Thanks for contradicting yourself.
How? Just because I said you may have been better prepared for the exam you failed compared to someone else…does not make you better prepared for taking it again compared to that same person. If that’s what you’re referring to…then well…you’re not very smart…and CFA might not be for you…but if not…point to the contradiction.
The whole CFA testing scheme is f’d up. They should go to test modules like the CPA and give partial credit for passing each module in a 18-month window.
For example, combine L1/L2 into subject modules for FRA, Equity, All other, and then L3 AM it’s own module.
Having to retest sections you’ve already passed in the current scheme is a huge waste of time. UNSAT !
Now that’s a personal attack, which I would however, politely ignore. But I certainly know someone who is smart won’t openly tell another he isn’t smart. Anyways, kindly scroll up, you just might belong to the league of Charterholders who talk down on candidates. Pathetic!
^I just dont like whiny kids.
Show of hands: how many here have experience writing exam-quality, six-question vignettes?
All of you (with your hands raised) are able to comment on the difficulty of creating a Level II exam compared to that of creating a Level I exam. The rest of you will have to take our (my) word for it: it’s monumentally more difficult.
One doesn’t just dash off another exam each year as if it were a grocery list, not to mention the cost of doing so.
Can you find MY post where I actually said that someone else made that claim? I’d love to read it…If you reread my post before the one you’ve referenced, and I encourage you to do so, you’ll see that I never said anyone outright said this. I said there’s an attitude of superiority (maybe arrogance) that can be inferred from some posts.
Can you honestly say you’ve never read a post along the lines of “talk to me when you’ve passed L2,” or a sarcastic remark that a L1 candidate is “clearly” an authority on a topic because they’re so far in the program? I’ve seen many comments like these in a little over a year. Maybe I’ve got it backwards, but that comes off as the poster acting superior, because they have completed or are further along in the program. You’ve made some posts along these lines to people, but I get the feeling you’re going for humor… Personally, I don’t believe that charterholders (or teachers, from my original post) are “better” than candidates (students). Each can learn from the other, generally speaking. I completely agree that knowledge comes with experience, but I’ve seen many candidates on here exhibit substantial industry knowledge. I’m also referring to curriculum topics as well, where your experience isn’t written in the CFA Institute’s books. Further, experience doesn’t validate negative interactions between people…
I would love to see what these people (the ones who think it is effortless) could create…and then tell them to make some more…
I am agree that L1 exam could be taken twice a year. However, L2 and L3 should be taken once a year only.
If it wasn’t one time a year for L2 & L3, the seriouness of it would be lost, in my opinion. In the other hand, the pass rates for both levels would drop certainly and the number of candidates each year would rise. This would be a higher net income for CFAI, but a lot more of work. Assuming CFAI has optimized their capital and labor resources, that change could affect that equilibrium and even become a loss of money.
As many other people said, 6 months more of wait does not harm. If you really want to pursue the charter, you will work harder for the next time.
My advice is not study to pass the exams, study to learn and become a good professional. The “pass” mails just tell you that you have done good enough, they are not the objective themselves (I passed yeah!!!.. and what is convexity?.. I don’t know, I passed ! What do I care!!, I sold my books anyway…)
GL
But then, how do other revered professional bodies manage to pull this off? I don’t want to believe that the words “rigorous and quality” are the exclusive preserves of the CFAI. In fact, it woud be a violation of the Ethical Standards to imply that. We are only rubbing minds here, and all I am after is just a convincing and civil argument. Thanks.
Sure you can assume a normal distribution… Again, that’s my point–you’re just making an assumption. The fact that “most people” agree is irrelevant, unless those people are from the CFA Institute and they’re commenting truthfully on the MPS…
Again, the CFAI website says a failing band indicates performance relative to other candidates who failed- it doesn’t not indicate how close you compare to passing candidates in any meaningful way. Since we don’t truly know about the MPS and the ethics adjustment, take this example to illustrate my point. Assume the Institute has a range decided of 62-67%. If you’re above the range, it’s a clear pass. If you’re below the range, you definitely failed. If you’re in between, Ethics will determine where you fall. Once all decisions have been made with Ethics, 62-67% becomes a “no man’s land”, with no candidate left in this region. We have a definitive split in the pass and fail regions. Now, the candidates who failed are divided into the 10 bands. If we used this at Level 2, the bottom and top raw scores (rounded) would be 74 and 80 questions, respectively. Band 10, in this case, would be a lot further away than 1-2 questions from the MPS…(in this scenario)…and I don’t think this is too crazy, but it very well could be incorrect. Many people try to draw too much certainty from too little or low quality information (unless there’s a link someone could provide me with to give me more information that I haven’t read). Edit: the link I would like is the one that defines Band 10 as one question less than the MPS, in terms of raw score.
Theoretically, your advice is the objective, but in reality, this objective is seldom met. Ask me why? Well, it has been alluded to severally on this Forum that even a Level III candidate might find it difficult re-sitting for the Level 1 or Level 2, and passing. I am not saying this is appropriate, rather it is just the reality that stares us in the face. So “passing” remains the bottomline.
Other exams are different formats and styles. I agree other organizations do it and it’s quite possible the CFA Institute could as well. My guess, is that most of these other bodies have a larger staff than the CFA Institute. This is only a guess, though, as I haven’t looked into the numbers (so this might not be a valid reason). But, I think it’s unfair to write off the effort required to produce a high quality, internationally administered exam (trying to be fair to nonnative speakers).
The only thing the bands convey is performance relative to other candidates who failed-- nothing more, nothing less. Ask the CFA Institute (it’s on their website). The CFA Institute would disagree with your “failing isn’t failing” idea.
Band 10 and Band 1 both failed. Absolutely true! How close was a Band 10 to a pass and how close was a Band 1? Band 10 was closer than a Band 1. Popular knowledge! But both failed. Valid and accepted!
However, If passing the exam in an absolute sense implies adequate preparation, then how close each Band is to passing should IMPLY how well they prepared too in a LOGICAL sense, though not sensu stricto. KIndly take note of the word “Imply”.
To me, this is just deductive reasoning and it need not be stated expressly on the CFAI website. This is my opinion here (which by the way, I am entitled to).
Thank you.
I’ve been saying all along that the fail bands indicate performance relative only to those who failed. We don’t know how large of a gap, if any, there is between Band 10 and passing (which counters the idea that band 10 missed by one question). What we can’t say is that a band 10 fail would indicate a “superior or more successful investor/analyst” than a band 4 fail-- identical to the restrictions imposed on passing candidates with differing score matrices and paths to passing. I’m also sorry you got the idea that we’re against you having an opinion, although I never said anything against it.
Tickersu, I’m also sorry if I implied you did.
I’m not so impressed with the argument that it’s difficult to write “exam quality vignette”… the basic format is always…" Johnny CEO of ABC Investments" Chart / Table talking to his buddy Timmy CFA… 1.Which of these arguments is least true? 2.Calculate x 3.Calculate y 4. Suppose Johnny was living on Mars, which buzz word would he use? 5. calculate z 6. Which of these buzzwords least likely makes sense?
I’m sure that you’re correct.
Write one for us on Fixed Income. You can post it here by, say, next Tuesday, 7/21/15, COB.
We’ll be on pins and needles till then.
I hate to add to the workload, although I asked DanV first, but I still would like to see the link that says a Band 10 is just one question below the MPS-- same deadline as your FI vignette. I’m not going to search for it myself, since I made no such claim. 