The pass rate for Paper 1 held on 21st February 2004
was 38.62%, which is the highest to date. Following the
examination and the release of exam results to
candidates, the HKSI has performed a limited analysis of
the examination results. Set out below are some broad
conclusions that may be drawn from our most recent exam
results analysis.
Examination Results
Figure 1 summarises the distribution of the exam
results. It shows that a majority of candidates only
marginally failed the exam as was the case for LE Paper
1 in January 2004.
Figure 1. Exam results distribution for Paper 1 - Feb
2004
Highlights of the Month
Looking further at our analysis of the exam results,
we would like to point out three areas which may be of
interest to candidates.
1. Topical Correctness
Figure 2 shows the overall topical correctness
achieved in the examination, i.e. how well candidates
have performed in each topic. Compared with the January
2004 exam results, improvements can be seen in most of
the 9 topics.
As indicated below, while candidates performed
particularly well in Topic 2 (Principles of Relevant
Hong Kong Law and the Companies Ordinance), candidates
are advised to spend more time revising for questions
relating to Topic 7 (Securities, Options and Futures).
It should be noted that candidates were given the same
advice in relation to Topic 7 in our previous analysis
of the January 2004 exam results.
The score system of topical correctness provides a
performance score for each topic, ranging from
0 to 1. When all questions relating to the same topic are
answered correctly by all candidates, the
topical correctness score will be 1. Conversely, if all
questions relating to the same topic are
answered incorrectly by all candidates, the topical
correctness score will be 0.
Figure 2. Topical correctness for Paper 1 - Feb 2004
2. Well Performed and Poorly Performed Subjects
Our analysis indicates that candidates performed well
in a number of subject areas:
• Powers of the
SFC;
• Knowledge of risk management;
• Fundamental concepts of contract
law; and
• Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance..
On the other hand, candidates performed less well in
the subject areas of:
• Code of Conduct
for Persons Licensed by or Registered with the SFC; and
• Important terms specifically
defined in the SFO.
In particular, candidates performed poorly in the
subject areas relating to:
• Listing Rules of
the SEHK; and
• Familiarity with various
sub-legislation, in particular the Securities and
Futures (Keeping of Records) Rules
and the Securities and Futures (Insurance) Rules.
We would advise candidates to focus on the above two
subject areas in particular when preparing for the
examination which are discussed in section 5 of Topic 4,
section 8 of Topic 6 and section 2 of Topic 8 of the
Study Manual for Paper 1.
Comparing the February 2004 exam results with the
January 2004 exam results, it can also be seen that
candidates continue to have difficulties in the subject
areas relating to Important terms specifically defined
in the SFO and Familiarity with various sub-legislation
(as indicated above). We would recommend that candidates
give special attention to these two subject areas.
Important terms specifically defined in the SFO are
discussed throughout the Study Manual, particularly in
Topic 4, Topic 7 and Topic 8.
3. Types of MCQ and performance of candidates
As explained in the
"Guidelines for LE Preparation", there are two types
of multiple-choice question (MCQ) in the LE:
• Type 1 -
"simple" MCQs and
• Type 2 - "complex" MCQs.
It is generally perceived that Type 2 (complex) MCQs
are more difficult than Type 1 (simple) MCQs. However,
as shown in figure 3, our analysis of the February 2004
exam results shows that the average correctness rates of
the two types of MCQ are very similar. Thus, the
perceived correlation between the performance of
candidates on individual questions and the type of MCQ
does not appear valid. In fact, the question with the
highest correctness rate in Paper 1 in February 2004 is
a Type 2 (complex) MCQ and one of the questions with
lowest correctness rate is a Type 1 (simple) MCQ.
Figure 3. Average correctness
of simple and complex MCQs for Paper 1 - Feb 2004
Candidates should take note that the only difference
between a Type 1 and a Type 2 MCQ is the structure of
the question. The terms "simple" and "complex" have no
direct bearing on the level of difficulty of the
question.
Comment
We continue to emphasize the advice given in the "Guidelines for LE
Preparation".
"It should be highlighted that the examination covers
all topics stated in the syllabus. A guesswork approach,
however intelligently applied, cannot be relied on by
candidates, especially for regulatory papers, which
require a rigorous approach to study."
