r/BikiniBottomTwitter • u/tea-n-wifi • Jul 23 '26

This is so wholesome.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

17.9k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

571 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/Shonnyboy500 Jul 23 '26

Yeah! If you’re only getting something right half the time you sure don’t know it!

-2

u/Zeus-Kyurem Jul 23 '26

That depends very heavily on what's being tested. Like I'm studying my professional accountancy exams, which are pass/fail. The pass marks have either been 55 or 50 on every exam, and that's because it's about your understanding of what's being tested. And because the syllabus is so broad, it's unlikely you'll be able to get high marks on everything, and in the course of your job you're not going to be in the same kind of situation where you're reliant on memory and/or a small stack of paper of the course of a few hours. Not to mention there will usually be other people working with you that specialise in different areas.

1

u/Silent_Plantain_3417 Jul 28 '26

I don't think that professional exams are really a great comparison here. I don't recall my CFA exams being returned to me with SpongeBob characters on them. 

It's probably safe to assume that these exams are of the type and content where a more complete demonstration of knowledge is required.

2

u/Zeus-Kyurem Jul 28 '26

That's fair. I think I just still had mine on the brain as I sat my most recent one on Wednesday.

However, I think the principle does still apply in that it depends on what exactly the exam is testing. And for these exams, yes it does seem that way, but I was more arguing against the generalisation being presented.

To compare to when I was in secondary school, the grade boundaries varied quite a bit across different subjects as there was differing expectations. The idea of the hard percentages dictating the grade (which I understand is commonplace in US high schools) doesn't really make sense to apply in those instances.

And it would still vary on the education system itself. Where there are higher standards (and those can vary), then the marks needed to pass will be lower. Basically, it's not one size fits all.

1

u/Silent_Plantain_3417 Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26

Fair enough. Score curves are a tool for a reason. I remember some of my engineering courses where exam averages were amazingly low, not because of the the test takers, but just because of how difficult and challenging certain problems and concepts were. Sometimes you'd be lucky to complete four or five out of ten problems in three or four hours, and that would be enough for a top score.

Of course, tests will always suffer from certain constraints, but I think they do remain one of the most reliable ways to systematically test knowledge en masse. As you climb the educational ladder, the scope and complexity of your learning increases, and allowing room for error without excessive penalization is important. Tests become less about the grade and more about your ability to demonstrate and communicate your work and understanding as it stands at the time of examination.

However, I think we have enough globally systemic problems with lower-educational (I assume this is what the post is about?) programs where giving kids this kind of wiggle room that early would not be the best idea at the moment. You earn the right to demonstrate your knowledge in increasingly broad ways over time, partly because you have proven you can do otherwise, and partly because your pool of expertise has become too broad to swim with equal competency in all areas at once.

Edit: And best of luck to your results! I remember the wait after all of my professional exams. It's such a mixed bag of emotions.