Re: how come no comments about the exam
c_w_mitch ( (no email) )
Thu, 6 May 1999 18:34:24 -0500
The thing I hate most about the computational difficulty is I knew how to do
probably 28 of the problem. I answered 25 and already found five errors
that show that I can't add or multiply, but I did know the material. I have
a computer to add and multiply. If the exam was graded appropriately for
these types of questions, it would be graded by hand and partial credit
given. Then I would have probably would have gotten 1 1/2 points for each
of these 2 point problems instead of -1/2. I also would get partial credit
for all the other problems I tried and didn't answer. The point is if the
tests were graded in this fashion the mean score could easily be 80%.
Instead, my guess is the mean score will be around 45%. If a score of 80%
would be considered passing for hand-graded exam, then a score of 45% would
be reasonable for this type of exam. I say these things because I think the
exam committees tend to object to passing scores below 50%. I wonder if
they are taking into account the relative difficulty inherent in the grading
process. It's all relative and the only way they can truly be consistent is
to maintain a consistent passing percentage(# of sitters) which I think
should be closer to 40 % instead of less than 30%. The test have gotten
more difficult, students have gotten better prepared, yet passing % have
gone down which in itself increases competition because of the increase in
the # of re-takers. This probably wasn't the place for me to rant but got
on a roll there. By the way my max possible score at this point is 35.5. I
really hope i don't find another error.
-----Original Message-----
From: cascoinc <poduska@cascoconsulting.com>
To: Donald Morrison <donald_morrison@es.adp.com>
Cc: studygroup4b@lists.casact.org <studygroup4b@lists.casact.org>
Date: Thursday, May 06, 1999 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: how come no comments about the exam
>I was waiting to see if the CAS discussion produced any comments. Since
>I can't seem to get in there now. . . . Some questions were harder.
>Some easier. The thing that struck me was that there were so many extra
>calculations. Who's bright idea was it to perform a K-S on a truncated
>distribution? In addition to being very time-consuming, this leaves a
>lot more room for mistakes! Is this an exercise in how quickly you can
>use a calculator? The only thing that makes me feel better is that I
>know everyone else was in the same boat.
>
>Donald Morrison wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> i thought it was harder than fall 98
>
>