Folks I'm wondering why the criteria is most strick for passing the CQE - ASQ test. I'm talking in reference to the percentage of candidates passing the tests.

Folks I'm wondering why the criteria is most strick for passing the CQE - ASQ test. I'm talking in reference to the percentage of candidates passing the tests.It might not be strict criteria, but the BOK that trips up people at test time. CQE is a rather technical BOK, I think.

I remember there are statistics, both in numeric problems and word problems, where one must choose the correct method and find a solution. This was the hardest part for me.

In contrast, I thought CQA was largely organization skills and people skills. I felt no need to study for that one, or recertify through points.

Even very smart people do not always pass. A colleague here in Maine (I suppose he's still at USM) holds a Ph.D. in statistics. He said he took the CQE without studying. Later he cheerfully said, "I got spanked!" and advocated studying for the test. Next time, he studied and passed.

I passed it the first time, but only after a few months of structured, dedicated self study. I would not be able to take it now and pass it without study, though perhaps less time or intensity would be needed than before.

I dunno guys....I found the CQE exam to be (literally) a walk in the park. I was in and out in less than an hour, and had no problem with ANY of the questions.

I found the CQT exam to be much more difficult, with more focus on statistics and analysis (always my weak point).

I don't care much for the exam format anyway.....I would much rather the exam consisted of a print, control plan, pfmea, process flow, some data, and the statement 'analyze, recommend, and justify'. If you knew what was implied by those 3 words, and could do it properly, then you passed....if not, back to the whipping post. (Yeah, I know it's not realistic, but hey, it's MY fantasy)

Hello Covers,

I recently took the CQE at a local conference in March. I believe their were only about 5-6 CQE testers, the rest were made up of CSSBB's, CQM's, CQA's, etc...

This is directly from the ASQ Exam Results Quasi Pareto of my exam

BOK AREA---Total Questions--Num I had correct---CQE testers that passed
I.--- 19, 13, 16
II.--- 19, 13, 15
III.--- 33, 20, 23
IV.--- 11, 10, 8
V.--- 25, 15, 21
VI.--- 53, 31, 40

The results were a comparison to the # of correct responses I had in relation the the BOK and the average number of questions the CQE test takers that were present "And Passed".

Unfortunately I did not pass. I got 510 out of 550. This was my first test in the ASQ Best Answer format. I did better than I thought only to have paid $180 to find out what I had already presumed that I did not allow myself enough time to study. I studied almost everyday for about 3 months, while juggling a full time college schedule and a full time job.

I'm scheduled for a CQE refresher course in Oct, to prep for the CQE in December. I have to admit that all these threads are correct from the successful ASQ Cert takers. Study as if it were a closed book exam and utilize effective time management... I used the full five hours.

I used the Quality Council of Indiana's Study materials (I am not supporting the solicitation of their materials) and found them to be very helpful. I also used the ASQ Press CQE Handbook, CQT Handbook, and Juran's Quality handbook. All of these reference materials were helpful.

The Quasi Pareto analysis of my test results in comparison to the other CQE testers that passed were almost even, except when it came to the Quantitative analysis section you know Stats (scored 33 correct out of 53 or something like that) I did take two courses in Statistics last year so the material wasn't totally foreign but I admit I need to brush up.

All in all I think I did o.k. for the first time taking a CQE exam (speaking from a Lamen standpoint) 510 out of 550. I now have somewhat of a measuring stick in which to set the bar for my preparation for the next CQE exam.

Thanks to all of you seasoned Covers.

Rob
__________________
:whip:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by gard2372 : 3 Weeks Ago at 04:44 PM.

i've only taken CQA and its biomedical add-on exams.....however, looking at # of people who passed CQE in silicon valley section and comparing to # of people who took the exam on exam dates, the % passing the exam is way less than 50%.

if you feel that passing rate is low, oh my, you should have seen RAPS' RAC exam passing rate. it is even lower and it is a 2-hour closed book exam.

since exam questions are written by people who passed the exams, it really depends on their background. when i was "playing" with questions from ASQ and Council of Indiana CD-ROMs every night for weeks before the exam, i found out that i got most questions wrong if i chose the answers based on what my company does or what my industry does. talk about freaking me out seeing the scores every night! :eek:

Folks I'm wondering why the criteria is most strick for passing the CQE - ASQ test. I'm talking in reference to the percentage of candidates passing the tests.

