Kansas real estate exam: a study map

Two portions, one pass line

An exam is a weighted dataset. So I studied it like one.

The Kansas salesperson exam has two portions. The national portion gives 2½ hours for 85 items, 80 of them scored. The Kansas portion gives 1½ hours for 40 items, 30 of them scored¹². Each portion needs a scaled score of 70 to pass¹.

It is tempting to treat every chapter as equal. The official outline does not.

Read the weights first

Pearson VUE publishes how many scored items each topic carries². Set out as a table, the priority is plain.

On the national side, contracts and agency carry a fifth of the scored items. On the Kansas side, two topics carry 19 of 30 items. Brokerage relationships alone carry more than a third.

That ordering became step one of the study path³. Start where the points are.

A few details change tactics too. The unscored items are unlabeled pretest items². So answer everything. Math is 7 of the 80 scored national items. The test center does not supply two constants, so the page has you memorize them: 43,560 square feet per acre and 5,280 feet per mile¹³.

What I built, with an AI agent

One page, two tracks, thirteen topic areas: eight national and five Kansas³. Each area has three study steps, one key fact, and three original practice checks. That makes 39 checks: 24 national and 15 Kansas⁴.

Every check links to a source. On the Kansas side, thirteen of the fifteen checks cite the Kansas statute itself³. The 24 national checks link to seven publishers, from Pearson VUE to HUD, the EPA and the CFPB³.

Progress saves in the browser only. There is no account, no backend, and nothing to sign up for. One button clears it³.

The guardrails came before any code⁵. Salesperson exam only. No claim of official question access. Kansas legal claims had to link to primary sources. It is an original study aid, not an official or full practice exam³.

The number it keeps apart

One design call was a number the page never prints⁵.

A practice tool wants to show a percent score. The real exam uses a scaled score from 0 to 100, with 70 as the pass line. Only failing candidates see the number¹. A raw percentage and a scaled score look alike on a screen. They are not the same measure¹.

So the page keeps them apart. Progress reads as checks correct and checks attempted, with a plain bar. It never prints a percent beside the 70, and the footer says the two differ. Each check repeats, in plain text, that a practice result does not predict the scaled score³.

What it does not do yet

The checks are spread evenly: three per area. The exam is not. Contracts and agency carry 16 items, while financing carries 7. Both get three checks.

The research behind the site said a matching bank should mirror the outline weights⁶. Today the weights live in the study map, not yet in the bank. A separately reviewed, weighted 80/30 bank comes before any timed full-length mode⁴.

Two Kansas licensing checks still cite the Pearson handbook rather than the statute or KREC rules³. Three national checks, on commission and loan-to-value, link only to a topic outline that gives no formula²³.

Visual and interaction review were also still open at the last handoff note⁴. I say so here rather than hide it.

What this means for your BI team

This side project is a small model of a Tableau to Power BI migration. The same four habits apply.

• Weight the backlog before you move it. Two Kansas topics carry 19 of 30 items. Rank your reports by the decisions they feed, using usage logs and owner interviews, and move the top of that list first.
• Never let two measures share one tile. A raw percent and a scaled score look alike. So can a Tableau ratio and a DAX measure that handle the denominator differently. Put the definition beside the number.
• Cite every metric to its source. Each of the 39 checks links to a source. Each migrated measure should link to the calculation it replaced.
• Publish the gap. This page states what it does not do. A migration status report should too: which reports are pending, and which measures still lack a parity test.

Small project, same discipline. Read the weights, source every claim, and say what is missing.

Notes

1. Pearson VUE Kansas Real Estate Candidate Handbook, April 2025 (rev. 7/25), PDF #091700, fetched 2026-09-25, re-checked 2026-10-17; summarized in research/2026-09-25_real-estate-test-for-national-and-kansas-learning-website-to.md. ↩︎
2. Pearson VUE Kansas state and national content outlines, PDF #091705, fetched 2026-09-25, re-checked 2026-10-17. National outline effective 2025-04-24; Kansas outline effective 2024-06-11. Shares are rounded half up, so each column sums to 101%. ↩︎
3. Study page, creation-test/danieljin-site/claude-opus-5.5_max/site/kansas-real-estate-exam.html. Check and source counts were recounted from its data on 2026-10-17. ↩︎
4. Handoff note, family/real-estate-study/README.md. ↩︎
5. Build plan, plans/2026-09-25_kansas-real-estate-exam-site.md. ↩︎
6. Research record, research/2026-09-25_real-estate-test-for-national-and-kansas-learning-website-to.md, section 5. ↩︎