If months of studying cant help you to pass, then what would another bubble do?
We were all supposed to know the CFAI rules before we started this journey. There is no point in complaining now.
…
In my test center, they absolutely claim that they have them. Some test takers were actually discussing whether they really do have them or not over the lunch break.
How is going to jail for insider trading or running someone over (say for drinking and driving) a less harsh sentence than getting banned for a few years from writing the exam? Yes, some people get special treatment like Mrs. Clinton, but I would say that not necessarily the norm. I don’t know about you, but I would consider being in jail for a year a harsher consequence over not being able to write the exams for few years.
Also, just because other institutions enforce lesser penalties… it doesn’t mean CFAI should lower theirs to the same level. As my mom always said “if so-and-so jumped off the bridge, would you also jump off the bridge?”
I can name a few of those exams that are computerized with video-recorded rooms/cubicles. There are still proctors that actively watch these video streams and investigate anything unusual in the testing room (in addition to facilitating the testing process). Proctors aren’t removed from the equation.
I think it’s highly unlikely that they do not have technology within the test room that can detect cell phones. Such technology most likey does exist but it would almost certainly be visible or intrusive (such as having to walk through a scanner of some sort similar to airport security). I’d say it’s almost certain they’re bluffing on that one.
*meant to say highly unlikely that they DO have that that technology…
I agree with what S2000Magician is insinuating, that these crimes have hurt people in a way that we cannot fathom and to compare them and the penalties to a PCP violation is moronic. I would even argue that this is a violation of Standard VII by a candidate compromising the reputation of the CFA Institute by comparing the Stanford case to a PCP violation. Probably a stretch but the argument could be made.
There is no way the CFAI has the resources to set up spectrum analyzers to search for cell phone signals when they can’t even set up a simple video camera to monitor the room.
…
Sorry this is happening to you
Why does the length of an athlete’s suspension for doping set a precedent for the length of a CFA candidate’s suspension for violating the rules of the exam?
…
I do wish you the best. Everything will work out. Keep your head up, but not too far up, otherwise you’ll look suspicious.
Probably.
So you’re saying that Harvard sets precedents that CFA Institute is obligated to follow?
I didn’t say they had them. I said they CLAIMED to have them. I don’t want to put their claims to the test with my own exam. If they are lying, it would be an ethics violation. If they do really have them, they should be able to put cameras in place was my original argument.
I’m not sure if it’s exactly apples to apples. Those students that will be reinstated (after a year not 6 months) will have a permanent notation on their transcript or the “academic kiss of death” as your article states. I suppose if they made your future charter different in a way or made you use an alternate designation you may have a point. All will have black marks when their c-suite interviewers ask for their transcript or their graduate school admissions boards requests them.
EllensPage, ever heard the fable of the fox and sour grapes?
The bottom line is, CFAI rules are what we signed up for, using our free will and rational judgement.
EllensPage does not read fables. She(?) only reads sophisticated novels with really big words in them. Then, she memorizes those big words and posts them on analystforum.com.
Perhaps the PCP investigation got started because the grader thought you were calling them a bad name when you wrote ‘obfuscation’ and ‘antediluvian’ in your AM book???