mo34 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Now the important questions: > > Can someone unprepared pass this test based on > luck ? I don’t believe so. > > Can a student with “average/good” preparation > fail this test? yes, I believe so. > > Based on this, I would conclude that their focus > is on NOT passing someone who does not deserve to > pass while risking to fail someone who is > borderline. ( type 2 error :)) I agree with your point and the presumed CFAI objective. However, this brings up my original point, which mentioned the fact that to distinguish good candidates vs. poor candidates, you need… shall we say… “more meat to work with”??? In other words, CFAI shouldn’t be experiencing what I experienced as a first year research fellow at a prestigious university - meaning all the kids in the class were pretty smart kids who got straight A’s in high school and they all had similar knowledge base. So my line of “off the left field questioning” simply got them all guessing at the answer. My original point: If you don’t have enough scope and depth of the materials being tested, the borderline between Fail/Pass becomes a very thin margin. However, since you and I agree that CFAI’s objective to do a REALLY GOOD JOB distinguishing PASS VS FAIL, this margin between the two must be river wide and not stream narrow.
comp_sci_kid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mo34 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > CSK, > > > > I only finished with 2 minutes left, but I > still > > don’t think it was too long. Specially that to > > pass you probably need to solve only 40-50% of > the > > questions correctly. > > > > It would have been too long if you needed to > > score say 80% to pass. But we all know that’s > not > > that case. > > > So, do you agree that the test was design so it > would be EXTREMLY hard to score 100%? Why would > you design such a test on the first palce? That’s been, and is, the complaint. Writing a test where you’re passing people with scores like we saw last year is a joke and makes things way too random.
MellonC00 Wrote: > However, since you and I agree that > CFAI’s objective to do a REALLY GOOD JOB > distinguishing PASS VS FAIL, this margin between > the two must be river wide and not stream narrow. To do that they would probably have to run the tests over two or three days, with one three hours session for FI, one for Equities, one for Derivatives and so on. Did you think L2 did a better job at this ? I remember people complaining about how the triangular arbitrage was not on the test, or how can they put an entire vignette on Treynor-Black.
comp_sci_kid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > >>Can a student with “average/good” preparation > fail this test? yes, I believe so. > > That would be me 
CSK, Go get your new business cards, but don’t mail them yet … Are you doing the FRM this November ?
mo34 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > comp_sci_kid Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > >>Can a student with “average/good” preparation > > fail this test? yes, I believe so. > > > > That would be me > > > CSK, > > Go get your new business cards, but don’t mail > them yet … Are you doing the FRM this November > ? Taking it easy before i will start my MBA in the spring :). Going through Hull in my spare time. I really need to refresh my calc 2 skills :). Want to spend some time with my wife too. I dont think she will let me take any other exam this year.
MellonC00 Wrote: > However, since you and I agree that > CFAI’s objective to do a REALLY GOOD JOB > distinguishing PASS VS FAIL, this margin between > the two must be river wide and not stream narrow. When you get to Level 3, the margin is going to be narrow just because of the candidate field. The scores are simply going to be more clustered than they were at L’s 1 & 2. I think that guessing on questions will not make a candidate pass… the essay section takes care of at least 50% of that. Plus if you’re relying on guessing in the PM to any extent, those guesses are going to even out. I would bet that the margin of pass/fail is clear. Some will squeak by and some will just miss, but for the most part I think those that pass deserve to and those that don’t pass shouldn’t. It’s easy to knock CFA, especially when we are unsure of their exact methodologies, but I think they are fair, their processes sound, and the designation still holds a lot of weight… otherwise there wouldn’t be so many individuals chasing it.
mo34 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > To do that they would probably have to run the > tests over two or three days, with one three hours > session for FI, one for Equities, one for > Derivatives and so on. > > Did you think L2 did a better job at this ? I > remember people complaining about how the > triangular arbitrage was not on the test, or how > can they put an entire vignette on Treynor-Black. Sorry, I haven’t taken a Level III exam in 4 years. I came back after 4 years years of hiatus and 2 wonderful children being born in my family. I finally got a long enough “hall pass” from my wife to dedicate prep time this year. So, I can’t comment on the recent Level II exam. I can, however, say that the Level II exam I took in 2003 was quite thorough in terms of scope and depth. I thought CFAI did a good job. On the topic of 2 day testing: I feel that is necessary if we kept the paper based format. However, I think the way to do this right may be the way of a computer based testing. Specifically, it can figure out where you are weak or strong in the first couple of hours of testing. Then, it can really widen the field between fail vs. pass by attacking the areas where the candidate didn’t prepare very well for the next 4 hours.
