I did but supect that may be fake. I have sent a question to CFAI. Watch out about phishing. The web link in mail is not the CFAI web page. It is enough prove for its dobtful character. Of course if we are talking about same massage.
This is another part of the process that you think is done under the cover of night? Why would the CFAI want data from the successful candidates but not the unsuccessful ones? Are they looking for a biased sample?
Furthermore, why would they opt to collect data in a manner that would indicate whether someone passed or not way before the results are released? Wouldn’t it just be easier and more discrete for the CFAI to distribute the survey to everyone, and record the results with another variable indicating the candidates exam performance (could easily be done with a simple computer program…)?
The email doesn’t mean squat, unless you have real data (not anecdotal evidence) that you can share with us to suggest otherwise…
Do you have a source for this statement? It seems pretty reasonable to assume that they take a random sample of candidates who sat for the exam to get their information. Unless you have a source, it’s less likely that the surveys are not randomly distributed to candidates who sat for the exam.
Again, do you have an authoritative source for this?
Right, so they randomly send the survey to a subset of candidates who sat for the exam. Candidates who did not sit for the exam are likely representing a different population than the population of interest.
I’m pretty sure the survey asks what study materials you used (official, kaplan, etc.). This is data the Insitute wouldn’t mind having. Also, you should also consider that some candidates do read the official curriculum, yet still do poorly.
It likely does if you’re trying to make generalizations about all candidates who took the exam, for example. You could only make generalizations (i.e. inferences) about the population of students who performed well. Doing otherwise would mean that your using a biased sample (because successful candidates alone are not representative of the entire examinee population).
So your assumption, then, is that only successful students provide quality responses? This doesn’t seem like a very reasonable assumption (someone performing poorly on an exam doesn’t necessarily mean they can’t answer survey questions in a reliable and objective manner).
Again, do you have an authoritative source or empirical data? I know people who received the survey last year. Some of those people passed and some of those people failed. There is also the issue that I mentioned previously regarding the survey indicating success far in advance of the actual results (according to your theory). Why would the Institute do this? According to the timeline, the MPS hasn’t been set yet (so they don’t know who passed).
Ya, it doesn’t make any sense. Pure trolling or ridiculousness. There’s no MPS. Not even sure they’d have scanned 100% of sheets. Probably received 99%, but things get crumpled etc.
There’s no point biasing the sample. There’s risk in sharing this list between the scoring team and the digital team so abruptly.
Lol. I received the survey in 2011 and 2012 and failed. I registered for the exam in 2014 and did not make it there yet I did receive the survey. Your theory does not make any sense.