CLARB LARE Scoring

[nca]

Anyone else think it is ridiculous that it takes 4-6 weeks for CLARB to score a completely digital exam? Stupid.

[Tosh K]

I’d assume it’s scored upfront by number of correct answers – they may be looking at the pass/fail line based on the scores?  The questions are different each time around and I would think CLARB would want to review the results before releasing pass/fail rates.  I’ve been told in the paper-test days they used to lay out the scores and see if there was an evident ‘gap’ to use as a cut line.

Bouncing around the country reviewing scores would take time…

[Peter Sanderson]

It is annoying that it takes so long.  The reason they do it is so they can evaluate “bad” questions.  For example, for a particular question, if 45% of people choose answer “A” and 45% choose “D”, the question is generally deemed to be poorly worded and the question is thrown out.  They then have to adjust the scores nationally.  Also, as Tosh said, I think they are looking at the pass/fail line which is why no one can tell you precisely how many questions you need to get right in order to pass a section.

That being said, I wish they would tell you your preliminary score (pass/fail/or too close to call) immediately upon completing the exam.  If you got 95% correct, it can be assumed that regardless of the curve, you have passed regardless of how the pass fail line falls (the opposite can be said if you only get 50%).  They could then still do their adjustments and give you an official score later.  Just my 2 cents.

[Jason T. Radice]

Question: Is the test still pass/fail (with degrees of passitude), or with the multiple choice, do they give you an actual percentage?

Pass anxiety isn’t fun with these things, and the worst one for me was actually sitting at the terminal at Prometric waiting for the score to tabulate on the LEED-AP exam. At least with the LARE, you have some decompression time and your results show up whenever. I was actually grateful for the delayed gratification and it couldn’t have showed up at a better time for me.

[Peter Sanderson]

The test is pass/fail only.  If you fail they identify areas you need to work on, but I think they are pretty general like “construction contracts” as your area of weakness.  After taking a LARE prep course, I’m under the impression that the passing percentage is somewhere around 85%.  Depending on the section, I know you need to get at least a certain number of each problem type correct (particularly with section 3 & 4).  Again, they never actually tell you what you need to pass or how you did on the exam beyond pass/fail.

I haven’t taken the LEED-AP exam, but with the GRE the preliminary score was instant and I liked that aspect of it.

[Angela Woodward]

The long wait time for the test results is a good thing which benefits the candidate. As the questions differ somewhat on each exam, CLARB’s testing guru’s examine the difficulty of the questions, the response patterns and ability of the candidates to answer the questions This time period is for CLARB’s experts to ensure the test questions and answers are correct, fair and accurately address the knowledge and tasks being tested.

Previous Non-digital LARE graphics sections would take double the time and then some to grade the exams.  Practicing professionals graded the non-digital exams. As you know there is room for interpretation with humans.

[Lauren E. L. Marshall]

Hi Peter- what prep course did you take?  I studied for my last section on my own, and it was painful.  I am in the “still waiting on results’ boat on that one and am feeling the 4-6 week pain…

[Ben Holmes]

Is there any part of the licensure process that is not ridiculous and stupid?

[Tosh K]

They’re all set up to gain public trust and ensure some level of consistent ‘minimal knowledge’ across the board.  This is true for all professions (law/medicine/engineering/architecture). 

The LARE process is, in my opinion, easy – in comparison to other related fields.  The tests are straight forward (esp compared to the PE) and as is record of experience (in comparison to IDP for building architects).

[ERB]

CLARB has a list of their pass/fail rates for the last couple of sessions up.

https://www.clarb.org/Candidates/Pages/PassRates.aspx

[Wyatt Thompson, PLA]

Wow. Comparing those scores to the previous format, it appears the new version is (dare I say it?) easier. It seems that candidates are figuring out how to maneuver through section 4, though even the first time test takers scored better on 4 than people did routinely on section E. It would be interesting to hear CLARB’s opinion on the increasing pass rates.

[Tosh K]

Sorry you feel that I’m misinformed.

I took the exam 2 years ago (ABCDE format, though 1=A and 2=B), passed w/o any problems in the process or exams – maybe CT has gotten it smoothed out.  Having seen the changes coming I did my research (spoke with CLARB and atate ASLA board members and co-workers for advice on whether to wait or plow through; took some courses, etc) and chose to take it before the 3&4 section changes took effect.  Most of my peers are going through this now, so I will be curious to see how they do.

Lack of feedback is a concern, and it should be easy enough for CLARB to pursue, granted that they have the resources (which they may not yet have).

From Wyatt’s statement above the pass rates are higher on the new 4 than the old E?

I’ve known more people to have problems with the PE than the LARE, hence my statement.  I don’t intend on taking it, but did take the FE where the questions were much more difficult to maneuver than the LARE. 

[brian matthew walker]

Is the new test perceived as being easier, or harder? Im not sure if there is a “fair” way to answer this. Unless someone took the old test and immediately took the second and then compared the results to see if they were extreme enough to draw a comparison. I have however heard that the computerization of the new test has practically ruled out a lot of the mistakes that people made in the past (drafting error, and calculation) personally not taken either I was only worried about the grading portion and now I don’t seem so worried about it. Has anyone recently taken it that can give me some pointers, or what to expect?

[nca]

For the record I thought section 3 was quite easy and based more in reading comprehension than actual design skill, but Ive been doing commercial and public site design for several years now on a daily basis.The new format provides zero feedback–its pass/fail, though there are a lot of weird questions. I made sure to add notes to questions I thought were strange as I was taking the exam with the hope that the ‘reviewer’ may take thos notes into consideration when scoring.

My arch friends have it much harder in my opinion with the ARE format (and they remind me on a regular basis, especially their prowess in site design and grading). 

[Brad Alexander]

All,

I recently sat for section 3 on the first day offered. This means I am enduring a 7-9 week wait period. I check the scores multiple times daily. I have a high level of confidence in my performance; however, it is still hard to wait this long for results.

I sat for 4 separate tests for the Certified Irrigation Designer tests by the Irrigation Association. Very similar test formats with all electronic questions. The results were instant. I was able to take all 4 sections of 100+ questions in less than a year. While I do not request an immediate result, I do think the wait time was initiated for the original vignette style tests and never got updated. The time it gives you to begin preparing for the next section are concerning.

(Just my vent)

[Author]

Posts