jimmylegs Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I committed myself to not participate in the forum > until test results are out but this thread is too > good not to respond. I did not think the Am test > was too long. I never cracked a CFAI book except > for some end of chapter problems, and referencing > when I was unsure of the topic. I used Schweser > entirely and I thought they did a pretty good job > preparing me. > > I got through the entire AM test with about 30 > minutes left, which I used to go back and fill in > some answers to questions I was unsure about. And > I did bomb the reverse cash and carry but take > full responsibility for not knowing the material; > I don’t blame CFA in any way. On Q 11, I did an > abbreviated anser which I think will score me some > points, but was OK with not acing the question > because I felt I could go back to the two IPS > questions and brush up/fill in answers; I knew my > time was better spent on these questions because I > was familiar with the material and could use my > brain to figire out some things I was never before > exposed to: excess return, liquidity constraint, > etc. > > If anyone happens to fail and plans to take it > next year, I wouldn’t spend my time blaming CFA > but would practicing on getting faster. I hope > everyone passes here; you all seem like good > candidates. But if you don’t pass, or if I don’t > for that matter, no one is to blame except > yourself. Get better for next year and know the > material inside and out. Leave nothing to chance. Excellent post. Bravo.
MellonC00 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mo34 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > To do that they would probably have to run the > > tests over two or three days, with one three > hours > > session for FI, one for Equities, one for > > Derivatives and so on. > > > > Did you think L2 did a better job at this ? I > > remember people complaining about how the > > triangular arbitrage was not on the test, or > how > > can they put an entire vignette on > Treynor-Black. > > Sorry, I haven’t taken a Level III exam in 4 > years. I came back after 4 years years of hiatus > and 2 wonderful children being born in my family. > I finally got a long enough “hall pass” from my > wife to dedicate prep time this year. So, I can’t > comment on the recent Level II exam. > > I can, however, say that the Level II exam I took > in 2003 was quite thorough in terms of scope and > depth. I thought CFAI did a good job. > > On the topic of 2 day testing: I feel that is > necessary if we kept the paper based format. > However, I think the way to do this right may be > the way of a computer based testing. > Specifically, it can figure out where you are weak > or strong in the first couple of hours of testing. > Then, it can really widen the field between fail > vs. pass by attacking the areas where the > candidate didn’t prepare very well for the next 4 > hours. I am wondering why all this discussion going on … i mean it was pretty much clear that this was the way CFAI conducts the test…yet we enrolled for it… i mean lets be frank CFAI did not thrust this upon us…we decided to do this on our own (either for career progression or to enhance skill sets or just for kick of it) knowing fully well the ambiguity of the test and the grading process… So after this test is over you shuoldnt be expected o come out and talk about how and what CFAI should do… for me the test was a real challenge and tested wat an average Charterholder would be expected to know ( the claim charter is being devalued is the biggest BS i ever have come across) though i do think i have a fair chance of passing … i do think that CFAI is fair enough in its testing policies… full Multiple choice is not a good idea according to me… though i do disagree with the fact that two versions of test were used without any disclosure… but then again u cant be perfect…
Questions you need to ask yourself: (1) Did CFAI test anything not in the curriculum? (2) Did you know the curriculum? You seem to be implying that even when CFA institute specifies a curriculum and asks questions only about that curriculum, that they are somehow to blame when you don’t know the answer to the questions, because you wish they had asked more predictable questions focussing on the parts of the curriculum you focused on. There are plenty of test takers out there who were easily able to finish within the allotted time and will pass with flying colors. Out of my section of ~80 people, at least 5 walked out of the AM exam before the 2h30m cutoff. A couple dozen left before that cutoff in the PM section. There is plenty of time for SOME people to finish the exam and feel comfortable leaving early.
