Who's at fault here?

I think that you and some of your classmates are not grasping the concepts. You can study content all you want, but if you are having issues understanding how to think critically and answer the questions, then you need to change that.

75% of your class is passing the test. 25% are not. There lies your answer as far as the program goes. I would focus on why you are missing the questions and how to answer them.

So what happens now ? you've taken it twice you haven't passed you have to repeat the whole last semester before you can graduate so what happens. Another post to say they're holding your degree "hostage".

If it's the schools fault how did the other 75% pass?

All these people saying "If it's the schools fault how did the other 75% pass?" need a brush-up on evidence based statements and practices. Just because 75% of the class passed that does not necessarily mean that it is not the program. Perhaps the 75% who did pass were harder working, more naturally talented at critical thinking, lucky, or any combination of these things. The number "75%" doesn't suggest anything. It's a number without any background information. Sheesh.

All these people saying "If it's the schools fault how did the other 75% pass?" need a brush-up on evidence based statements and practices. Just because 75% of the class passed that does not necessarily mean that it is not the program. Perhaps the 75% who did pass were harder working, more naturally talented at critical thinking, lucky, or any combination of these things. The number "75%" doesn't suggest anything. It's a number without any background information. Sheesh.

Well if 25% of the class didn't work as hard that's not the school's fault, if 25% are not good critical thinkers that's not the school's fault and I doubt very much that people passed by luck.

HESI standards are developed and maintained with a very very large population..... so it's not the "test's fault". How does your class' results compare with previous cohorts? With other area schools? Have there been any recent changes (curriculum, process, faculty turnover, etc) at your school that may have led to poorer outcomes?

If they have experienced a significant downturn in HESI scores, schools tend to take some drastic corrective actions. They often become much more strict with admission criteria, and re-vamp course activities to increase the amount of work that students must complete.

It was 75% who failed I would be thinking its the school but 25% is a realistic number of students who perhaps are not grasping the critical thinking concepts. The last rotation of my program I am entering this summer saw 30 out of 40 students fail out. Its a respected and accelerated bridge program, they offered no alternatives other than to reapply and start over.

All these people saying "If it's the schools fault how did the other 75% pass?" need a brush-up on evidence based statements and practices. Just because 75% of the class passed that does not necessarily mean that it is not the program. Perhaps the 75% who did pass were harder working, more naturally talented at critical thinking, lucky, or any combination of these things. The number "75%" doesn't suggest anything. It's a number without any background information. Sheesh.

No, there's certainly enough information here to reach a reasonable conclusion.

The information provided tells us that 75% of the students passed a nationally recognized, standardized exam. What the 25% did or didn't do that resulted in them failing the exam isn't a reflection on the school, as all the students took the same courses from the same staff at the same time in the same school. If the bottom 25% of the class didn't work as hard as the top 75% it obviously isn't the school's fault OR the test's fault. It would be the students' fault, for failing to study hard enough to pass. You could argue that it isn't the students' fault if they don't have the cognitive ability to pass but you still couldn't argue it was the school's fault or the test's fault.

In some schools those bottom 25% might have found themselves dropped from the program before ever reaching that point. You could, then, say it's the school's fault for letting them dream on that they could pass this test when they didn't appear to be able to, earlier in the program. But that's about the best you could do for the argument that it's somehow the school's fault. Then, too, we'd have students complaining how the school didn't give them enough of a chance to succeed, how they were kicked out too early, before proving they could do better. Or not.

There's all the information needed for this scenario.

Well if 25% of the class didn't work as hard that's not the school's fault, if 25% are not good critical thinkers that's not the school's fault and I doubt very much that people passed by luck.

That was the whole point of my comment. I think you may need to read it a second time. I was saying that just because 75% passed, that does not exclude the possibility that the school has at least some of the blame.

75% passed? Clearly THEY'VE managed to learn something from your "awful" school. I think this is a case of "student error". Fault is a pretty harsh term, but since you chose it, I'll say it. Failing this test multiple times is YOUR fault.

All these people saying "If it's the schools fault how did the other 75% pass?" need a brush-up on evidence based statements and practices. Just because 75% of the class passed that does not necessarily mean that it is not the program. Perhaps the 75% who did pass were harder working, more naturally talented at critical thinking, lucky, or any combination of these things. The number "75%" doesn't suggest anything. It's a number without any background information. Sheesh.

That's not how it works, that's not how any of this works!