"Format Change For 2009 CFA Exams CFA Institute is committed to maintaining and improving the standards and consistency of the CFA exams. Research and our own experience indicate that the fourth answer option on multiple choice and item set exams is unnecessary to assess a candidate’s knowledge and skills. Three answer choices are sufficient and effective in discriminating between those candidates that possess the knowledge and skills and those that do not. As a result, we are changing the format of the multiple-choice and item set questions on CFA exams from four answer options to three. " http://www.cfainstitute.org/cfaprog/courseofstudy/sample.html WTF?
That’s a bizarre change. One step away from a true/false exam now.
crap …I almost forgot about that …hmm I wonder if this means that the 09 exam will be a little easier since they are rolling out this new testing format
Rudeboi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > crap …I almost forgot about that …hmm I wonder > if this means that the 09 exam will be a little > easier since they are rolling out this new testing > format I just think that they will now make the AM that much harder. Damn man.!
Won’t be surprised if PM is harder as well. Answers less clear cut or very close numerically.
There was an excellent short manual for ‘guessing’ values in one of Schweser books (only saw it for Level 1, might be elsewhere too). The main point of it is that if you know the stuff behind the formulas, in most cases you can deduce the right answer with a handful of logic. This - knowing how stuff works - is way better than knowing how to stuck the numbers in the right places. Can’t think of a reason why CFAI would prefer latter guys to do better. So probably no close numbers.
also Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There was an excellent short manual for ‘guessing’ > values in one of Schweser books (only saw it for > Level 1, might be elsewhere too). > > The main point of it is that if you know the stuff > behind the formulas, in most cases you can deduce > the right answer with a handful of logic. > > This - knowing how stuff works - is way better > than knowing how to stuck the numbers in the right > places. Can’t think of a reason why CFAI would > prefer latter guys to do better. So probably no > close numbers. Well my logic was around reducing the ability to randomly guess as opposed to penalizing people who know their stuff.
I don’t blame you guys for disliking the change. I know the day I pass L3, I’ll say "Now that we passed, we’d like the city walls to be a bit higher…maybe add a “none of the above”…that’ll really get em 
PeteyPete Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don’t blame you guys for disliking the change. > I know the day I pass L3, I’ll say "Now that we > passed, we’d like the city walls to be a bit > higher…maybe add a “none of the > above”…that’ll really get em So true…