there is no doubt that AM was too long compared to what showed up in the last 3 years. its not that i didnt know the material…i did everything from the source material…the reverse cash and carry etc etc…with all end of chapter problems / examples… but i missed out on a few sections cause of time! the PM was easy…most ppl finished it in 2 hours, went back and re checked their work…a bit of balance is what could have helped! i think most cfa charterholders out there passed this exam with schweser…and only 1-2 years ago they started suggesting that the pass rate is low because people dont use the source material and hence compulsory purchase of books when you sign up for an exam… the question then is, would more people who used source material pass this year?.. i m not too sure about that!..the exam was such that if you did schweser / or stalla or whatever, you probably have as much chance of passing as if you did the source material, if not more… people who write exam questions, all have schweser / stalla etc in mind (as that is what they did when they prepared for it!), thus you do not quite see questions similar to what appear in the source material on the exam… (there were a few this year though…straight from source…but few!) i did all of last three year’s morning exams, well within 3 hours … the actual thing however was a bit longer than expected… the mock was harder than the actual pm session…it took me 2hrs 40 mins to finish it…the actual test i finished in about 2 hours… may be a few ppl did every thing in the morning within the allocated time…hats off to them…but that doesnt necessarily mean the exam was perfectly designed… it could be better structured… u work 6 months for this, stretching yourself to the limits and even then if it boils down to luck…there is something wrong some where!
equity_research_nds Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am wondering why all this discussion going on > … i mean it was pretty much clear that this was > the way CFAI conducts the test…yet we enrolled > for it… i mean lets be frank CFAI did not > thrust this upon us…we decided to do this on our > own (either for career progression or to enhance > skill sets or just for kick of it) … > My point exactly. That’s why I said (as according to my original post), I am walking away from this CFA business all together…
newsmaker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There are plenty of test takers out there who were > easily able to finish within the allotted time and > will pass with flying colors. Out of my section > of ~80 people, at least 5 walked out of the AM > exam before the 2h30m cutoff. A couple dozen left > before that cutoff in the PM section. There is > plenty of time for SOME people to finish the exam > and feel comfortable leaving early. This is a falacy on multiple levels. 1) You cannot claim that “plenty” of people had time to finish the exam when you took the exam with a small sample of 80. 2) You don’t know that they will pass with flying colors since the results have not yet been released. 3) 6.25% of your sample walked out early. How do you know they did not just give up and leave? You are assuming they crushed the exam and walked out. Bad logic. There were roughly 80-100 people in my section. Not a single person left before time ran out in the AM. Not even one. So our samples cancel each other out but tell us nothing about the overall picture. There is no rational counterargument that “everything on the test was in one of the LOS.” The material is chosen to represent a wide range of topics. When entire topics are excluded from the exam, that disadvantages candidates who diligently studied those topics (you have no opportunity to earn credit for the knowledge you have gained). The higher the degree of tracking error of the exam compared to the material, the less meaningful the exam is. Sure, every queston was from some LOS, but it’s disingenious and counter intuitive to suggest that people should focus as much effort on the small topics as on the major topics. Would it be fair if the entire test were drawn from only 20% of the LOS? Would it be fair if CFAI just decided to drop fixed income and equity because they felt like testing other sections? That’s basically what happened this year since attribution and emerging markets were not tested at all, and derivatives received very imbalanced coverage.
asdffdsa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There is no rational counterargument that > “everything on the test was in one of the LOS.” > The material is chosen to represent a wide range > of topics. When entire topics are excluded from > the exam, that disadvantages candidates who > diligently studied those topics (you have no > opportunity to earn credit for the knowledge you > have gained). The higher the degree of tracking > error of the exam compared to the material, the > less meaningful the exam is. Sure, every queston > was from some LOS, but it’s disingenious and > counter intuitive to suggest that people should > focus as much effort on the small topics as on the > major topics. > > Would it be fair if the entire test were drawn > from only 20% of the LOS? Would it be fair if CFAI > just decided to drop fixed income and equity > because they felt like testing other sections? > That’s basically what happened this year since > attribution and emerging markets were not tested > at all, and derivatives received very imbalanced > coverage. You should focus an equal amount of energy on all topics. If a topic is smaller, it will simply require less time for you to master it. No topic is more important than any other… it’s all fair game. As far as percentages of the exam goes, CFA gives you exactly what the range for any given section will be (ie 5-15%, etc… including derivatives). Candidates should dilligently study all topics. If you were trying to guess what would be tested by not mastering all the sessions, you only set yourself up for failure. If you have mastered the material there is nothing for you to worry about.
