Passing SE scores

[ADB]

Just wanted to see if anyone else has heard something similar to this:

multiple choice portion - somewhere around 60% is passing adjusting up or down for the statistical process

essay portion - graded on a 0/2/4/6/8/10 basis, 6 is considered minimum competence

The key is that you have to pass BOTH portions individually, not as an average...

 

[McEngr]

Seems reasonable to me, but I feel I'm in a lot of guys shoes - feel that they got at least 6 out of 10. I personally think 6 out of 10 would guarantee me a passing grade. Hopefully you're right.

 

[Layman]

I did not perform as well as I expected last month on my bridge lateral. I skipped masonry completely during preparation and was aiming at 70% correct. You guys really increased my hope of passing the component.

Layman

 

[jessie74]

I feel the passing score for SE should be 7/10. PE is 6/10 and FE is 5/10.

 

[Layman]

I feel the passing score for SE should be 7/10. PE is 6/10 and FE is 5/10.

and college is 4/10

I personally feel a bit worried if an engineer with 5/10 FE passing score designs anything for me.

Layman

 

[McEngr]

http://www.ncees.org/About_NCEES/News/News_Pages/Update_on_April_2012_exam_scores.php

It looks like we are still having to wait the usual timeframe. I find it unusual that the exam workshop (held June 7-9) is held so late. It appears that the SE scoring is based off of the performance of randomly selected, yet highly qualified, SE's that then determine minimum competency. This is just a little speculation on my part, but most likely true.

 

[dakota_79]

The key is that you have to pass BOTH portions individually, not as an average...

I don't believe that's correct. From NCEES:

" ...the candidate’s combined performance on both sections (morning/afternoon) must demonstrate minimum competency"

http://www.ncees.org/Exams/SE_exam.php

That's what I'm banking on! Feeling good I nailed the mornings, but flopped around a bit on the afternoons.

 

[dakota_79]

PS - good find on that update McEngr. At least it's an answer, and we can probably narrow down the dates to start looking. Also, look on the bright side: we could be in these poor guys' boats:

http://engineerboards.com/index.php?showtopic=18906

Yikes!!

 

[bmc846]

Here is a link to a previous discussion from last October about exam results. Based on this it seemed that the morning and afternoon were seperate in that one unacceptable is a definite fail (guess it could drag you down enough to push the overall below the minimum). I'm still not sure on how a needs improvement impacts overall day scores. I felt better about lateral than vertical in October but passed vertical and not lateral.

http://engineerboards.com/index.php?showtopic=17875

 

[daedalus34r]

The key is that you have to pass BOTH portions individually, not as an average...

I don't believe that's correct. From NCEES:

" ...the candidate’s combined performance on both sections (morning/afternoon) must demonstrate minimum competency"

http://www.ncees.org/Exams/SE_exam.php

That's what I'm banking on! Feeling good I nailed the mornings, but flopped around a bit on the afternoons.

The combined statement is a tad vague, all it says is that it takes both scores for evaluation. Personally I feel test takers should have to pass both am/pm individually, otherwise the SE license loses its meaning.

 

[jessie74]

the statement listed on the NCEES's website:

...the candidate’s combined performance on both sections (morning/afternoon) must demonstrate minimum competency"

is very misleading. I think you have to pass both morning and afternoon sections, and for the afternoon section, you cannot get any "unacceptable". Not clear about "improvement needed", I guess you can only get 1 at most: say if you get 2 "improvement needed", you still fail....

 

[yoduh9]

I will use myself as an example for you. I took the new exam in October 2011. I passed the first day but not the second day. My score breakdown for day 2 was 32/40 correct in the morning session, 1 acceptable in the afternoon and 2 improvement needed in the afternoon. That resulted in a fail for Day 2.

 

[Layman]

I will use myself as an example for you. I took the new exam in October 2011. I passed the first day but not the second day. My score breakdown for day 2 was 32/40 correct in the morning session, 1 acceptable in the afternoon and 2 improvement needed in the afternoon. That resulted in a fail for Day 2.

So you took the bridge module. Is the acceptable the 20-point problem or 10-point?

 

[yoduh9]

Yes, it was the bridge module. I believe it was one of the "10-point" problems, but I cannot recall.

 

[McEngr]

Yoduh9, only you can be the judge of your own performance. Did the results surprise you? Thanks.

 

[yoduh9]

The results did suprise me a bit. During that exam, the problem I had was that I think for the 2 problems I got "Improvement Needed" I may have incorrectly answered the first part of the 5-part questions but I feel the remaining 4 parts were done accurately. I was always under the impression that the grader should take that into consideration and grade on theory and design, regardless if a math error was done and carried through. Oh well, personnally I am not the biggest fan of the exam because I don't feel it is a good judge of what an engineer is capable of, but being in Illinois it is a requirement. Best of luck to everyone who has taken the exam and those preparing now.

 

[Layman]

Since the first administration of 16 hr SE in April 2011, many examinees posted in this forum their detailed results of failed components. I read all of them and have the following observation for your evaluations:

There is no failed component result that has a 24/40 or better morning score AND a 3-acceptables-1-Need-Improvement or better afternoon score.

In other words, every failed compent includes a 23/40 or worse morning AND/OR an afternoon worse than 3-acceptables-1-Need-Improvement.

Layman

 

[jessie74]

Since the first administration of 16 hr SE in April 2011, many examinees posted in this forum their detailed results of failed components. I read all of them and have the following observation for your evaluations:

There is no failed component result that has a 24/40 or better morning score AND a 3-acceptables-1-Need-Improvement or better afternoon score.

In other words, every failed compent includes a 23/40 or worse morning AND/OR an afternoon worse than 3-acceptables-1-Need-Improvement.

Layman

I think you are right, my another concern is: how much difference between "Need improvement" and "Acceptable"? Any guess?

 

[Layman]

Since the first administration of 16 hr SE in April 2011, many examinees posted in this forum their detailed results of failed components. I read all of them and have the following observation for your evaluations:

There is no failed component result that has a 24/40 or better morning score AND a 3-acceptables-1-Need-Improvement or better afternoon score.

In other words, every failed compent includes a 23/40 or worse morning AND/OR an afternoon worse than 3-acceptables-1-Need-Improvement.

Layman

I think you are right, my another concern is: how much difference between "Need improvement" and "Acceptable"? Any guess?

I agree with ADB that 6/10 and better means an acceptable, a conclusion that is also consistent my personal impression. If an unacceptable means no valuable engineering understanding offered, then Need improveemnt is something between these two.

 

[ADB]

I agree McEngr that the test taker should know how well/poorly they did. But the secrecy of the whole exam process makes the pass/fail line really murky. I wish the whole process had more transparency and accountability, but that will never happen.