IMHO, there are three main reasons for low passing rate.

1. language (english) problem for those who write the exam...at least in Toronto Section

2. inadequate training....most believe that a college quality certificate is enough to prepare for the exam.

3.CQE exam questions...too many "trick" questions, rather than testing the knowledge (see #1 above)..... I have seen too many "qualified" students fail the CQE exam :mad:

I have seen too many "qualified" students fail the CQE exam :mad:
My experience has been just the opposite--way to many obviously unqualified individuals who pass. I do agree with the consensus however--lack of preparation is probably the biggest factor.

1. language (english) problem for those who write the exam...at least in Toronto Section
Maybe ASQ should be required to provide a duplicate copy (in French) of every document it publishes to satisfy the couple hundred or so French speaking Canadians that want to take the test.
3....too many "trick" questions, rather than testing the knowledge
I have a problem with trick questions too. I couldn't even find the questions, so that I could take the "Stupidity Test". :confused:

I took the CQE last weekend. I primarily used the Quality Council of Indiana primer to study, supplemented by Pyzdek CQE Handbook in areas where I was weak. As part of my study plan, I went through every single question on the CQI practice disk one section at a time and consistenly scored 80% or greater well within the time alotted. I felt great and very confident going into the exam.

Personally, I thought the exam was much more difficult than the practice tests that I completed. I consider being able to get through all of the questions in the allotted 5 hours an accomplishment. I don't know about other tests, as I've only taken the CQT and CQE, however on the CQT, there were 100 questions and 4 hours... that's 2.4 minutes per question, and IMO plenty of time to look up information if you need to.

For the CQE, there were 160 questions in 5 hours, that's only 1.8 minutes per question, and I thought the questions were more complex and difficult. There were a couple of points in the exam where I wondered if I would be able to finish or not. I did finish, but I didn't have any time to go back and review my answers. I would say that timing, for me, was the most difficult part of the exam, which just goes to show that I don't feel I knew the material as well as I should have. We'll see if I passed or not.

I've only been in the field of quality for 6 months, and just passed the CQT in March, so I know that my taking the CQE was pretty ambitious. My lack of experience may have contributed to the difficulty I ran into during the test.

I have took the CQE exam last saturday. But I dont know the result yet. Many people said it is easy this time. I only took three hours to finished it. But I think I maybe finished too quickly!

I would agree with Jennifer. The BOK is so large and technical is hard to prep for. This isn't a test that you can really cram for. You have to have a good background

I have talked to a lot of people who say the really struggled with the advanced stats and reliability portions of the test.

I retook the test last saturday as well. I had taken it in December and had missed it by one or two questions.

I do not have a strong background in stats. I last took a stats course 18 years ago. So to prep this time the first thing I did was to go through a very simple stats book (idiots guide to Stats). Then to prep for it like Holly I first went through the CQI primer. I then went through Pyzdek's QE handbook.

A week before the test I felt good about every area except stats. So on the day before the test I spent 15 hours working through stats textsbook and problems.

Taking the test I spent 3 1/2 hours going through the entire test, skipping any questions I needed spend a lot of time on looking up or working through. I then spent an hour on the ones I had skipped. That left me half an hour to review and check for bonehead mistakes.

Nervously waiting for the results now, but I think I score somewhere between 85 and 90%.

Maybe ASQ should be required to provide a duplicate copy (in French) of every document it publishes to satisfy the couple hundred or so French speaking Canadians that want to take the test.

I have a problem with trick questions too. I couldn't even find the questions, so that I could take the "Stupidity Test". :confused:
but there are a lot of other people (test takers) in toronto who's first laguage is not english or french. like chinese, etc

I would agree with Jennifer. The BOK is so large and technical is hard to prep for. This isn't a test that you can really cram for. You have to have a good background

I have talked to a lot of people who say the really struggled with the advanced stats and reliability portions of the test.


