@tomas
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Up0
I’ve taken a little over 12 hours worth of studying using this program and it seems pretty cool. I would like to see how the adaptive technology works out; the expectation of study time possibly being 200 – 250 hours instead of about 300 hours sounds attractive. Since this program is new, I would really like to see the future results of candidates who used this program and passed and after how many attempts they passed.
I’ve only had a couple problems with it so far. One is there can be quite a bit of typos in the lessons, numerically in the math and verbally in definitions of concepts (you’ll notice if you’re paying attention; it gave a definition and later said that’s what it is not after it said that’s what it is). Also, in my 12 hours, I have encountered one conceptual error and quite possibly another. I hope they have a team or mechanism to proofread and catch anymore of them. I wouldn’t want to learn the mistaken concepts of the subjects.
Another little bit is that the FAQs say you can expect a tutor to respond within 24 hours. A couple responses took a little longer than that. But, their responses are very clarifying, very elucidating.
As with a lot of technologies, the first model isn’t perfect and may have a few bugs in it or improvements that need to be made (I remember this happened to i – pad on its release). If they keep working on this, this appears that it may become a superior alternative for CFA study material. I’m still going to use it and hope there are no more errors or that it is being improved upon. I liked Sophie’s article, but I felt like these things I noticed should be considered as well by everyone else interested in this, especially considering it cost at least $599 (seems not a problem if you could get your employer to cover it).
