no one else is surprised that the exam hasn't been released yet, I always skipped the envelope, because the exam was released quickly after sitting for it, but this time it appears to be taking longer...

snoo
05-11-2011, 07:29 PM
I thought they released them a week or so after the exam. Well i guess it has been a week. Maybe they will be out friday...

oblivious
05-11-2011, 07:30 PM
I thought they released them a week or so after the exam.

oh, my memory might be off, and/or maybe I'm a little more anxious to see the exam this time.

JasonScandopolous
05-11-2011, 09:26 PM
Just trying to follow this approach...

Didn't we also establish that certain questions are only found on the combined test? From what I vaguely remember in previous comments, 5A was shorter than the ratemaking half of 5, and 5B was longer (or the same??) as the reserving half of 5. So for this "addition" of MQC scores, what happens to these questions that fall out?

Where I'm going with this is that it all depends on which questions were left out. If the questions that got left out of the half-exam were extremely hard, it's unfair to grade 5A with the same passing mark as 5. If the questions that got left out were easy, the opposite could be said. I think since the tests were different tests (although based on mostly the same questions), there is no way it would be "fair" to have the same passing mark.

Alternatively, think about 5A and 5B alone. They were different tests, and you can't really compare the difficulty of tests with completely different questions. If the average on 5A is 50% and the average in 5B is 80%, do you think it's fair for the pass mark to be 70% for both?

All speculation, and the funny part is, what I think really doesn't matter! Interested to hear your thoughts tho

I dont think that any questions were different. Regarding your Alternatively section, you're thinking of it backwards... they wouldnt set a full 5 pass mark of 70% and then use that on both A and B; they'd set 5A and 5B pass marks, and then combine them for full 5. This prevents any difference in section A/B difficulty from mattering.

tommie frazier: you are correct, I didnt think of that.

Ceej
05-11-2011, 09:42 PM
I'm pretty sure 5A + 5B = 5 questions, high level judging by Bobby's thread on all the questions on reserving were what I saw for 5B. Plus, from an operational cost standpoint it just wouldn't make sense to have two sets of questions.

(I've always thought the grading was to be as tommie described above.)

doop
05-12-2011, 10:02 AM
I dont think that any questions were different. Regarding your Alternatively section, you're thinking of it backwards... they wouldnt set a full 5 pass mark of 70% and then use that on both A and B; they'd set 5A and 5B pass marks, and then combine them for full 5. This prevents any difference in section A/B difficulty from mattering.

Got it, that way is much better than what I described. Does this mean that the people who took the full exam are not considered at all when setting the pass mark?

Vorian Atreides
05-12-2011, 10:18 AM
Got it, that way is much better than what I described. Does this mean that the people who took the full exam are not considered at all when setting the pass mark?
Final determination of setting the pass mark for 5A includes all candidates who took that portion of the Exam--that is, summary statistics includes candidates sitting for both 5A and 5.

Analogous situation for 5B.

doop
05-12-2011, 10:29 AM
Final determination of setting the pass mark for 5A includes all candidates who took that portion of the Exam--that is, summary statistics includes candidates sitting for both 5A and 5.

Analogous situation for 5B.

:notworth:

so really, that means the passing "grade" for each exam will indeed be different, with the full exam being somewhere between 5A's and 5B's (if 5A's and 5B's are different). interesting.