I'm happy to see that almost all of the comments here relate to how challenging the exams are and that they are something that requires a fair amount of preparation and experience. I'm a CQE, CRE and CQA (21yrs, 18yrs and 15yrs) and in some other threads in the Cove, it always seemed like there was a fair amount of "bashing" of the certifications and the ease in which they could be attained. I found the tests to be challenging, but well-worth the effort in my career, irrespective of whether employers recognize certification or not.

Good Luck to All of you, who have recently sat for the exam. :applause:

I don't think anyone here is bashing any particular certification exams. It's just that certification exam questions are updated more frequently now so what may be perceived as easy back then may not be that easy nowadays, especially with the technology, quality principles and techniques, and different industry backgrounds of the exam question contributors.

Then again, there are people who have XYZ certifications but not following basic quality guidelines and/or adhering to quality ethics. Not all companies look at certifications heavily. There are people who earn top $ without having 1 certificate...

I don't think anyone here is bashing any particular certification exams.

Rose: Please note, I never said that anyone in THIS thread was "bashing" the certificates. What I said was "and in some other threads in the Cove", which is an accurate statement, because there have been previous posts (in other threads, which may pre-date your registration) where folks have knocked certifications. :frust:

Yes, the tests are updated, specifically so people don't count them out, as outdated certifications. If nothing else, I'd like to think they are evidence of someone's motivation to add to their skill base. I was part of the team in Milwaukee, which helped re-write the questions for the CRE, several years ago (It was an interesting and tough process, as every question offered, must be independently proofed by someone else outside the group and we had to be able to come up with at least 3 current publications where the information could be found/confirmed).

As far as your 2nd paragraph, I don't disagree, but you can say that about almost any occupation. Yes, certifications don't necessariy demonstrate you follow quality principles or that you are more ethical, then the next guy (although, I can't imagine someone wasting their time sitting for the exam, if they didn't follow qp's or weren't ethical; why would they care???). Yes, not all companies look at certifications heavily (For some folks, I think its' more of a personal achievement, which is the best reason. I only know a few who were expected to sit for the exam, at their company's behest). Yes, there are people that earn top $ without having 1 certificate. Paris Hilton earns top dollar for what she does (what does she do???) :lmao: What else is new??

It might not be strict criteria, but the BOK that trips up people at test time. CQE is a rather technical BOK, I think.

I remember there are statistics, both in numeric problems and word problems, where one must choose the correct method and find a solution. This was the hardest part for me.

In contrast, I thought CQA was largely organization skills and people skills. I felt no need to study for that one, or recertify through points.

Even very smart people do not always pass. A colleague here in Maine (I suppose he's still at USM) holds a Ph.D. in statistics. He said he took the CQE without studying. Later he cheerfully said, "I got spanked!" and advocated studying for the test. Next time, he studied and passed.

I passed it the first time, but only after a few months of structured, dedicated self study. I would not be able to take it now and pass it without study, though perhaps less time or intensity would be needed than before.
What I mean to say is that most of the time we observe (if you see the %age of people) passing the other test like CSSBB, CQA where passing rate is much higher than that of CQE.
Now, the question is why CQE is passing rate is much lower than other test? Is there any specific kind of quota involved there?

Now, the question is why CQE is passing rate is much lower than other test? Is there any specific kind of quota involved there?
There have been all sorts of folk legends over the years regarding the CQE pass/fail criteria, ranging from the secret establishment of quotas to use of arcane curves that no one understands. I think the answer--as is usually the case with such legends--is simpler. ASQ took on the daunting task of defining what a quality engineer is. Everyone knows what an auditor does, and the BOK for reliability engineers and quality technicians (what used to be called mechanical inspectors) were pretty well established--if not codified--before ASQ got involved. "Quality Engineer" isn't as easily defined, however, and there are no industry-wide accepted criteria for qualifications. Thus a degreed engineer who happens to work in the quality department might have the title without being able to tell a standard deviation from a tuna sandwich. The ASQ-devised BOK for quality engineers is nowhere near universally known or accepted, so it's not surprising that people who have had the title for a long time might not fit ASQ's expectations. The first-pass statistics for the exam are evidence of the exam being somewhat of a wake-up call. ASQ has some (imo) very narrow and very questionable expectations, and as I've opined in other threads, some of the questions are needlessly subjective and open to interpretation.

