Exam Weights Operational vs. Pretested

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #2834271
    AJ
    Participant

    Going to take BEC in another day and was reviewing the structure etc, and realized how much more of it “doesn’t count” compared to the other ones. I always thought BEC was going to be way easy looking at the passing rates, but now I think it is more due to the setup. Did some calcs real quick, not sure if anyone else has done this and could check the math.

    . .MC. .TBS. .WC. .2019 Pass.

    BEC- (12/62)(.5) + (1/4)(.35) + (1/3)(.15) = 23.43% {60.45%}

    AUD- (.5)[(12/72)+(1/8)] = 14.583% {52.06%}

    FAR- (.5)[(12/66)+(1/8)] = 15.341% {48.30%}

    REG- (.5)[(12/76)+(1/8)] = 14.145% {56.51%}

    Without taking the size, length of time, or different lvls of effort that can vary for each MC or TBS into account (since unknown anyways), the difference between BEC and AUD 2019 avg pass rates and pretested amounts is almost the same. FAR is always the hardest, and REG doesn’t help prove this theory at all, unless Qtr. 4 results are terrible.

    Anyways, just super bored after studying all day. Haven’t really looked at this for previous years either.

Viewing 2 replies - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #2836212
    Recked
    Participant

    Put this same effort into your BEC studies and you'll be fine.
    Love the quote!

    #2837652
    coffees56
    Participant

    Just curious, why are you multiplying by .5 in the first part of the calculation?

    Edit: NVM I get it. It's because each section is 50%.

Viewing 2 replies - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • The topic ‘Exam Weights Operational vs. Pretested’ is closed to new replies.