Publication of Marks?

Publication of Exam Marks?

I just looked on the professions website, on the student consultataive forum report (here; http://www.actuaries.org.uk/research-and-resources/documents/student-consultative-forum-notes-20-may-2011) that the publication of pass marks was being considered. Does anyone know how far the profession is in this regard.

Or they just won't do it if it increases the pass rate? Since that's not the idea.

 

Latest

If you read the notes from the meeting in November (http://www.actuaries.org.uk/researc...ent-consultative-forum-notes-18-november-2011) it says that that publication of pass marks was being presented in a paper to Management Board with a recommendation to publish.

There was another meeting last week so there may be some more news on this soon but its looking promising

 

It shouldn't affect pass rates because the profession will still judge paper by paper. The harder ones will have a lower mark and that mark will change every session.

So we await an announcement

 

But I think it will be less charming, since people will start aiming less if for example marks are indeed <60% for some of the harder CT's?

Anyway do you think there's a chance bystander?

 

publication of pass marks

from what i heard there is a concern that publication of pass marks would lead to more exam appeals, and generally more dissatisfaction from people who failed who feel they got enough marks to pass

i think it would be interesting to know the pass marks, but i'm not sure it would really help students (since we know approximately what the pass marks are). also, i think the pass marks would be suprisingly low (i think i only got more than 55% on one CT paper, but passed them all), which could reflect badly on the profession.

 

Exactly, if they are lower than we have been told it will be a big lol from other professions.Some won't believe actuarial students who study A LOT and generally work hard through exams can't get even 50% for their exams then they will think we are bunch of fools.

If we get such low marks can we be trusted with what we are doing by the OUTSIDE world?

Then more people outside the profession will wonder WHAT'S THE POINT of making the exams TOO hard? Then they will be convinced the idea is to retain a few so that they can be paid big salaries!

Imagine having to respect a FIA who passed their SA with 39% (general exam standard 'E')and getting to think he get's $100000 for a 'shining E'. I don't think I will!lol

 

The profession has been around the loop so many times on this so I still the chance of publishing is slim. As everyone has pointed out, it could impact credibility unless there is a way that the data can be retained only available to the profession. That would mean say moving the data the members only site.

BUt I think the biggest issue is those on the borderline. Say the clearcut pass mark was 65%. Then they look at the potential passes who got say 62-64%. Some of these may be promoted to pass and others not taking into account the overall impression they have created (talking here about CA and beyond as the CT is pretty clear cut). Two people both who got 64 - the decision could be candidate A is passed, B gets FA. So you can't then say the pass rate is 64% although some with that score made it.

So do I expect to see it happen --- NO

 

publicaion of marks

is that how it works when they look at borderline cases? so there isn't really a consistent pass mark at all?!

i know they consider slightly wider issues when considering borderline cases, but i thought they do this to find reasons to give some people an extra quarter or half a mark here or there, and the pass mark remains absolute. i'm not sure if that's the case - bystander may be right - but anything else would seem rather unfair.

 

I don't understand what students think they are going to achieve by getting the pass marks published?

So... we find out the pass mark is 65.
You will have the usual high flyers who ignore this information and get a much higher mark and pass.
You have the people who are under prepared who still fail.
Then you have the people who use the pass mark of 65 as a study goal. If the majority of people do this and everyone achieves a 65, do you really think we will all pass?

Are people really failing because they don't know what the pass mark is? (for a start, at most tutorials we are given a rough pass mark to aim for) I really cannot understand why anyone cares what the pass mark is? Maybe someone can enlighten me on this one.

 

moreoomph, what about people who can't attend the tutorials?

 

I do agree some people seem to make much more of an issue of this than it merits.

At the same time, it is useful to know whether the pass mark is closer to 40, 60, or 80.

 

The rough pass marks are easily available on this forum. No "inside information" is released at tutorials. I did my CTs with no tutorials, its not a massive disadvantage.

 

publication of pass marks etc

I think its useful to have a reasonably good idea of what pass mark is, to judge your progress when looking at pass papers, and potentially to help with your study strategy, and even your exam technique, but I would agree that knowing the precise pass marks on past papers in unlikely to make a difference to anyone.

Btw, for anyone who was wondering, acted tutors all seem say the pass marks for CTs are typically 60% (although i suspect they're a bit lower, especially for CT1-3), about 50% for CA1 and the STs, and around 40% for SAs. (But it varies from sitting to sitting of course.)

Of course knowing the pass mark is fairly irrelevant anyway without also having a good idea of how strictly/generously the papers are marked!

 

The Profession has said in articles the past that pass mark for CTs is typically in the 55%-65% range. (And typically lower for later subjects.) Hence 60% is often quoted. But it's probably only 60-65 for (easier) CT1 and CT7 and lower for other CTs (and might evene be less than 55% for the likes of CT4, 5, 6 and 8 on occasions).

I hear there is a good chance from the SCF that pass rates will be published, but tweaks to the system are being trialled this session. Once reviewed, a decision may be made for next session/year.