FASEA releases inaugural exam results

The Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA) has released its June exam results, from the inaugural financial advisers exam, with 90 per cent of candidates passing the exam.

The exam was subject to the Australian Council for Education Research’s (ACER’s) marking approach, and had been marked to credit standard. The pass rate would vary with each exam.

Stephen Glenfield, FASEA chief executive officer, said FASEA was pleased with how the first exam was implemented and congratulated successful candidates.

Related News:

“Unsuccessful candidates are able to resit the exam and these advisers will receive guidance on which knowledge areas they need to improve to enhance their ability to pass at a future sitting,” Glenfield said.

The exam had been held in nine centres across the country from 20-24 June, and 579 advisers had sat the exam.

Registrations for the 2019 exam sittings on September 15 and December 18 were still open, with 1000 currently enrolled.




Recommended for you

Author

Comments

Comments

Let me guess, Hedware will start complaining that the pass rate is too high and isn't representative of the standard the industry should set.

Maybe 90% is genuine. Maybe the exam was too easy. There’s plenty of others questioning the 90% result.

But if 90% is genuine, the what was all the fuss about.

Maybe 90% of the advisers who sat for the first exam work for Industry Super Funds.

I take it the 10% who failed were the ones who didn't show up for the exam.

90% of Advisers above the Credit average, surprise surprise- FASEA makes first Exam a success!
I wonder what sort of scaling was done to achieve these results......

Its a no brainer they would be wanting a high pass rate for the first exam.It would be interesting to see an independent review would uncover any manipulation of the pass rate.

What was the pass mark? They indicated 65%+, but I know two advisers who scored in the low 60s and passed. Why all the secrecy? Sounds like they have manipulated the pass mark to suit themselves.

How do the 2 advisers you refer to know their marks? The statement either had a Pass or Fail and no marks.

That's true now, but yesterday there was a result. It was called 'Score Full Test'. I took a photo of it. It was on the screen just above the PDF link. FASEA or ACER obviously stuffed up and they have now deleted it. Weird. It raises a serious question though. Have they dumped the original plan to test three separate modules and mark them separately? The words 'full test' seem to imply it is now being graded on one overall test result.

I am in the unlucky 10%. I would like to know my result, did I fail by 1 or 2 marks, do I get this remarked ?? I would like a copy of my exam paper so I can learn from my mistakes so I pass in December. Otherwise, I am going to be second guessing my multiple choices answers if questions are similar to June paper. Very disappointed, I never fail exams !

Bad luck - can I ask did you do a lot of preparation? I'm just interested how much time people think need to put in prior - I haven't done mine. Did you think it was hard when doing it?

FASEA released a grade with the results, against their earlier guidance. They call it a 'score Full Test'. What does this mean? Is it a percentage or a raw mark? If it is a raw mark, what was the maximum?

Mysteriously the scores have disappeared. Looks like it was a mistake. What is going on with FASEA?

if 90% passed it's too easy. the pass rate should be no more than 35%. pass rates should be managed. just like some of the other professional bodies do so as to appear to be difficult exams (when they really aren't) to influence perception of the difficulty, to increase their "fake prestige"

i mean the vast majority of sheeple still believe the crap

i mean the objective is to raise revenue isn't it?

Add new comment