No, it wasn’t on the exam… Now that I have some separation from the exam, I have been thinking about how I might approach this differently next year if I fail. I used a combination of Schweser and CFAI, qbank, end of chapter problems, and vol. 1 and 2. I write a lot for my job (sell side) under timed conditions (sometimes extreme time pressure), so I think it’s fair to say that I am an above average writer. All told, I put in around 400 hours… … AND I GOT BRUTALIZED BY THE MORNING. I think I could have doubled the number of hours I studied, and it would not have helped. I could have used only CFAI, and it would not have helped. I could have done 1,000 more practice problems, and it would not have helped. So what are you supposed to do to ace the morning section? What would you guys do differently next time? Anything? Read more? Do more questions? I think it was a bogus test as far as the morning was concerned, and I hope I pass, because I don’t see how I could possibly do any better next year.
You just need to know the stuff. Questions i knew i would answer under 30 seconds and that was most of questions. If you would start thinking about how to answer - you would fall behind. Remember, CFAI doesnt want us to think, it wants us to be a robots who can recite answers in the sleep
well, i knew the answers and still could not do some of them in the alloted time. i don’t consider myself a slow test taker, either.
For me, doing more problems would help. I made so many silly slip-ups that if I see myself doing it in practice problems, I usually remember not to do them on the exam. I always make some mistakes like this, but I feel like I did more on L3 than I did at L2 and L1, proportionately. Maybe it was overconfidence. I thought I understood the material, but there were lots of niggling little bits to throw you off.
so that’s it? know the material better? maybe i am just bitter about the morning section (i am bitter about it), but i am not buying it.
Whatever time advantage you have from thinking fast is squandered by having to physically write. I see no purpose to be served by making the part of the exam where you can’t help but have less time to deliberate harder than the one where you have more time. Especially when the IPS material is inherently more deliberative.
I thought the morning was difficult…and agree that there was a lot of time pressure. I passed L1 and L2 with >70% in virtually every section and I thought L3 morning was by far the hardest I’ve taken so far. The afternoon was pretty standard(easy), although I thought a few of the ethics questions were very ambiguous…even more so than usual.
One bright side is if you check the passing grade grids from the August 17, 2007 threads there are some extremely weak grids that passed. People with sub-50% on over half the AM passed without anything approaching all 70+s on the PM.
maybe i passed, i really have no idea. from the discussion here and my general feeling after the exam, i killed the PM. but the question remains – how does one train to do well on the AM section?
asdffdsa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > maybe i passed, i really have no idea. from the > discussion here and my general feeling after the > exam, i killed the PM. > > but the question remains – how does one train to > do well on the AM section? The very same questions crossed my mind yesterday (too wasted Sat night). I think the answer is is that there isn’t any way to ace the morning. It’s designed that way. That’s why you never see someone with >70% in all morning categories. It’s the afternoon section that will save people from having to write the test again. If I have to write this test again next year, I’m going to have a quick look the test questions before I start and concentrate my effort on the questions with the most amount of points and slowly work through the rest as time permits. If it comes again that I don’t have time to finish, at least I put my best effort forward with the most critical questions. I just wished I followed this logic this year. Here’s to waiting out a long three months…
i’m worried i might have scored in the 50s int eh am. i’d be surprised if i didn’t score well above 70 in the pm.
i think i’m looking at 75-80 in the PM (conservatively) and 40-50 in the AM. i don’t know if it will be enough.
asdffdsa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I think it was a bogus test as far as the morning > was concerned, and I hope I pass, because I don’t > see how I could possibly do any better next year. The exam was not bogus. Your preparation was bogus ( don’t take it personal). Nothing in this test was outside the material. Anyone of above-average intelligence and enough practice to solve number problems quickly can ace this test. The key is you can’t spend 5 minutes trying to figure out how to solve a problem, as soon as you’re done reading you should know right away what to do. If you’re going to start thinking, you’re too late. I wasted about 8 minutes on the Excess Return question just because there was too much information given and they gave us 4 minutes to do this calculation. I had to rush the IPS just for that.
well, mo, i don’t see how my prep could have been bogus. i read the entire curriculum three times slowly. i did all of the end of chapter problems, and i used multiple question sources from schweser as well. i did the previous year’s exams. i put a lot of time and effort in. i did exactly the same amount of work and strategy for L1 and L2 and i passed both of those. outside of the AM section, i don’t see how this exam was any different (i.e., the PM was fair just like at L1 and L2).
