CII improves feedback for exam failures

re - marks etc

I applaud the ability for all candidates to now see the exact mark they received and the relevent pass mark that they needed to get in that particular sitting. What I wonder about is the ability for all candidates to get a review of their marking. Is this going to be charged ? If someone fails by 15 marks, would the CII charge them the usual remark cost - in the same way that they would charge someone who failed by say 3 marks? Or, is the wider review just to give the low scoring candidates specific feedback on how they need to improve their understanding of the sylabus / question posed. Regardless, this takes up additional time and resources.

Posted by: Anonymous

Cii exam feedback

Wow! the useless money grabbing "not for profit" organisation actually attempting to do something of use? They must be listening to the vast majority of advisers who know they are nothing but a waste of money.

Posted by: Harry

About 40 years late

If you want to improve standards it is vital to provide relevant feedback - this is so well established by research that it beggars belief that it has taken the CII so long to get around to it. In fact its previous omission is scandalous. Which also negates the comments of Anonymous - if you improve progress and learning through feedback, people pass exams more quickly - thus saving a lot of money, including the CII who would not have so many people having to repeat exams so many times. Not having feedback is not saving money - it is merely being lazy.

Posted by: Glen McKeown

A definate improvement BUT

I had been banging on about them doing this for about 4 years whilst also asking why, in todays electrnic age, they cannot scan/fax back the marked paper to the individual so they can run through their mistakes with their tutor after the exam, whether they have passed or failed sio they can fill in their knowledge gaps on ANY questions they failed to get full marks in.

Posted by: Phil Castle

Feedback etc

I honestly think that if the CII gave a sensible and constructive level of personal written feedback to circa 50% of the candidates that sit (and fail) each written paper at each sitting - you would probably find that J paper sittings would reduce back to 2 a year, or less. Far better to better prepare candidates to sit the papers in the first place. That means a study text that is written in plain english and more workable examples within each study text to support the text.

Posted by: Anonymous

CII Examinations

I would take this opportunity to reassure candidates that if they request a remark and subsequently a fail is upgraded to a pass then any remark fee is reimbursed. As regards sending back papers to candidates. This is not something that ordinarily happens with other qualifications - A level candidates don't get to see their papers for example. The CII oversees nearly 90,000 exam sittings each year so such an approach would present a significant logistical challenge. It would also incur additional cost, which would need to be met by increased entry fees. CII exams are written, marked and moderated by practitioners, mostly Chartered Financial Planners. They are paid for the work they do and this cost is borne by candidates. Introducing "a sensible and constructive level of personal written feedback to circa 50% of the candidates that sit (and fail) each written paper at each sitting" would further lengthen the marking process and incur further costs. The cost of exams and the time taken to provide results are two areas that merit strong opinionsfrom our members and consequently we do not think that it would be wish to add to either. Similarly the CII does not write the textbooks. These are written by practitioners and subject matter experts from across the advice sector. David Ross Chartered Insurance Institute

Posted by: David Ross

Not for Profit

Harry, I am concerned at your repeated negative comments about the CII, most recently your concerns about our "not for profit" status. Last year our operating surplus was around £400K and this will be reinvested for the benefit of the members; funding the development of new qualifications, alternative assessments, more detailed exam feedback and a wide and diverse variety of other iniatives and services that encourage professionalism support our membership. Given the scale of the CII - We have over 95,000 members based in 150 countries - I don't think a surplus of this size is unreasonable. If, as you clearly believe, the CII is money grabbing would you be willing you share your concerns with me? david.ross@cii.co.uk David Ross Chartered Insurance Institute

Posted by: DavidRoss