Guys, all in all, i emailed the CFAI, and i was told it is not a violation as long as the information is factual. So it is at our discretion to decide if we want to include it in the personal statement section or not.
Based on people’s opinion, i will definitely not include it in my personal statement area.
There’s a question very similar to this in the ethics section that asks if you can make the claim that you passed all 3 exams on your first try. The answer is that you can as long as you don’t claim superior performance.
What you should think about when considering including this information is that it will be questioned, so what questions could be asked, and what answers are you going to give?
You’ll learn pretty quickly (or already know) that anything you deem important enough to include on any report, you will most likely be questioned on it. So if its something you think is important and want to talk about, include it. Otherwise, don’t.
My personal opinion is that while its a great stat that shows your aptitute for hard work and self education, CFAI rules makes tip-toeing around this potentially a bad experience. Consider questions such as “So does this mean you’re a better CFA?” or “What does this matter if the exam is pass/fail?”.
although it’s a little similar, “highest possible” is not the same as “above 70%”, the guidance on page 243 states “the exam is graded only as “pass” or “fail.”. So I’d say it’s a violation and in no way a statement of fact (especially considering the email from cfai about how some questions are discarded).
I’m not sure how far your email will get with them on this topic. They’ve already addressed the question in an explicit manner. It’s also around a topic that they created and interpret for people-- it’s not something you can support with outside research.
As long as you are not a charterholder, people want to see some proof of your engagement in the program. Just attach your pass notices to application, they show your performance to those who are interested and you don’t come across as arrogant to those who don’t care.
I mean, they said it’s okay. That means it’s okay for the real world and on an exam- they’ve never said some things are only okay in the exam but not okay in real life (for Ethics).
I think this topic was beaten to a pulp a long time ago, but these explicit clarifications from the Institute should put this to bed, no questions asked.
I don’t see how anybody could think this is a violation. If you scored 70%+ in all areas, you scored 70%+ in all areas. No interpretation, nothing subjective… It’s a fact. As long as you don’t draw any conclusions about what that means, it’s not a violation.