• We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
  • Please be advised that the SP1, SP5 and SP7 X1 deadline is the 14th July and not the 17th June as first stated. Please accept out apologies for any confusion caused.

what the communications papers have become..

P

phantom

Member
these days the communications papers have seen more of "having to decide" what to communicate rather than just "communicating ahead" what the examiner has already told u.. the previous papers told u straight ahead what to communicate and u started straight from there, although this was not good.

though i like this development, as deciding what to communicate is as important as communicating itself.. however it's hard on time in the exams... i spent significant time in this april'08 exam "deciphering the technical material" provided.. the planning and actual writing came later..
though this new aspect "decipering technical material" has been added to exam, which is good, they haven't added the "time" to 3h 15mins.. aren't we being unfairly treated to the previous generation of actuaries who sat 201?

any thoughts on the above and/or the recent papers?
 
I found all the past papers were only 2-3 pages say, so it took a moment to get over the shock of opening what appeared to be a book when I got my paper on Tuesday.

With all those figures / notes etc for both questions, it took me ages to find one of the main points of the letter as it was in one of the later notes, with loads of irrelevant stuff before it - and I know the whole point is to work out what is irrelevant, but as you said, there isn't time to decipher such a largeamount of data.

Other than that, I thought it was ok-ish compared to past papers, it just took a bit more investigative work than usual.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top