I’m reaching out to see where I missed in 2017 exam. I took L3 for the first time, felt like AM kept slapping me whenever I turned the page. PM was a bit easier to me.
I finished the AM at 2 hrs and 40 mins and had 20 mins to go over it quickly. The AM part felt like someone held a gun to my head while I was running a marathon. A day after the exam I couldn’t recall a lot of the questions! This is how fast I was going.
Anywho, long story short I failed band 9. PM which I thought I did better on turned out to be as ugly as the AM. Now when I want to make modifications to my plan, I feel like I did all that I could. I started in november, put in more than 500 hours, I solved past papers 3 times up to 2008. I did all EOC & blue boxes. I also did all topic tests and was scoring above 70% most of the time. I did my first round of reading from schweser and then the 2 additional rounds were from the CFAI books. I also did a round of videos on 80% of the topics.
Now the only thing that comes to my mind is that I must have been correcting my papers in a way where I gave myself more credit. Although the MCQs I did were also in the high range. So now I want to know if any of the prep providers have a service of grading your papers in a similar way to how the CFAI wants you to? I’m thinking maybe when I see how they correct my papers I will perform better next time.
Please if anyone knows any provider that does that let me know.
Just don’t give yourself partial credit unless the grading guidelines clearly indicate how partial credit should be applied. Assume that the real graders won’t give any. That way your studying to earn 100% of points. If you use partial credit as a crutch, you’ll feel confident scoring 60-70% on your mocks but you might actually only have full comprehension of 50-60%. Better to study to try and get 65-70% without partial credit and then hope the partial are a bonus.
No, I think in that case if it’s clear you used the exact correct term for the 2 you answered then count them. But if it asks for a liquidity constraint in IPS and you don’t nail it, give yourself zero. Or if you think you got the correct justification but didn’t use the exact key words the answer key uses, zero.
judging from this past example and having a similar question like that, and being confident in 2/3 and then getting a <50 with this question being a high value question…I would opt to say yes. Definitely. Schweser said they give partial but being a 2nd time retakes I question the validity of that now…
Think of the partial this way. If it’s a 3 part justification, and you get 2 of the justifications 100% correct, you’d get 2/3 “partial credit”. If it’s a 1 part question you answered 67% accurately, you’d get a zero. The partial is in terms of how many points you answered accurately, not in how partially accurate were your answers.
Hi mbl sorry to hear that. I guess what we have also missed is to nail the PM portion. Of all the short time I had, I dedicated too much time to AM that I wasn’t too well prepared for PM. Yes, we have to focus on AM AM AM and AM but that’s in addition to mastering the PM session. The competition is high in L3 so no excuses for the PM portion. As hashtag says AM is the damage control but lose no points in PM. Ok that AM got us but because we couldn’t get the best or good score in PM we failed in those high bands. Perhaps if I had better score in PM than 3/2/4 I would’ve passed.
My two cents to clear the AM and get the points. CFA institute has clearly stated that if you just regurgitate what is in the case as your answer you will get it wrong. What I found to work is to identify the part of the case relevant to each answer and then always write “because of… Liquidity, time horizon…etc” or “which is an example of ALM, Monetization… etc”
If you answer like this is shows that you know what you are talking about.