We both understand that putting several pdf files on your website has near-zero cost. Putting a phrase with the disclaimer of past credentials has zero cost at all. Zero.
Do you mean that the disclosure could negatively affect Institute’s fee income? If so, what about CFAI being a pro-values organization? The Internet is full of your own quotes stating the ‘values first’ approach which CFAI would like to promote. Are you serious about your values? The disclosure will come if not from CFAI but from another parts of the market, we both understand this. Why to make a big deal of it? Really.
I do not opposite (at all) if the people who earn their Charter long ago will retain some ‘fame’ record.
Something like that.
Itera, Emeritus CFA Charterholder [Discaimer: Mr. Itera has earned his Charter in 1999 when the total amount of study material in CBOK was 36% of CBOK of this year. Since Mr. Itera declined to be tested on CFA Curriculum of Current year, his status was updated to Emeritus CFA Charterholder].
All of 28 passed candidates of 28000 who tested on L3 in 2015. Just made my day. Really.
If you would think of candidates basing on af, so… there were 95% pass rate on the program. The issue is: there is much more people who READ the af than who POST to af.
And I am writing for these reading people. I do know thay make a note. I do want them to understand that with the lack of transparency all the CFA Level 3 exam is the issue of the faith. Do you believe in CFAI?
That is all about it.
And when Paul Smith (or actually the people who consult him) is telling me (and all the candidates) that putting pdf files on their website is issue of time and money… well… I would like to sound very polite and respectful… but it’s like an argument valid for 4 year old, not for the Institute, to my opinion.
Well, I think as following: by pitting ‘it cost time and money to put pdf files of old curriculum on the website’ argument Mr. Smith just has shown that hethinks that an average candidate is not clever enough and will take his argument. Well, perhaps I am wrong, but it feels awful. Really.
Give some credit to intellect of candidates on your program, give us better arguments, please!
Do you mean that it is your right to declare that it cost time and money to put several pdf files to your website and everyone is supposed to believe it? I just really want to understand you.
Threads like this remind me that the ideal of standards convergence from other parts of the world to the United States looks a lot better on paper than in reality.
I have taken a zillion exams insofar from various educational bodies ( CFA, TOEFL, GRE, GCE etc). There was not even a single exam in which we had access to our graded papers. Even in university (prestigious UK university) in which the number of candidates is by far smaller we did not have access to our graded papers.
CFAilure, you are trying to make a big argument in segregating what the prior exams were like and noting how much easier it was vs now. The CFAI really looks down upon comparing the far easier past exams 10+ years ago with the far more difficult exams today. There’s not a snowball’s chance in hell there will be anything done about it, so don’t bother.
If you really want, check old libraries, I’ve heard of someone finding an old L2 or L3 textbook. I believe it was 1 or 2 books at most and equities ended at the dividend discount model, no taxes, no alternatives, no derivatives, no international, no options. yes I’m with you, it was an utter joke. But no chance CFAI is going to put an * asterick by older earned charterholers.
And don’t bother arguing I’m saying this because I got my CFA a decade+ ago. I passed L3 and got my charter within the last 3 years
CFAilure. I am starting to think this is a conspiracy against you. They don’t want you to pass, so the tease you and taunt you year after year to waste your 20s. I think if you keep emailing Paul Smith, CFA you will definately get to the bottom of this. Don’t give up!! For the intergrity of man!
Once again you have confused me. How does releasing prior curriclula help current and prospective candidates (which is who you claim to be advocating for during all these posts)? Current and prospective candidates cannot decide which curriculum they want to study; they must learn the current curriculum to prepare for the current exam to become a charterholder. The fact that the curriculum is more voluminous than in the past only shows that the CFA is getting tougher (at least to study for), something I would argue is better than if the curriculum was moving in the opposite direction. This post has gone from the CFAI has to disclose more about the self-study process, to the way they disclose information is not as informative as it could be, to saying the CFA is not equal depending on when you took the program, to outright mocking those who received the charter in the past. While I do believe the third point listed has some merit (although you approach it in the wrong way) given the fact that once you become a charterholder there is no requirement to maintain continuing education (and something I brought up in the discussion here http://www.analystforum.com/forums/cfa-forums/cfa-general-discussion/91344415), you seem to be now grasping at straws as your points continue to be countered with proper reasoning and commonsense. Additionally, you constantly changing what exactly your advocating for makes your point-of-view look disjointed and weak. Give up man. While you might think you’re providing some sort of service to current candidates, you’re not. You sound like a bitter person who has spent a lot of money and time on a credential he/she no longer values because it doesn’t seem attainable. Essentially, you’re devaluing the credential now to save face in response to the many failures you have received from the program. Either keep on fighting the good fight with getting your charter or give up. Your efforts right now are utterly fruitless.