Did any of the charterholders here vote on this or was this a unilateral decision ?
I don’t think they could make the questions that much harder to make up for an eliminated answer choice. They’ll have to raise the total amount of questions you have to get right. THis is strange.
Straci Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Did any of the charterholders here vote on this or > was this a unilateral decision ? I’m a charterholder and this is news to me, and I actually read the emails the CFAI sends to us. I find it troubling that I had to learn this on a message board… Anyway, I 2nd Joey’s point that this change will dilute the quality of the charter among the general public (assuming that they’ve even heard of the CFA designation).
“Did any of the charterholders here vote on this or was this a unilateral decision ?” I sure didn’t. Willy
What the hell is the point of this? A 3-answer multiple choice question? All because one of the four is obviously not plausible? Why not make all 3 incorrect answers plausible? This just sounds too stupid to be true. Hell, why stop at 3? Let’s just make the questions MC with 2 answers! Way to dilute the whole program CFAi!
Yeah, True or False! As an LIII er, who has already faced 360 (240 LI, 120 L II) out of the 420 (60 more for L III) total MC questions total for the entire porgam, I think this is stupid. It also flies smack in the face the recent (and I believe positive) trends towards making the exams slightly harder over time.
I am also a charterholder and I am not pleased to learn of this either. If they are so confident that this does not weaken the program, then why is it burried on their website? Why didn’t they announce it or put it in the letters they email us? Ridiculous. I too am pissed that I spent countless hours studying and after I finish they make this move. What is the point of doing this? Was the 4-option MC exam really that problematic–of all the things that don’t need reforming in this country (or world), the multiple choice exam with four possible is answers is not one!
Oh, and the main reason I posted was to encourage charterholders to submit complaints online at the CFA-I website. I did. They should know our opinions and they should have incorporated the views of us that pay dues and took these exams!!!
cfastudent Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oh, and the main reason I posted was to encourage > charterholders to submit complaints online at the > CFA-I website. I did. They should know our > opinions and they should have incorporated the > views of us that pay dues and took these exams!!! If the pass rate once this format is implemented is similar to the previous years, would you still be pi$$ed?
“Way to dilute the whole program CFA”. GDiddy, I’ve already sent my Charter back to Virginia with “do NOT return” as the return address, C.O.D. of course. I figure that this will counter the commoditization of the Charter that this stupid move by AIMR will most certainly cause. In fact, I urge everyone whose Charter number begins with the number 6 or 7 to relinquish their designations to enhance the value of the more newly minted Charters, now watch me hit this putt. Those members whose Charter numbers begin with the numbers 4 and 5…please retire…if you haven’t made your millions from the profession by now then…well…I hate to say this but you probably just don’t “get it”. Willy Note: I am making the implicit assumption that members with Charter numbers starting in 1, 2 or 3 are irrelevant for the purposes of this post.
“If the pass rate once this format is implemented is similar to the previous years, would you still be pi$$ed?” I would be because the fact would still remain that a semi retarded south african tree sloth, with ADD, could still [theoretically] pass the CFA exams by blindly guessing. Willy Note: Sure, some current Chartered members blindly guessed their way through the CFA exams, but purple and yellow tie combos on a Sloth??? Not a chance.
Straci Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Did any of the charterholders here vote on this or > was this a unilateral decision ? I don’t get this. HOW can they take decisions like this ? Is not the CFAI governed and accountable to its members ? What exactly is the CORPORATE GOVERNANCE structure of CFAI ?
What pisses me off the most is the constant change CFAI deems necessary whether its LOS or exam format or mock exams. I doubt the exam will get any easier from going from 4 to 3 MCQ, since the minimum pass rate might just go up.
What? As noted in the above posts, there are clearly some notable if not considerable downsides to a 3 answer test, so all else being equal why make the change? Psychometricians, “the fourth choice often performs poorly,” what the hell?
I simply don’t see the advantage of a 3 answer test. The psychometricians may be right but if that’s the case, why not leave it as it is and have the fourth choice perform poorly as it is? The general mindset is that it’ll become easier and that’s what nobody wants.
this is definitely stupid , please write to CFAI and complain about this… remind me a story when i was a teen: we have a hockey league where skills are well diversed, good teams beated the bad teams 30-1 in a game, ridicious. The way we solved this problem is to reduce the game playing time by 75% (play only 25%), it turns out the bad team are more competitive they can sometime pull a tie or a 1-goal margin game… things are more exciting. if we reduce the questions from 4 to 3 , expect something like that to happen, unqualified candidiates can make a serious threat to pass the exam over those more qualified candidiates…
WillyR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > “Way to dilute the whole program CFA”. > > GDiddy, I’ve already sent my Charter back to > Virginia with “do NOT return” as the return > address, C.O.D. of course. I figure that this will > counter the commoditization of the Charter that > this stupid move by AIMR will most certainly > cause. In fact, I urge everyone whose Charter > number begins with the number 6 or 7 to relinquish > their designations to enhance the value of the > more newly minted Charters, now watch me hit this > putt. Those members whose Charter numbers begin > with the numbers 4 and 5…please retire…if you > haven’t made your millions from the profession by > now then…well…I hate to say this but you > probably just don’t “get it”. > > Willy > > Note: I am making the implicit assumption that > members with Charter numbers starting in 1, 2 or 3 > are irrelevant for the purposes of this post. Uh, irrelevant?
I guess they won’t be doing many more of those two-fer type questions like “Statement A is true/false. Statement B is true/false.” Or those questions where they ask you to calculate two numbers, and will get you if you miss either one.
It’s a shame the average hiring manager in the investment management industry isn’t a psychometrician.
This is an easy dispute to solve. I’d like to see the % of responders for each wrong answer on a random set of questions. If most incorrect answers tend to 2 of the 3, going down to 3 should not decrease the difficutly. Though, it would save a lot of reading time.