The concern now is that this will lead to an increase in the passing score
Thread Content
Everyone should now be clear about the situation: after the exam, it seems that everyone was worried, but once the scores were released, everyone was overjoyed; some even showed off their scores to attract attention. Those that were **not written or not written in the designated place passed successfully, but I remember that in previous years there were people who had to take the exam again because of this. Were there any others who achieved a perfect score or a score very close to perfect? This year I scored 65+65+32+36, which is average – after all, I only studied for one week. Still, I was quite surprised to get 130 points on the first day; that’s 20–30 points less than what I had expected. There are a few questions: 1. After the exam, everyone was very anxious; when the results came in, most of those who scored high passed. 2. Those that were **not written or not written in the designated place passed successfully. 3. In previous years, someone would come out to leak information, but not this year; suddenly the scores could be checked. 4. For those who take the exam with 30 questions in the morning and 50 in the afternoon, in previous years the morning session covered transport phenomena, thermodynamics, and heat transfer, while the afternoon session focused on mass transfer; this year, however, these topics are mixed together. I don’t believe that there could be such a big difference between the morning and afternoon sessions. There are still scores in the 90s and 100s; I still can’t believe it. How hard did you work? Did you practice problems for a whole year? Won’t you work and earn money anymore? Those who took the exam this year can recall that although there were easy questions, especially in the afternoon, many of the questions required considerable calculation, right? It’s hard to guarantee that everything will be correct in such a short time; there’s a possibility the questions are wrong – how lucky would one have to be? ! Some people say that you only studied for 1 week before scoring 68 – why can’t others reach a score of over 90 in 3 or 4 months? Well, when I took the postgraduate entrance exams back then, I got full marks in Organic Chemistry; I scored 96 points in Physical Chemistry, Chemical Engineering, and Thermodynamics. It’s not that I didn’t try hard on those exams – it’s just that I used to find them extremely difficult. 5. Before the exam, I would occasionally check the forum, mainly to look at various questions and past exam papers. I got many questions wrong on those papers, and the questions were mostly of a basic nature. 6. Registration does not reflect one’s actual skill level. Given the national conditions, if someone has something that you don’t have, then you have to leave; if everyone has what you have, then it’s as if no one has it at all. So.......... The conclusion is: there was no manual marking of papers in 2016. Of course, this is just a personal guess, but there is concern that the passing score might increase as a result. Although this certificate isn’t worth much money, it still has some practical use. I also hope what I’m saying is just a rumor; it would be best if someone who was involved in grading the papers or someone from the relevant department could come forward and explain things.
I have the same question regarding the case. I remember very clearly that during the exam, there were four questions in the morning and four in the afternoon for which I didn’t write out the steps, and even for the questions for which I did write steps, my accuracy rate couldn’t have been 100%. After taking the exam and going through the forum discussions, I was confident about around 34 questions only. But in the end, my case result was 42+40. I don’t understand.
Do you feel it’s a waste to score high and only feel satisfied if you just manage to pass on the edge?
That’s not what I meant. I just think there’s some truth to what the original poster said about there being no manual marking in 2016. Regarding the cut-off scores, I personally think that since the exams were not held in 2015, it’s understandable if the scores weren’t lowered in 2016; but it makes no sense to raise them!
Could it be that they didn’t hold an exam last year, so they’re being lenient this year?
Whether the passing score is raised or not, I will still fail. . . .
Insider information has already been disclosed: pass the computer-based test ----- undergo manual review ----- if approved, the results of the computer-based test will be issued. It is unlikely that the authorities in charge of survey and design work would handle things in such a perfunctory manner. Anyway, this year’s questions were indeed a bit simpler
Those whose achievements are displayed are all those who did well on the exam. There are thousands of people taking this exam across the country, and these few are just the tip of the iceberg; the majority still fail the exam. Don’t be misled by these posts.
Personally, I think it’s based on the answer sheet; many people are frustrated. The reason for not using manual marking is that a year passes in between, and if marking were done manually, things would probably go terribly wrong
You just filled in your answer sheet; many of my classmates were stuck on lots of questions, yet they still passed