Do any markers read this forum?

[BedfordBoy]

I was very surprised to hear that increasing the number of questions from 2 to 3 has made little difference to the pass rate for module 1.

Someone please tell me the markers aren't still looking for the same level of depth for each answer as for previous years.

Since a 30 min answer has now become a 20 min answer, hopefully it only has to be 2/3 as detailed compared to previous years to get the same marks. Did someone forget to tell the markers?

Any thoughts, from markers or others?

[PJW]

I was very surprised to hear that increasing the number of questions from 2 to 3 has made little difference to the pass rate for module 1.

Someone please tell me the markers aren't still looking for the same level of depth for each answer as for previous years.

Since a 30 min answer has now become a 20 min answer, hopefully it only has to be 2/3 as detailed compared to previous years to get the same marks. Did someone forget to tell the markers?

Any thoughts, from markers or others?

We will be given the figures on Thursday and indeed I hope we will get the exam committee to comment on this very topic. However I am sure that the markers would have been acutely aware of the change; whether it is possible to do justice to a question in 2 minutes is something else- I must say that I personally have my doubts.
Having tried to judge those attempts from Brisbane group to do a previous year's mod 1 question within 20 mins in the final run up to the exam, I certainly felt that it wasn't likely to be a very satisfactory means of assessment- the answetrs were quite superficial, but understandably so.
To me this arrangement came about very last minute as a compromise between the desire to get 3 questions into the paper and the constraint of not lengthening the exam day- I have my prejudices but I certainly will be interested to find out how it was from the examiner's perspective.

[Peter]

I was very surprised to hear that increasing the number of questions from 2 to 3 has made little difference to the pass rate for module 1.

Someone please tell me the markers aren't still looking for the same level of depth for each answer as for previous years.

Since a 30 min answer has now become a 20 min answer, hopefully it only has to be 2/3 as detailed compared to previous years to get the same marks. Did someone forget to tell the markers?

Any thoughts, from markers or others?

I know that at least one marker has registered here (albeit one for a different module).

I note from jbrownhill's thoughts, he was not confident but did OK. Are you asking in the light of personal experience from results, or just commenting on the stats? It would be interesting to hear from others too with their thoughts on this matter.

[BedfordBoy]

Are you asking in the light of personal experience from results, or just commenting on the stats?

I will be attempting module 1 this year. Although I received credits in modules 2,3 & 5 I have been put off module 1 previously by the very low pass rates. The change to 3 questions had given me more confidence to tackle it, but now I'm very curious (& nervous) to know why it had minimal effect on pass rates. I subscribed to the theory that the reason for low pass rates was because with only 2 questions, a candidate couldn't afford to have a poor performance on a single question. With 3 questions this shouldn't have been an issue - as long as the markers realise each answer will only be two thirds as "good" as in previous years!

[Peter]

Are you asking in the light of personal experience from results, or just commenting on the stats?

I will be attempting module 1 this year. Although I received credits in modules 2,3 & 5 I have been put off module 1 previously by the very low pass rates. The change to 3 questions had given me more confidence to tackle it, but now I'm very curious (& nervous) to know why it had minimal effect on pass rates. I subscribed to the theory that the reason for low pass rates was because with only 2 questions, a candidate couldn't afford to have a poor performance on a single question. With 3 questions this shouldn't have been an issue - as long as the markers realise each answer will only be two thirds as "good" as in previous years!

There was a sizeable group of people who thought your way about poor show in one Q writing off your chances. With a good level of experience in a range of activities, you should have the knowledge to pass ok.

[Jerry1237]

M1 is similar to all the other papers in that if you understand the subject it is possible to shine. However, I feel that many choose the module to dip their toes or without the background knowledge to be able to suitably answer the question. Hence, poor results often follow.

It is generally obvious is someone understands the subject rather than writing blurb. My belief has always been it is a vocational exam and relevant learning and experience are the key. Some aspects of the exam are impossible to learn from a book.

An example was a mathematical PhD which was one single side of A4 (less than 20 minutes writing). Simple proof that understanding of the subject can be delivered in a simple, concise way and be the right answer!

Jerry

[BedfordBoy]

An example was a mathematical PhD which was one single side of A4 (less than 20 minutes writing). Simple proof that understanding of the subject can be delivered in a simple, concise way and be the right answer!

While I agree whole-heartedly with this, unfortunately the IRSE don't see it that way. From the 2004 exam review (Module 3 Part B):
"one side of A4 paper as an answer is unlikely to gain you very many marks".
So it's about quantity as well as quality apparently.

[PJW]

An example was a mathematical PhD which was one single side of A4 (less than 20 minutes writing). Simple proof that understanding of the subject can be delivered in a simple, concise way and be the right answer!

While I agree whole-heartedly with this, unfortunately the IRSE don't see it that way. From the 2004 exam review (Module 3 Part B):
"one side of A4 paper as an answer is unlikely to gain you very many marks".
So it's about quantity as well as quality apparently.

Certainly there must be sufficient to cover the full range of the question and therefore I agree that it is unlikely (assuming a well constructed question comparable with the others on the paper) that it could be adequately answered in less than 3 sides of typical presentation. Whereas in proving a mathmatical theorem this may be possible by a very clever and succinct method, I can't conceive that a written answer could ever be that brief [although potentially a track circuit calculation or headway calculation ma be able to benefit from very economical presentation yet still have enough detail to be obviously explicable].

Excellent quality isn't by itself sufficient unless it also covers the full scope- this isn't judged by quantity but obviously a very brief answer could never hope to be sufficiently wide ranging.

We were offered that some sample typical answers would everntually be forthcoming for a couple of the 2010 mod1 questions, so that should give a clue re what is expected within 20 minutes.

It wasn't stated if the format for mod1 will be retained for 2011; the working assumption is that it will be. Note that the IRSE Exam committee themselves would not have the authoriy to make the module 1 paper a 90 minute one; it is however possible that they could escalate to the Professional Development Committee who would be able to take such a decision. Indeed given the results of mod 1 in 2010, there is inevitably going to be a review of the reasons for the deterioration following a change designed to improve. There may actually be various other factors at work and indeed there was some useful discussion on this subject last night with varuious suggestions being put forward as worthy of investigation to try to understand what is happening and why.

Overall the view I got from the floor last night was that most felt that changing to 3 x 30 minute questions would be a sensible change, although there are concerns that it may give problems at certain exam centres and thus a range of stake-holders to persuade.

[BedfordBoy]

We were offered some sample typical answers for a couple of the 2010 mod1 questions, so that should give a clue re what is expected within 20 minutes.

I will be very interested to see those answers & also to know whether they were completed in 20 minutes, in exam conditions without prior knowledge of the questions & what mark they would have received (pass/credit/distinction)

I guess I'll keep an eye on the forum!

[Jerry1237]

The overriding points from my comments were that:
*/ people do not suitably prepare for M1;
*/ M1 is not easy!;
*/ The exam is vocational based upon experience NOT pure theoretical revision.

Examiners want quality. As pointed out, one side of A4 is unlikely to show sufficient quality. However, three pages of rambling is more probable to loose the benefit of doubt for a candidate!

Jerry

An example was a mathematical PhD which was one single side of A4 (less than 20 minutes writing). Simple proof that understanding of the subject can be delivered in a simple, concise way and be the right answer!

While I agree whole-heartedly with this, unfortunately the IRSE don't see it that way. From the 2004 exam review (Module 3 Part B):
"one side of A4 paper as an answer is unlikely to gain you very many marks".
So it's about quantity as well as quality apparently.