I find the links from CFAI website arent that helpful…
if say MPS is 65%, does it mean as long as my total score is >65%, I will pass? Regardless of my score for each topic?
how does the bracketing system work? If I get 4 questions out of 6 correct for a topic (67%), will my score for that topic = (51-70%)? Or does it depend on how well I did for that topic compared against other candidates?
does every question carry the same weight? i.e. 3 points for each multiple choice question?
what’s the worst score you have known to have passed Level III exam?
First of all, you reached L3 and doesnt know what MPS means? Then nobody knows exactly what is the MPS every year nd CFAI does not disclose it…There might be estimation especially for Band 10 failures then you can indiacate range of what’s an MPS.
Second, again you are a L3 candidate and if you scored 4/6… what range you should be 50-70 or above 70%… (Math Calculation)Even if everyone scores ZERO and you scored 4/6 you would get between 50-70%. Nothing changes
Third, What do you mean every questions carry the same weight? if you are talking about PM session each Vignitte (item set is 18 points with 6 questions/ each 3 points, Easy to calculate?) - Nothing is variable except there is topics which can have more item sets, thus more questions, more weights? I wonder how you didnt notice that? - for AM its the same thing = Minutes allocated to Q= Points = Points/180 = % of Morning.
Last, but not least, unless if you want to run- linear-regression analysis or time-series analysis for 10 years you can find the worst score for 1,000 random people. Whats the point to know? MPS varies every year, pass rates changes every year, and does scores varies…
In my opinion, some of questions asked are very valid.
Example :
"
zerobeta wrote:1) if say MPS is 65%, does it mean as long as my total score is >65%, I will pass? Regardless of my score for each topic?
Yes, but if you’re on the border (65% ± ε), your Ethics score (above or below 70%) will determine whether you pass or not.
"
So basically if MPS is 65% and some one got 64.99% but lets say 100% in ethics, she would pass but if some one got 65.01% but is low on ethics score, might fail. Right ? So basically 65% does not necessarily mean, it is “Minimum Passing score”, No ? Hence, the question that, what exactly is definition of MPS is quite valid to be honest.
I’m pretty sure the Institute’s website says that an Ethics adjustment can turn a borderline pass into a fail and a borderline fail into a pass. It just depends on which side you are on and how well you did in Ethics. I’ve seen a few people on here post reference to the CFAI website regarding the adjustment, but I haven’t searched for it.
"The Board of Governors instituted a policy to place particular emphasis on ethics. Starting with the 1996 exams, the performance on the ethics section became a factor in the pass/fail decision for candidates whose total scores BORDERED the minimum passing score. The ethics adjustment can have a POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE impact on these candidates’ final results.
CFA Institute has a policy of not releasing either the minimum passing score or individual candidate scores. Consequently, CFA Institute does not release specific information about the ethics adjustment or the candidates who were affected. The adjustment has had a net positive effect on candidate scores (and thus pass rates) in most exam sessions. The published pass rates always take into account the ethics adjustment for borderline candidates." Source: CFA Institute
You are wrong again! Just read carefully pal… If one makes the MPS he passes no ethics adjustment ! If one borders the MPS in your case if MPS is 63% and you got 62% then ethics comes into play if you got 63% than one passes . It is that simple…
Lastly, yes results are identical but they are not similar, the exact scores are not known with certainty due to the ranges… Hence simple assumption is that the second guy got higher scores ! And on top of that with ethics lower than 50% range which again proves the hypothesis so called “my rule” that if you nail the MPS you nail the exam!
A “border” surrounds something. So, a 64 borders 63.
A “negative” impact on a candidate’s final results means that a candidate goes from a passing score based on MPS, to a failing score because of ethics adjustment.
If the above were not true, than there would be no such “negative impact”, because a failing score based on MPS, is a failing score.
Man I guess we will never know for sure what the adjustment is all about…I hear you but for argument’s sake how can 64 border 63 if MPS say is 63? You already beyond that point secondly if I read the CFAI rationale the candidates who borders the MPS, my understanding is that near the border from the ascending point of view not descending, would be given an ethics adjustment ! If he is good he pages if not the negative adjustment kicks in… I am trying the logic here no one can’t take away the fact that if one passes the MPS point no matter what the ethics score he or she got! Hope it makes it a bit clear otherwise I give up…