What I mean to say is that most of the time we observe (if you see the %age of people) passing the other test like CSSBB, CQA where passing rate is much higher than that of CQE.
Now, the question is why CQE is passing rate is much lower than other test? Is there any specific kind of quota involved there?

Certification like CSQE, CRE, CSSBB, CHA, CBA kind of narrows the applicants from that field/expertise. There is only a small possibility that candidates who are not from these areas actually apply/sit for the exam.

On the other hand, CQE is general BOK (somewhat skewed to manufacturing though).Many could qualify applying for this exam. Those who are familiar with ASQ Certifications know that CQE is the most sought certification.

Unfortunately, many who have not had read in-depth statistics or practiced statistics also happen sit for the exam. They may not fully realize depth and width of statistics that appear in the exam. What we are seeing here is like (First Pass Yield). It would be interesting to see (if available) what the second pass yield is? That would reveal if failed examinee actually understood the exam difficulty via first attempt.

There is NO quota or magic curve that limits the “number of candidates” passing the exam. There is a cut-off score established (process explained in the brochure). If 100% of the candidates score past cut off score, all of them pass the exam. You may notice these in special administrations with 100% pass rate. This score is statistically verified during every sitting. If any happen to volunteer for Cut score process for any new exam, they will understand the process.

In nutshell I contribute the higher failures in CQE to
a.Possibilities that many candidates who fail may not fully qualify for requirement sitting for the exam. (ASQ HQ has NO fail proof way to verify this aspect).
b.Exam takers not fully estimating the level of preparation and practice required passing the first time.

Regards,
Govind.

Well they haven't sent out the official notice but I saw it listed on the ASQ site I passed the 6-4-5 test. No details available.

So 2nd times a charm. Based on a sample of 1 I can conclude 100% of the test takers fail the first test and 100% pass the 2nd. :bonk:

Tough test. Now to figure out how to earn enough recert credits, cause I never want to take that one again.

i wonder how many CQEs can pass the current exam? ... I have an issue with recertification process....what good is the recertification process, other than $$$ for ASQ? (yah, i know the local section reviews and approves the recertification)

When i wrote my exam (in 1991) and passed, it was 6hr exam: 3hr for principle and 3hr for practical. When ASQ changed to the current format, I thought (and still do) they made a mistake.

Well they haven't sent out the official notice but I saw it listed on the ASQ site I passed the 6-4-5 test. No details available.

So 2nd times a charm. Based on a sample of 1 I can conclude 100% of the test takers fail the first test and 100% pass the 2nd. :bonk:

Tough test. Now to figure out how to earn enough recert credits, cause I never want to take that one again.


Scott:

You can increase your sample size to 2, because that was my experience, as well.

I just received notification today that I passed the CQE (first try) :D . It was challenging and I spent the entire 5 hours but I had a large amount of training in statistics through our six sigma black belt training internally. I admit that I only studied for about 8 hours the day before. (not counting all the time I spent last year preparing for our Six Sigma exam). This is the first ASQ test that I have ever taken so I wonder how the others compare.

3.CQE exam questions...too many "trick" questions, rather than testing the knowledge (see #1 above)..... I have seen too many "qualified" students fail the CQE exam :mad:

You hit the nail dead center on all exams in any area you can imagine!

Exams are designed with failure in mind! Which would be the equivalent of designing a Quality System with failure in mind. :rolleyes:

It is the norm to teach one thing in some format and test in another with formats that have not been remotely discussed in a class.
This may be due to an attempt to make the exam taker to think, but 90% of the time the exam taker will be thinking in the realm of how the class(s) were taught!

When an exam is created it should be audited within the formats taught, not ones perception of what they think the questions or format should be!

Let the future CQE (example only) learn to think outside the box on his own, that's the real test. :cool:

No I am not a CQE! But I did stay at a Holiday Inn once. :lmao: