anyone know what happend in 2006 that the pass rate for level 3 was 76% compared to 55% in '05 and 50% in '06…
not that it matters… just curious 
Yea I saw this last year., and here’s my unproven theory.
Look at 2004 L2’s pass rate (ultra low). CFAI decided to fail a ton of L2 people that year. Perhaps there was some aberration in the grading, or the bar was set too high in error, etc
So, those people had to retake L2 in 2005 (the pass rate skyrockets to 56%).
So in 2006, when this group took L3, maybe they decided to cut these people a break for failing too many of them back in 2004 and pass a ton of them now in 2006, Hence, L3’s 2006 pass rates were ultra high.
I don’t think there is ever an intention to pass more or pass fewer people. However the questions are initially chosen by a randomized process from CFA’s bank . That coinciding with curriculum changes may account for easier or tougher q’s in particular years.
But remember CFAI attempts to set the MPS each year to compensate for the level of difficulty. Theoretically, a highr passing score means that candidates were better prepared.
If you witness significantly higher scores: better prepared isn’t the best term to describe it.
The reason I say this is because if you change the exam format… say for 4 multiple choice to 3… then statistically, the scores by default will be boosted.
Two massive groups of people (tens of thousands of L1 candidates) only 6 months apart shouldn’t produce a massive swing in the scores. But this is exactly what happened the very first time the multple choice was reduced to 3, the pass rate shot up from like 33% prior to 46 or something around there. kinda suspicious isn’t it?
And Hank is right, CFAI does move the MPS around. But bec of the unwritten rule that they would never fail someone that scored a 70%+, the passrate will skyrocket if something fundamentally changes the exam and too many people cross that 70 mark.
THE WHOLE THING STINKS!