The PM was a total joke and an insult to anyone who has put time and effort into preparing for this thing. The AM had very few tricks, you only had to be ready to write for 3 hours straight almost without thinking except for the IPS part off-course. I started backwards, with question 11 and moving back, I ended up with one hour for the first 3 questions, including a trivial behavioral finance question. The only items I had to question were: 1 - How to calculate the excess return for the DB plan given all this information given about future liabilities and contribution schedule 2 - The differences between Sector rotation in bonds and in stocks 3 - Come up with one more advantage for the Re-sampled efficient frontier ( I put the diversification one, but needed one more) Other than that, it was ALL from the books.
I agree that the questions in the AM were fair, but I have yet to hear of anyone who felt there was enough time to do it. Now, that might not make for a bogus exam, because you don’t have to answer everything to pass it, and everyone had the same length of time to answer things (other than possibly the blackout-people). So, from a test-design perspective, I don’t think it was bogus, so long as the MPS isn’t all that high. I actually enjoyed most of the problems; just didn’t enjoy the panic and time pressure.
the PM was not a joke. it was easier than the AM by a mile, but there were several tricky questions. all you have to do is read the posts on here to see that several of the questions are in contention. they also tested the finest possible details instead of hitting the large topics, which is what the majority of people spend the majority of their timing studying. it sounds like you did well–congratulations. but a lot of people here studied really hard and are smart people and they got blown away. that tells me AM test was at least partially unfair.
I am sorry to pick on you, but I worked as a University professor for 3 years in the US and it drove me crazy how students judge tests based on whether or not they can ace them. The objective of the tests are three levels: 1 - Test your retention of some points 2 - Test the direct application of some principles and concepts 3 - Extend what you have learned to apply it to new situations you have not faced. Most of the test covered the first two aspects, you should be able to get a high B based on only those ( for a well written test), to get an A you should be able to do part 3 as well. Putting you under time pressure is an alternative to increasing the weight of part 3 (putting fewer but harder questions) For some reason, many students feel entitled to get an “A” because they have done everything they were asked to do in the syllabus. That’s how the American system works, I am glad the CFAI does not operate like that, because it would become another bogus piece of paper. You can get some consolation from the fact that they do not post grades or scores, so at the end of the day it will not make a difference on paper.
i agree with your analysis in spirit, but if people “only” did what they were “asked to do,” they would study for 250 hours and call it good. you could have studied for a lot longer than that and still gotten hammered in the AM. the point i am trying to make, and the reason i think it was a bogus exam, is that i know that i could have studied a lot more and it would not have meaningfully changed the result. it might just be me, but i don’t see how a person can prepare for the morning section given the intense time constraints, minutiae questions and atrocious format of the booklet. i knew the curriculum well and had practiced, and that was still not enough to earn a high AM score.
i totally agree with your point, asdffdsa. “I think I could have doubled the number of hours I studied, and it would not have helped. I could have used only CFAI, and it would not have helped. I could have done 1,000 more practice problems, and it would not have helped. So what are you supposed to do to ace the morning section? What would you guys do differently next time? Anything? Read more? Do more questions?” i think i put in as much effort in the preparation as you did and got hammered on the AM part as well. i found AM sections of prior years quite doable. i did the 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006 and 2007 exam (timed and without interruption) and thought none of those was nearly as difficult as the 2008 AM section. if i fail, which is very likely (AM (40-50) and PM (70-75)), i would not use schweser next year, but focus on the cfai texts only. i would also change my test taking strategy by writing much shorter responses with a few key words. perhaps i would take a prep course for a week or so. right now i feel very empty and tired from the last few months, as most other people on this forum. i wish you all good luck come august 13th.