my my…the egos clashing in this forum…wow! a few of the posters are just generally bitter with life…naturally…since we did devote a healthy 4-6 months preparing for this exam and you can never be “that sure” that you passed…if you are , well…behavioral finance 101 should kick in - what was that psychological bias again…??? ohhh yea…“over-confidence” a few of the others simply make it a point to disagree for the sake of disagreeing with a holier than thou attitude - must be a narcissistic thing…and one kid even went so far as to to backtest someones hypothesis of getting more 70% in all of his L2 exam sections…hahahahha… i dont have much quality to add here - but will state what my instructor from schweser said to us in one of the 3 day seminars…"dont 2nd guess the CFAI- dont waste your time worrying about whether the nature of the question is right or wrong - dont give the answer you think is right - give the answer CFAI thinks is right , IT IS WHAT IT IS…; and finally…dont stress yourself out by spending hours and hours on analystforum.com, cause there are some people who will stress you out… " i couldnt help but chuckle at that last statement bottom line - if you pass, move on in life…and if you dont pass; then keep on writing the exam until you do (provided circumstances prevail ofcourse) - one guy from a few years back was a 6-time failure of the level 3 exam…and each year his wife threatened to divorce him, his colleagues made fun of him, and he was being held back in his professional and personal life… i was in the l2 forum at the time - and this guy had plenty of reasons to be bitter, angry, upset, frustrated…etc…but he never blamed anyone other than himself and at the same time never felt the need to judge others for passing on the first try or failing 2-3 times … In his 7th attempt - he passed…he probably didnt get any smarter…and the exam probably didnt get any easier…and somehow i dont think CFAI passed him out of sympathy - but for all his faults…the kid had tenacity - and he assumed responsibility…and dealt with it without ànchoring`his hopes and expectations. as for me - dont be mistaken any of you - ofcourse we all want an exam thats easier to understand, easier to pass, and makes us feel like King Kong at work because we got that charter tatooed on our chest and got a special hummer from our girlfriends the day the results come out…but…sad fact is…IT IS WHAT IT IS…i might pass this year or hell…i might be here 3 years from now…tenacity isnt a character fault i already got a helmet on for the plethora of abusive responses i am going to get
Hey i agree with asdffdsa, for totally the opposite reason. Failed L3 last year after studying a decent amount for it. This year, i started an MBA program and signed up for the test not realizing I would have no time… come late May/early June I figured as long as I paid for the damn thing, why not give it a random shot? So I studied a little under a week and didn’t even finish the second book of practice exams on Schweser. Very low expectations of passing. Anyway, I sit for the test, and it occurs to me that another 2 months of studying would not have prepared me for the currency question, the Reverse-Cash-and-Carry, or a bunch of other questions because i would have spent all my time studying for the ‘substantive’ material that never showed up on the test. Second, some of the questions were phrased so oddly that figuring out what was being asked of me became a challenging part of the test. To top it off, despite all that, i walked out the test center feeling that I did BETTER than last year. Now, fact is i may fail anyway, but it’s discouraging news for next year because I’m going to go through all the material knowing that the entire Level 3 exam is almost a toss-up no matter how hard I study. I don’t remember feeling that Levels 1 & 2 were as luck-based as the level 3… but with only 1 level to go, I feel like I’m going to be like Sisyphus and the rock- year after year, I’ll go in for this test, and i’m goign to walk out clueless and not knowing what I could have done different. plus they’re going to keep changing the material (Wasn’t it like 40% changed this year?) so that what was learned last year doesn’t help in successive years. Man.
It’s unfortunate that things have to play out this way when it comes to the trials and tribulations of getting thru the CFA program. Countless people have already mentioned to me “oh, don’t worry, you’ll pass because you’ve studied hard!”, yeah, you know what, “you can eat a phat one”, is my desired response because the CFAI has NO mercy. The charter is not merit-based, but then again what is, in life? Some idiots get into great business schools only to lead their countries into shambles, some law grads will never pass the BAR exam (career on hold, sucks for them). CFAI really f’s with the human psyche, several of you are victims of uncertainty, despising it, wishing more preditability in the outcome, but you’re not going to get it. talk about loss aversion. At the end of the day at least 50% of us will pass, whether i’m in the camp of those who don’t get through, then it’ll be what it is to be. I’m at ease knowing that i made it to the NBA finals, competed, gave it my best shot, but accept the fact that of the two final contenders, only one will triumph in holding up the charter. The loser will just have to suck it up and compete once again next year or go home a weak sauce loser, winer, little beyotch, complainer, moaner, etc.
