Quality of new 2015 Reading Material

[Anonymous]

I was looking to get some feedback from others that are looking at doing exam 3 soon. Do you find that the official material for exam 3 is exceptionally badly written with spelling/grammar/missing words everywhere?

[Anonymous]

Hi

I wrote Exam 3 (2015) and I totally agree with you…the material is definitely very badly written. I even found the flow of the information to be of very poor quality.

Nevertheless, I still went through all three books to prepare for my exam (with written summaries for some sections) and I got 56%. A bit of a bummer, so close yet so far. I Will rewrite it again in Nov/Dec session. Am not sure yet how different my studying will be this time around but I thought that maybe reading through the material once was clearly not good enough. They do say in the study guide that first reading is just to familiarise yourself with the material & the second should focus on the study guide outcomes. Exam3 is very very bulky but I also think its probably the most interesting of the 4 exams. Will also write Exam 4 in the same sitting so a lot of work to be done in the next 2.5month or so.

Good luck with your preps.

[Anonymous]

I read Vol 3 book 1 and 2 in the last few weeks. I found errors on virtually every page. This includes grammar, spelling mistakes, words missing altogether, badly formatted tables etc. It is impossible to study effectively with this material – you have to correct the errors or assume the corrections you are making are correct and in line with what the author actually meant. Not the way to study to pass a difficult exam. I am a CFA Charterholder and have seen what much better quality material looks like. I complained to the PRMIA…and after wasting a lot of my time they finally admitted that there is a problem with the material from their end. It clearly has not been edited and proof read. I have got a full refund and alerted the CFA Institute too given that the PRMIA entices many CFA charterholders with exemptions vs. FRM.

Shockingly unprofessional. Time to consider doing the FRM, which I am sure is not littered with errors everywhere.

[Mukul Pareek]

There are minor errors here and there, and I would think in the next editions they will get addressed. If you were to look past any minor things, I do believe the quality is excellent. Remember that PRMIA is an entirely volunteer driven organization. Though I am not entirely sure, the material was put together by the contributing authors for passion and not for money.

Yet PRMIA does need to create the connection between students and members and the authors so feedback can be shared, and the authors (often each chapter has a different author) can incorporate that in future editions.

[Author]

Posts