How is this fair?

Attila_the_Bun

As above. In fact, it always used to be the case even with O levels and A levels. There'd be a bell curve and the average (C) grade would vary each year according to the average marks gained by the pupils in that particular year.

Same principle in the job you're applying for. You have to be in the top 10 (for example) in order to get an interview.

Mind you, not sure what they do if everyone scores 100%! Guess that's not very likely.

getmore4less

But they are changing the pass mark every time. How am I supposed to pass if they keep moving the goalposts especially if I don't know where they are? It doesn't make any logical sense. The questions and the answers are the same every time

you need to be getting a higher score, fix the ones you are getting wrong.

If they are the same every time you should be at 100% correct by now.

sangie595

How is it fair that 200 people apply for a job and only a few get interviews? This is life. There will be some sort of test applied, and the best at passing that test are selected. Nothing unfair in that.


And the questions asked are actually very pertinent to a recruitment process, so I am wondering why you can't see why they would be relevant. Perhaps you don't know as much about what they are looking for as you think? You say the questions and answers are the same every time you apply, and you have applied more than once. But you still don't understand what the correct answers are and why, or what they are testing? Because if you did you should have 100% correct answers.


BTW - this "arbitrary pass mark" system is commonplace - it applies to most tests, including the vast majority of educational qualifications.

agrinnall

ohreally wrote: »

Score a higher mark, job done.

Exactly this. If you're getting 20/20 and still not getting an interview that's the time to raise concerns about the process (it might still be fair, but would have to be based on some criteria other than the test score).

TBagpuss

As others have said, it's not a pass/fail test. It's a method of identifying the highest scoring candidates to produce a pool of people to interview.

It's the same as if you were looking at people's educational qualifications. Suppose I have a job opening which requires a specific degree.

If I get 10 applicants, of whom 1 hs a 1st class degree, 2 have 2:1s, 3 have 2:2s and 4 have 3rd, I might decide to progress 6 people to interview, and therefore all those with 2:1 and 2:2s would get through.

If I get 10 applicants, of whom 2 have 1st, 4 have 2:1s , 3 have 2:2s and 1 has a 3rd, I am probably going to interview the ones with 1sts and 2:1s.

The candidates with 2:2s are no better or worse than they were with the first application, but this time they don't get through, because they are not as strong *in comparison to the specific group of individuals they are competing against*

Pennywise

Basically, it's competition. The qualifications/ability/experience of applicants will vary every time a job comes up. Say you got a clutch of "B" grades at O/A level. Some times, other applicants will have Bs and below, so you'll be higher up the list. Other times, other applicants will have A's so you'll be lower down the list. Nothing unfair about it.

mac.d

While I agree with most of the comments, suggestions that the OP gets more questions right, fix the ones they are getting wrong, and why aren't you getting 100%, isn't any help. These tests aren't right or wrong answers, and the OP won't get any feedback on what ones weren't answered well.

engineer_amy

sangie595 wrote: »

BTW - this "arbitrary pass mark" system is commonplace - it applies to most tests, including the vast majority of educational qualifications.

Very true - when we did our GCSEs in 2001, we were shown the grade boundaries for the previous year. To get an A* in the science paper, students had to get 90 or more. This was based on the top (say) 5% of all entries for that paper. Then we sat the exam and people were aiming for 90. Whether the paper was easier the year we did it or the students were smarter, when they released the marks, the grade boundary for an A* was now 94 or more as there were more students achieving higher marks. Plenty of people were saying its not fair, but it was untrue - the exam boards were still applying the same criteria -the top 5% of all entries.


Employers have no legal requirement to be fair, only to not discriminate on protected characteristics. They can apply whatever selection criteria they want in order to get the candidate pool down to a manageable size, including instantly rejecting CVs typed in a Times New Roman font should they so wish.

sangie595

mac.d wrote: »

While I agree with most of the comments, suggestions that the OP gets more questions right, fix the ones they are getting wrong, and why aren't you getting 100%, isn't any help. These tests aren't right or wrong answers, and the OP won't get any feedback on what ones weren't answered well.

Actually, yes there are right answers - otherwise there wouldn't be any point whatsoever in applying the test! You are not understanding why such tests are administered. Personally, I don't "believe" in them, in that anyone who understands the system can also fix the results. But psychometric testing had been around for a long time now, and the questions are a dead give away. The employer will be looking for specific characteristics that they think they want - like someone who can operate as part of a team and also work on their own initiative. These characteristics are usually included somewhere in the job spec. The test is attempting to determine which candidates best fit that profile. So there are definitely right answers! There might not be wrong ones, but there are definitely right ones - as far as each employer is concerned.

Many, many years ago I bet an HR bod that I could pass the test with flying colours for any range of jobs they cared to choose. They said that was impossible. But I did it! I don't think it's even hard to do if you have the right skills. You just need to look at what the employer wants, then use basic analytical skills to determine the answers that speak to those characteristics. The ability to speed read is also handy - often these tests are time limited. Voila! The "right" answers!

Samsung_Note2

GrandiaKnight wrote: »

So I recently was turned down for a job as a Court Usher with HCMTS. This is a role I have experience in so I am applying for any similar jobs in my local area. However I am almost always being turned down for them so I decided to see if I could try and get some feedback on my applications. After a bit of research I was told that the reason I didn't succeed was that I failed the online test portion of my application. However this didn't make a lot of sense to me as I had given the same answers in previous applications from which I had gotten interviews so I must have passed the online test.

So I queried this and this is what I was told

"The pass mark, and subsequent progression to interview, varies and is determined by the number of applicants, their marks on the online test, and the number of posts/interviews available. For example, there may be 50 applicants but only one post available and ten candidates are to be interviewed. The pass mark would be set to include the top ten scoring applicants. If there were only, say, six applicants, the pass mark may be set to progress all six to interview"

So basically what they are saying is that my success in getting an interview is based on some arbitrary pass mark. It has nothing to do with my experience or qualifications which is what it should be based on. It is purely based on some random number developed by some formula they have. How is that fair? How is that getting you the best candidate? All it means is that you can pass a multiple choice test whose questions have nothing to do with the job itself.

Your focused on the online test part of the process..are you sure its that is the issue.

Maybe your CV needs some work or your cover letter etc...as others have said if your not hitting 100% on the tests that you have done before,maybe your missing something really obvious.

Id get a friend to look over your CV and give some honest feedback..they might find things that are not great,that you haven't noticed.

In some industries its amazing how small and well connected they can be,maybe your name has popped up for the wrong reasons.