Passing Percentages

[am_vanquish]

Originally Posted by ditkaworshipper

The pass marks are not set based on how many people they think should pass. It's based on how many people display the minimum qualification according to their arcane standards on what percentage of qualified candidates should get a specific question correct. Ergo, they're trying to screw me over too.

May 2008 55% 48.4 53.2

Sorry - I don't see why May 2008 has to be any different from Nov 2009. I honestly believe that a passmark of 14/24 = 58.33% would have provided very similar results to the May '08 passing rates. What exactly changed?

And don't tell me it's the difficulty of the exam - I'd venture to guess that the difficulty of the May '08 and Nov '09 exams are very comparable because it seems to me that similar passmarks would produce similar passing rates.

[scotth]

Originally Posted by ditkaworshipper

The problem may actually be that more of the incapable test takers are getting through P and FM due to the increase of quality in study materials. The math is pretty elementary in those exams compared to MFE.

You do bring up a good point here.. This exam was first designed for candidates to take after MLC... I believe too many people take this exam with or right after FM... or heck double up with MLC when they probably shouldn't. So that's one reason for the lower percentage, but if you look back... I believe less people (%) double up this exam today, than did in 2007. Though the job economy could be skewing more candidates to double up to get ahead in their job search.

Either way, If I could do it over again, I would have saved MFE for the last prelim.. I think others should consider this as well.

Originally Posted by ditkaworshipper

As someone who still has to take this exam, shut up! It's really easy to say add material when you're not the one studying the additional material. Personally, I think they could add questions on the stuff within the syllabus and make it longer.

Isn't that the topic of this thread? That the passing percentages are too low? I believe adding more material will make this exam EASIER, lengthening it tends to help those who are qualified, not those who aren't.

I think MFE is a beast, and it needs to be moderated a bit. Lengthening will help people respect the exam more... that this certainly IS a full exam... and even out the material. If they want 6 ito problems... Fine.. have 6 ito problems... but make the exam 35 questions instead of 25. Understand?

Yes, the MFE syllabus may be shorter, but that doesn't mean squat. You could make the MFE syllabus one chapter, and still make it the hardest exam you've ever seen.

[scotth]

Originally Posted by am_vanquish

If the passrate were raised 9%, it would be exactly in line with MLC & C. I personally doubt that lowering the passmark by one question would have caused a swing of more than 10%

Originally Posted by am_vanquish

Sorry - I don't see why May 2008 has to be any different from Nov 2009. I honestly believe that a passmark of 14/24 = 58.33% would have provided very similar results to the May '08 passing rates. What exactly changed?

You are contradicting yourself here when you say that dropping the passmark one question would improve the pass rates by 14%

We know that 35% of test takers scored 15/24 or better. 60% scored 1-5 or 8-14.

14/24 = 5, 12-13/24 = 4, 11/24 = 3, 9-10/24 = 2, 8 = 1

If you assume a uniform distribution, which we know isn't the case, that means each grade is worth 8.57%. Thus a drop of the passmark to 14/24 would have raised the passmark to 43.3.

Looking at the PAK distribution, and knowing their results are biased... lets assume that the scores are normal with mu=13(1 less than pak), and a SD of 4 (using Cont. correction)
Probability of Failure (0-5) = .65; Probabilty of (0-4) = .55; then percentage of people scoring a 5 is ~10%

Obviously these numbers are guesses, but why don't you propose some alternate numbers. We know the number of 5's is at least 8.57 and around 10%, and I'd say it's probably a couple points higher than that.

Either way, we agree. I don't believe dropping the passmark by one would have adversely affected the minimum knowledge required to pass.

[SandbagQueen]

Originally Posted by scotth

Isn't that the topic of this thread? That the passing percentages are too low?

Actually the point was that if the exam is getting harder to the point that the passing percentages are dropping each time, then clearly a 5 in Fall 09 means more than a 5 in Fall 08, and I am learning something more each flippin' time I study for this exam. It was all about making me feel better.

Although the topic does seem to have quickly gone to "the passing percentages are too low." which is fine for everyone else who doesn't care about making me feel better!!!!!

[SandbagQueen]

Originally Posted by Darkness Falls

Good luck for next time SandbagQueen. I'm sure the 4th time will be the last one.

Thanks!! Although the 4th time being the last time I take it either means I am passing or I really am going to be a barista at Starbucks. Seriously I really do think I'm going to make it this time.

[tomorrow never knows]

Originally Posted by SandbagQueen

Thanks!! Although the 4th time being the last time I take it either means I am passing or I really am going to be a barista at Starbucks. Seriously I really do think I'm going to make it this time.

People typically grow stronger once having been through a traumatic experience (or in your case, three). Hang in there

[andrew_h]

I'll probably get flammed for this but I don't care because this is just my opinion.

The MFE exam, for some reason, is out of the SOA's ability to test. Looking at the two released ones and the passed one from November that's very plain (to me anyway). The SOA needs to outsource this particular test and hire some consultants from the academic community to come in and develop questions that test the entire syllabus. The goal of this exam (and any of the prelims) is just to answer the question "does the student understand the material". You can probably still do this in 25 questions for MFE, but you sure as hell won't accomplish it by leaving out topics. The SOA doesn't have a handle on this concept though for MFE - hence the strangeness.

They just need to outsource. They've had six shots to get it right. Maybe the 3 that I haven't seen were ok - who knows. I just know the 3 that I have seen were not good exams. If they don't want to outsource then maybe the SOA should concede to the CAS on this particular exam and let them handle it. Use the old 3F. Anything is better than the current MFE.

My .02.

[jraven]

Originally Posted by andrew_h

If they don't want to outsource then maybe the SOA should concede to the CAS on this particular exam and let them handle it. Use the old 3F. Anything is better than the current MFE.

There was no "old" Exam 3F -- 3F is just the CAS name for the joint exam. Prior to the joint MFE/3F there was only CAS Exam 3, and frankly the financial mathematics questions on that were a joke -- all too often they were either ridiculously easy or improperly stated.

[scotth]

I think he meant to let the CAS run the exam... I don't agree with that part of his statement, but I do agree that the tests have not been good indicators of knowing the material.

There was no joint 3F/MFE exam until Spring 2008. The SOA administered the MFE exam in 2007, while the CAS added "3F" material to their CAS3 that year. They decided to split it in 2008 to cosponsor MFE.

Just like jraven said, the CAS "3F" problems in Spring 07 and Fall 07 definitely were horrible
Note that the CAS3 exam in Spring 07 only had 1 Ito Problem and 2 Interest rate problems. Then, the Fall 07 CAS3 exam had 0 Ito and 0 Interest Rate problems. The 2008-2009 joint exams had around a third+ Ito&IR problems.

I'm sorry, but if you earned credit for 3F/MFE in 2007 or Spring 2008, you have no basis to say how difficult this exam has become. If you got credit for Course 3 and got to miss MFE, consider yourself lucky.

[SandbagQueen]

Originally Posted by tomorrow never knows

People typically grow stronger once having been through a traumatic experience (or in your case, three). Hang in there

Yeah, it's the whole "that which doesn't kill you only makes you stronger" adage. I think I am just meant to learn some humility or something from this process.