FAAA backs lower cost multiple choice adviser exam
Cost, flexibility and clarity make the shift to a multiple choice financial adviser exam the right option, according to the Financial Advice Association of Australia (FAAA).
A day after the Stockbrokers and Investment Advisers Association (SIAA) also backed the multiple choice option and called for a commensurate lowering of the exam fee, the FAAA also suggested that ASIC should also be able to report exam results inside a time-frame of about two weeks.
The FAAA said there were two major problems with the existing exam format that had broader consequences.
“Firstly, the exam is far too expensive for university students and career changers. This is a factor as a disincentive for some to pursue a career in financial advice. Secondly, the timing considerations for a professional year candidate are challenging, as the infrequency of the exam, the time taken to provide results, and the consequences of failing the exam and being unable to move on to the second half of the professional year are problematic, potentially extending the “Professional Year” well beyond 12 months,” the FAAA said.
Like the SIAA, the FAAA also stated that it favours changes to the exam process that will give students greater flexibility and control over their academic careers, such as allowing candidates to sit the exam while completing their tertiary studies.
“This would also provide greater certainty to employers appointing a professional year candidate if they had already passed the financial adviser exam,” it said.
Commenting on the submission, FAAA chief executive, Sarah Abood said the proposed changes to the adviser exam would simplify and speed up the process, making it both more flexible and potentially much cheaper for candidates.
Wow big issues attended too.
FFS with so many really important Advice issues not fixed, this is a Govt bait to waste time & thought on.
Much more important crap to sort out.
If your spouse committed suicide after failing an exam, purposely written in a manner designed cull advisers wouldn’t you want questioned ask?
Imagine if we put through new migrants a challenging test written to purposely rule out people gaining citizenship in Australia. Of course at the time we don’t like Migrants so we’ll try and get rid of them.
We could write questions like. Select the “best” Answer… The Australian flag is a) Not White & Red b) Not blue and Red c) Is blue and white and not red or d) Is Not red or white.
Then we flip it around because we either want to get more citizens and feel we’ll be caught out… and so we make it so easy..eg Here’s a picture of the flag A) Is the Australian Flag mostly blue, white and red B) or Fluro Pink. Select A or B.
mmmm wonder what people would say. Funny how Super funds will soon be needing new entrants.
I of course have only been writing exams for over a decade and recognise an exam design to get rid of people. Pity no one had the gumption to stand up for advisers, especially the ones that failed, gave up or committed suicide over this previous style of exam designed to purposely cull Advisers.