Hi Dibble,Just a quick aside to any newbies lurking – and I was one of those a few months ago and made exactly this mistake: There is no 'pass mark' for each individual paper in the KEVI exam, it's just a way of speaking -a very useful way- but not actually true. Scores for all papers are added together and if they reach the magic number – you're in.
In reply to your NVR questions:-
Yes I did obtain the raws scores for the 3 sections from the KE Foundation office for the tests in Nov 2004 for Sept 2005 entry.
These were a table of standardised scores, but for NVR for a child of my son's age (late Dec birthday), a pass core of 114 for this section (in this year) equated to raw score of 50 correct out of 70. (If you are interested, the corresponding scores for VR and Numerical were 64/100 and 44/82)
Thanks for those stats, it's really given me something to get my teeth into.
For NVR in 2005 it certainly seems that many candidates did have a good attempt at most of the questions. Answering half the questions wouldn't reach an average mark either, I think. Probably my sons recollection is wrong, or just maybe this year was markedly different from 2005
I don't think randomly ticking all the remaining question boxes would be particularly beneficial (we used to try this with sample papers when my son first started with 11+ practice questions)
Could it be that your practice questions were too easy, relative to KEVI exam, to show a benefit for random ticking? This is what I found anyway. If you're going to score 90percent in an exam then there's little room for improvement and even less need to worry about it.
Taking the 2005 Numerical reasoning as an example and assuming 5 options per questions. Around 2 in every 100 candidates could expect to get 24 of the required 44 marks by luck – perhaps 10 in every 100 should get 20 lucky marks - if they tick every question.
“Spend most of your time choosing and answering a quarter of the questions then guess the rest” would have been a bet worth taking for a struggling candidate - in that paper, in that year. And that's to 'pass' the paper of course. It is possible to come back from a merely average mark on one paper with good attempts at the other two.
However a good technique can help improve the probability. If you get you child to put a line through any solution they have identified as being NOT the answer - they if they can't answer the question they will have an improved chance of guessing the correct answer. This does work.
No argument there. I guess the very brightest candidates don't have to bother doing that but everyone else should. From what I can work out – and I'll be very happy if someone wants to step in and improve or ridicule my maths – though guessing between three options is a marked improvement over guessing between four, guessing between five options is not falling off the end of the probability curve.
I'm not suggesting that bulk guessing on all three papers is ever going to get you through but very good exam technique in one weak area, and a bit of luck, might just turn a disaster into something you can make up for in the other two papers - and provide a bit of hope for a bright child who's spotted that they have a weakness in one area.
Unless of course, I'm being daft, my maths is wrong or the answer to the question “could there be a clever marking scheme to reduce the advantage of bulk, blind guessing?” Is "Yes!"