[quote=ShortNakedPuts]

I got a 88% without trying. 

[/quote]

That's a lie too.  To not try would suggest you just walked in there and sat down and took the test, having never opened a book or taken a sample test.

What drives so many people to suggest that they're jack off slackers?

[quote=Big Easy Flood]The passing score should be raised to 85 or 90 and a college degree in something should be required.[/quote]

As a person who meets both of those requirements, I'm all for it...

Seriously, there is some wisdom to that, and I think Put makes a good argument here (I can't believe I'm defending your bud, Joe).  My guess is that most successful producers, whether they actually DID or not, at least COULD meet those standards.  Perhaps an apprentice program would better prepare those young struggling candidates for the test, and to manage real portfolios.  Honestly, with some of the dim bulbs I've "competed" against, the industry could stand some weeding.  Sure, most of those needing weeding get just that, but unfortunately, only after they've inflicted significant damage on an unsuspecting public.

[quote=Big Easy Flood][quote=anonymous]

Smart people understand that their exam score doesn't put money on the table for their family.   The fact that a score is given doesn't stop it from being anything more than a pass/fail exam.

One of the top producers who I know failed the exam twice.  He's dyslexic and a terrible exam taker, but very bright.

Regardless, smarts is low down on the scale of what makes someone successful in this business. 

[/quote]

A smart person would grasp "No passie no workie."

I'd be interested in hearing how anybody who is going to take a high stakes test can decide that they've studied enough to pass.  I believe it's ridiculous to conclude that somebody who scores a 70 on the Series 7 is actually capable of scoring in the high 90s but they let up becuase they knew they were going to pass.

I believe that everybody who takes the test does the best they can do, and that sadly for our business the best an awful lot of people can do is barely passing.

There is something scary about a man or woman who doesn't know 30% of what is being tested still being allowed to handle folks money.

The passing score should be raised to 85 or 90 and a college degree in something should be required.

[/quote]

In this case Put I agree with many of your assertions.  Go figure!

The reason I acheived such a high score was because I studied quite a bit.  I felt passing the test was very important in my life, and that I simply couldn't be sure I would pass just from getting good scores on the sample test questions.  The only way to assure that I would pass, rather than going through the additional hassle of a re-take, was to continue to grab every extra bit of time I could and review key areas and take additional test questions.  It yielded a score in the 90's for me.

I followed a similar approach for the Series 31(finished in 35 minutes), the 66, the 24, and the Life Insurance exam.  First time pass on each of them, although not all the scores were as spectacular as the 7.  It just seemed to make sense to me to build as big a 'safety margin' in my knowledge of the material rather than having to worry if I was going to pass.

Not right for everybody, perhaps, but it's served me reasonably well.

I see no wisdom in Put's comment.  What is the point of raising the needed passing score if there's not evidence that says that people who scored below 85 can't do the job?  I would venture that there is very little correlation between test score and success in this industry.

Put, I think that you make the wrong assumption that people stop studying because they think that they know enough to score a 70.  People stop studying because their test date arrives.  I went into the exam thinking I had a 50/50 chance of passing.  I did not study as much as I would have liked.  I could have delayed the exam, but what would the point have been?

Heck, if I felt that I had a chance to pass without studying, I would have done so. 

My job is to help my clients achieve their financial goals.  If scoring higher on an entrance exam would have helped me do that, it would have been a priority.  My score, other than "pass" does nothing to help my clients.

In reality during my college years there was a quote, "get a C for a degree." With that being stated I for the most part maintained a 3.33+...

The fact was I was working my butt off! Taking 18 credit semesters, working 40 hours a week, Fire Fighter 1 school and the reserves.. So my focus was time management and getting a 3.8 or comparison 95 on the 7 was not essential. Maybe this path of lack of focus is bad?

It seems if one were to get paid for 3 months and the only thing in their life was to pass the 7. They should get above an 80. Of course if one was not in school or learning environment for 10 years that may be hard. There are so many variables that its extremly hard to say getting a 70 is better then a 90...

There has always been a theory that the B & C students do much better then the A students throughout life. Not sure if this is true, but it could go either way. B & C students may have more things going on which improves social skills, desire to prove them selves, knowledge and diversity. A student may be really smart and strive for 100% or the desire to win and meet/exceed expectations.

All this crap must vary between everyone on this earth. My point is there is no point on scores and performance. Maybe there is a statistical evaluation showing 7 score and AUM? Also I am sure you all have much more experience in this field and see people with 70 on third test make millions and some with 98's leave after 2 months.

How does one "for the most part" maintain a certain GPA?

It seems to me that you either do or do not maintain things like GPAs.

[quote=Big Easy Flood]

How does one “for the most part” maintain a certain GPA?

It seems to me that you either do or do not maintain things like GPAs.

One could drink and maintain a 2.5gpa to stay in school. Or one can focus enough to maintain a 3.0 or one can commit to getting a 4.0.

For sure the more college and test experience one has, the easier testing can be.. This is not across the board, but I have seen thousands test and for the most part people who have the experience are confident... Sometimes tooooooo confident and they fail.         & nbsp;         & nbsp; 

[quote=ShortNakedPuts]To the original poster:

I hope you come across as more intelligent than you actually are, otherwise you're going to have one heck of a time winning clients.  You don't need to be a genious in this business but clients expect a certain level of intelligence from the person managing their future.  From your 56% you don't seem to possess a level of intelligence that will impress prospects.  I'm sorry but its the truth.  The test is not even difficult - I got a 88% without trying.  Would you want a doctor who failed his medical license exam?[/quote]

Hahaha wow. Proof that you aren't a genius if you just so happen to pass a test.

