The exam held on 26 March, which had been delayed from 15 February in order to implement the changes, was the first to see the removal of short answer questions from the exam, leaving only multiple choice questions. The requirement that only provisional relevant providers and existing advisers could sit the exam was also removed.
The changes followed a brief Treasury consultation on draft legislation at the end of 2023 which the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) then confirmed it would be implementing in January.
It was hoped that multiple choice questions would be more efficient by enabling computer marking to replace manual marking which would reduce the cost of administering the exam and improve response times for candidates to receive their results.
Some 298 people sat the exam and 70 per cent of these (210 candidates) passed the exam. The majority of the candidates at 230 were sitting the exam for the first time, ASIC said.
This pass mark was up slightly from 66 per cent in the November exam but below the highest pass mark in 2023 which was 73 per cent of candidates who sat the exam in August.
The results were issued exactly a month after sitting the exam.
Unsuccessful candidates will receive general feedback from the Australian Council for Educational Research on the areas they underperformed.
To date, 21,102 individual candidates have sat the exam and 92 per cent of them have passed, demonstrating their knowledge in advice construction, ethics and legal requirements.
I sat the exam in March. I passed. Whilst it was very ambiguous I didn’t find it challenging. I completed it in an hour. Although I just came off doing the Grad Dip so it was the perfect run up in preparation.
I passed the exam. I thought it was terrible. The person who wrote the exam questions is definitely all about theory. In practice it is not how financial planning works. This will do nothing to stop scams or fraud.
why oh why? ASIC should stay right away from education. No other Industry on the planet has a regulator supervising examinations. This is how far this Industry has fallen, all due to a Govt. with way too much power and holding the upper hand.
I did my test and failed, paid $190 for review, passed.
How many people didn’t pay to get a review and got screwed?
Does it mean everyone is now so ethical and there will not be any unethical behaviours in future?
I DOUBT IT!
Hi,
Did you ask for the review today? If so, they were quick on the re-test.
In my feedback, it stated “re-mark of the written response questions is not warranted. Should the written
response questions be re-marked your total score would not reach the minimum required to achieve a pass”
which appears not up to date as we didn’t have any written questions.
Cheers.
I am only referring to the Fasea exam of around 2020, I failed and left the industry after 27 yrs, still gutted really.
I am happy for you. A little perplexed as the exam was multi choice. Did the remark simply identify that the addition of correct answers was erroneous or are the questions that ambiguous that there are two correct answers for some questions. I sat the very first FASEA exam back I think in 2018 and also failed, then applied for remark and thankfully passed. This exam did however have short answer questions.
More than likely, the questions are still the same: “want is the most correct answer” and have not helped candidates. I have sat for around 100 exams at University and other institutions. The FASEA exam is very unfair; the answers are ambiguous, and the pass mark changes at each setting. The pass should be 50%, like any other exam. I passed the exam for the previous short answer questions.
how did you know you passed..? see my comment re 2020
Interesting as they have definetley not released them to the candidates
Not sure why it was appropriate for the overall results to be released to the press at least an hour before candidates received their results.
Is this the same FASEA 3hr exam I did in say 2020…? Id really like to know my score, all I got was an F no explanations or comments.