azmi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > my my…the egos clashing in this forum…wow! > > a few of the posters are just generally bitter > with life…naturally…since we did devote a > healthy 4-6 months preparing for this exam and you > can never be “that sure” that you passed…if you > are , well…behavioral finance 101 should kick > in - what was that psychological bias > again…??? ohhh yea…“over-confidence” > > a few of the others simply make it a point to > disagree for the sake of disagreeing with a holier > than thou attitude - must be a narcissistic > thing…and one kid even went so far as to to > backtest someones hypothesis of getting more 70% > in all of his L2 exam sections…hahahahha… > > i dont have much quality to add here - but will > state what my instructor from schweser said to us > in one of the 3 day seminars…"dont 2nd guess the > CFAI- dont waste your time worrying about whether > the nature of the question is right or wrong - > dont give the answer you think is right - give the > answer CFAI thinks is right , IT IS WHAT IT IS…; > and finally…dont stress yourself out by > spending hours and hours on analystforum.com, > cause there are some people who will stress you > out… " > > i couldnt help but chuckle at that last statement > > > bottom line - if you pass, move on in life…and > if you dont pass; then keep on writing the exam > until you do (provided circumstances prevail > ofcourse) - one guy from a few years back was a > 6-time failure of the level 3 exam…and each year > his wife threatened to divorce him, his colleagues > made fun of him, and he was being held back in his > professional and personal life… > > i was in the l2 forum at the time - and this guy > had plenty of reasons to be bitter, angry, upset, > frustrated…etc…but he never blamed anyone other > than himself and at the same time never felt the > need to judge others for passing on the first try > or failing 2-3 times … > In his 7th attempt - he passed…he probably > didnt get any smarter…and the exam probably didnt > get any easier…and somehow i dont think CFAI > passed him out of sympathy - but for all his > faults…the kid had tenacity - and he assumed > responsibility…and dealt with it without > ànchoring`his hopes and expectations. > > as for me - dont be mistaken any of you - ofcourse > we all want an exam thats easier to understand, > easier to pass, and makes us feel like King Kong > at work because we got that charter tatooed on > our chest and got a special hummer from our > girlfriends the day the results come > out…but…sad fact is…IT IS WHAT IT IS…i might > pass this year or hell…i might be here 3 years > from now…tenacity isnt a character fault > > i already got a helmet on for the plethora of > abusive responses i am going to get Still not understanding where are we all getting too… I still feel that CFAI is fair enough…I mean they have done this for years and earned an recognition in the industry and I see no reason in future why they should change it … well some candidates feel they are not well served…or are being unfairly tested well hard luck u can walk out of this anytime…i guess CFAI would be more happy than less… for years they havent disclosed the MPS and given test takers their scores and still they have produced good charterholders (financial analysts) and ye some great ones too ( so the BS of devaluation is out of the window) just because the number of ppl taking the test increases …tht doesnt mean CFAI should change it ways to please ppl who are ready to walk away from the test if they are not happy ( tht much for dedication) rather than hanging in their and fighting out. for sure if i fail this test i would be back with vengence next year …rather than walking away from the process …cribbing about the fact that MPS is not declared or test is unfair or i shuld know by how much i failed blah…blah… come guys this is has been the way it is since last 60 years
I do not pretend I know the answer - whether CFAI failed to compose an exam that properly distinguish the well prepared from the underprepared. It is a matter of degree. I would agree that the questions are complex and a lot of time is required to merely understand them. But real life problems are often complex. We often need to ask the right question. Once the right question is asked, the right answer would seem simple. So I would say the ability to understand the question is part of the ability tested. English is my second language. For all the candidates to whom English is the second language, the issue of question complexity would seem more prominent. Would it be unfair for a candidate poor in Englsih but proficient in knowledge to take the CFA test? I don’t think so. To me, many things in life are not fair. For CFA test, we know in advance the format and the complexity of the questions. If some of us only prepared for the material but not the way it will be tested, then I would say it is a case of being underprepared and nothing to do with fairness. I didn’t finish all the AM questions. Looking back at it, I spent too much time carefully doing the first seven questions. I did not manage time well. But I think it is doable. If I fail, I think next year would be easy. The point is I do think preparation will translate into result.
You guys are at the last leg of the race and want to quit? I don’t think you should do it. Look at all those hours you wasted studying for level 1 and 2.