Listen, I want you to go to 3 doctors in the next year and ask them if they've passed all their exams to get to where they are at. I don't care how many times a doctor took his license exam, what I care is that he got it. And yes, if he IS a doctor, than he most likely does have it and ahs earned it.

Now, what's even mroe disturbing is your prejudice statement of calling someone unintelligent because he didn't pass his securities exam. Prey tell me how you came to this "truth" that you so kindly and generously shared with us. Seriously, because I did exceptionally well at university, but that's not to say I didn't have a hard time every semester with a test or two. How did you come to the conclusion that I was not intelligent for not passing a series 7 exam? Would a doctor going in to take a series 7 exam but dumber than **** because he fails it? What basis are you using to come up with your asstacular "truth"?

When you actually have something useful to say, share it. Otherwise, and what I can say IS true, when you go to bed at night, your self esteem won't be any higher just because you tried to put someone down on a message board.

and by the way, at 56%, I won’t have any clients. So you nor they have nothing to worry about until I get licensed do you?

[quote=joedabrkr][quote=anabuhabkuss]

I did not go over any practice exmas over and over.

The CD pulls from a pool of 2500 questions randomly and that's what I used to get tested. None of the questions in the actual exam came anywhere near what they looked like from Dearborn. When you get a question asking you which securities are exempt from tax at a certain area, given four choices each one have two securities and are asked to pick two choices (for a toal of four securities( you know, if anything, this exam is commited to memory based answers.

EZ is right, I shouldn't have listened to anyone from the get go and just read the book thoroughly. That was my mistake. I felt like I had a good overall knowledge of everything. I didn;t go in there knowing only options or muni bonds, I went in there with the wrong study approach and it cost me and I can see how many others would do the same.

Thanks for the advise guys. Truly appreciated.

[/quote]

I passed the test with a 92, and followed the methodology that was suggested to you.  However, here is what may NOT have been pointed out to you......when you take a practice exam go through your results and analyze them.  Pay particular attention to whether or not you are missing questions that pertain to certain key areas such as muni's and options.  Too, when you get a question wrong, go back to the book as a reference and figure out WHY you got the question wrong.  You don't need to worry about the questions you answered correctly, you're fine on those concepts.

Good luck.

[/quote]

That shows that ANY moron can pass the 7.

[quote=cpafp][quote=joedabrkr][quote=anabuhabkuss]

I did not go over any practice exmas over and over.

The CD pulls from a pool of 2500 questions randomly and that's what I used to get tested. None of the questions in the actual exam came anywhere near what they looked like from Dearborn. When you get a question asking you which securities are exempt from tax at a certain area, given four choices each one have two securities and are asked to pick two choices (for a toal of four securities( you know, if anything, this exam is commited to memory based answers.

EZ is right, I shouldn't have listened to anyone from the get go and just read the book thoroughly. That was my mistake. I felt like I had a good overall knowledge of everything. I didn;t go in there knowing only options or muni bonds, I went in there with the wrong study approach and it cost me and I can see how many others would do the same.

Thanks for the advise guys. Truly appreciated.

[/quote]

I passed the test with a 92, and followed the methodology that was suggested to you.  However, here is what may NOT have been pointed out to you......when you take a practice exam go through your results and analyze them.  Pay particular attention to whether or not you are missing questions that pertain to certain key areas such as muni's and options.  Too, when you get a question wrong, go back to the book as a reference and figure out WHY you got the question wrong.  You don't need to worry about the questions you answered correctly, you're fine on those concepts.

Good luck.

[/quote]

That shows that ANY moron can pass the 7.

Hello, im currently a trainee with Edward Jones and I am sitting for my exam in a short amount of time, I am using the CCH Wallstreet books and practice tests that were provided me by another form where I didnt get a chance to sit for the exam and still was able to keep my books…What is your suggestion to actually passing this thing, the actual subject matter or is it the ability to answer really tricky questions…thanks, Jordan

[quote=jrvinson]What is your suggestion to actually passing this thing,
the actual subject matter or is it the ability to answer really tricky
questions…thanks, Jordan[/quote]



Both.  There’s no way around it, you have to know the material
cold.  And some of the questions can get pretty tricky so I guess
both abilities you mentioned would be required.   Its easily
passible though.

Why are you using CCH Wallstreet material?  For as many bad things that can be said about EDJ on this forum, series 7 prep is not one.  They have better than a 90% pass rate.

I just wanted to thank everyone on this forum for all your input. I took my Series 7 today and passed. My advice is to read and study more than you think you need to. The practice exams that I took from Dearborn/Kaplan did help alot. But I also looked over some practice tests from STC. Thanks again all.

Congratulations…and welcome to the jungle…

[quote=xbabygirlx]

I just wanted to thank everyone on this forum for all your input. I took my Series 7 today and passed. My advice is to read and study more than you think you need to. The practice exams that I took from Dearborn/Kaplan did help alot. But I also looked over some practice tests from STC. Thanks again all.

[quote=Scorpio][quote=jrvinson]What is your suggestion to actually passing this thing, the actual subject matter or is it the ability to answer really tricky questions…thanks, Jordan[/quote]

Both.  There’s no way around it, you have to know the material cold.  And some of the questions can get pretty tricky so I guess both abilities you mentioned would be required.   Its easily passible though.
Oh ok, well that makes enough sense, its just that I was a finance major and I know a lot of these subjects from my 4 years in business school, and quite honestly a lot of the things on the test are a lot different than what I learned…in question asking capacity…just curious, thanks man

[quote=exEJIR]

Why are you using CCH Wallstreet material?  For as many bad things that can be said about EDJ on this forum, series 7 prep is not one.  They have better than a 90% pass rate.