Normally I would be refreshing the CAS website right now...

[Kongo]

Originally Posted by MightySchoop

80 = a couple hundred now?

moron. reread his logic. His original deduction (based on eligible passers)assumed 967 taking 9 and 150ish or so taking 7. I am saying combined it is still less than the 967 and exam 9 is aroudn 200 shy of his estimate. That is expalined by

a)failers not retaking
b)first time eligible people taking a sitting off.

I assume the former

[Kongo]

Originally Posted by Kongo

moron. reread his logic. His original deduction (based on eligible passers)assumed 967 taking 9 and 150ish or so taking 7. I am saying combined it is still less than the 967 and exam 9 is aroudn 200 shy of his estimate. That is expalined by

a)failers not retaking
b)first time eligible people taking a sitting off.

I assume the former

just thought abotu it. Thats 120K of less dough for the fellows (600 x 200). Serves them right for fall 2011.

[jenn3539]

My range was 52% to 76% and I got a 5.

[Heywood J]

Well, this was an utterly ****ed up exam, but at least they didn't punish the student body for it (on average).

[Debaser]

Exam statistics posted. Great job on studying better this time around guys, it really shows.

http://www.casact.org/admissions/examstatsum.pdf

[Bobby]

Here's an update of the charts I posted last sitting on historical pass ratios for each exam:



Although this sitting saw pass ratios increase a lot compared to the last sitting... they were in the same ballpark as most pass ratios have been in the past ten years.

[gaddy]

But, as many expected, they did go from the lowest in history to one of the highest overall ratios in history (combined basis).

[merson]

Originally Posted by gaddy

But, as many expected, they did go from the lowest in history to one of the highest overall ratios in history (combined basis).

Guess I just need to show up for 6US this fall to get a pass?

[Kongo]

Originally Posted by Bobby

Estimated number of people sitting for exam 9:

People that failed exam 9 last year: 604
Exam 5A passers last year: 106

Additional number of people that could have sat for exam 7 or 9 this year = exam 5/5B passers from last year = 178 + 171 ~= 350

Number of estimated exam 7 takers (assuming 40% pass ratio) = 56 / .4 = 140

Number of last years' 5/5B passers that sat for 9 this time = 350 - 140 = 210

Number of estimated exam 9 takers = 604 + 106 + 210 = 920

Number of estimated exam 3L takers (assuming 48% pass ratio) = 90 / 0.48 = 188

Assumed people that took exam 5/5A/5B this time around = 2240 - 920 - 140 - 188 = 992

About 115 people took 5A and 5B this year (based on failers last year), so (992-115)=877 people sat for exam 5.

That would put the pass ratio for exam 5 at 431/877 = 49.1%.

Note: I ignored the one person that passed exam 7 last year, who could have taken 9 this time around.

Summarizing estimates:

Bobby, any theory why your estimates were so far off?

[Bobby]

Originally Posted by Kongo

Bobby, any theory why your estimates were so far off?

I don't know why the estimate for exam 9 was so far off.

My estimation of exam 9 takers was split into two portions:

• people that took 9 that came from passing 5/5A/5B
• people that failed exam 9 last year and were retaking it

One of these estimates was far off.

I'm more inclined to believe that people who had just failed 9 would be more likely to quit than those that had just passed 5/5A/5B.

So my hypothesis is that a lot of people that failed exam 9 last year just quit taking exams and became career ACAS's. (Or took a sitting off.)