This thread is asking about the order of exams. Darrell is inviting views about the order students might take the exams. We deleted a number of threads that went off on a tangent, making points that have been made many times in other threads. We suggest you use the new thread created called Actuarial Sheep to discuss those issues.
To answer your other question - Darrell's post says: "the winter sessions above are equivalent to".
In the first winter session above there are two subjects. CM1 is roughly the length of 1.5 CT subject and CB1 roughly the length of one CT subject. 1.5+1 = 2.5.
Similarly in the second winter session with CS2 and CB2.
The length of the courses is being referenced, not the number of exam papers you might need to sit.
I hope that clarifies things.
So you're recommending they don't start? Very helpful if they've already decided they are going to!!!
Assuming they will still start then they still need to decide what to do first even if you don't think it matters. In fact, given your experiences, perhaps we should recommend that they do the exams roughly in order, and don't jump ahead and do some later ones if they haven't finished the earlier ones. Easy in hindsight to say that but perhaps they are less likely to lose out if anything changes in the future
By the way OP - there aren't more "subjects". There are a couple more papers, given they've introduced some computer-exams, although if you include the fact that they lost a paper in CP3 then I think there's only one more paper if you're starting from scratch, and the number of exam hours is about the same. Obviously anyone having to resit anything will end up with more exam hours than someone who passes everything first time.
Good luck
Yes unfortunately that would be my recommendation. Do not start until the new curriculum is well established. Mr Cribb has said that no one would be put in limbo but many people are put off starting or continuing exams due to the risk of having to shell out large amounts of money on taking exams which could be rendered worthless.
I agree that taking the exams in order is the better choice but then why don’t the IFoA make this a requirement rather than keep changing the rule.
Mr Brown is wrong about the majority of people being happy with the IFoA. As I keep saying there are potentially 10,000 students out of 15,000 who will face extra exams. I am sure they will not be pleased. A few have come out but most are just sheep.
What is also clear is that you do not have a voice or any say in exam matters. Complaints are being swept under the carpet and I have not met a single actuary who has not complained to the IFoA about something or other. I include many senior Actuaries who also have complete disregard of the profession.
Mr Brown still does not seem to understand there are more exams. 11 is a greater number than 9. I would have hoped that any actuary would understand that, even if they were unqualified, qualified in another country or got exemptions at university. Mr Brown also hasn’t comment on my point that the IFoA have lied about these exams being sat and passed independently. The IFoA have changed their tune or made another mistake here. The list of errors is endless and I find it difficult to keep up with the constant corrections of published material which is not even made clear with a notification of an update.
So in summary. Unfortunately it is very difficult for a new person to make up their mind as there are several references including the first few hits on google which say that you will not be disadvantaged by the implementation of the new exam system. If you start now it is at the risk of having exams you’ve taken already rendered worthless due to potential regulatory and legal developments and due to changes in the new exam system. The whole notion of the chartered actuary and FRC review is also out there and should be monitored carefully.
The exams In Switzerland take 3 years or less to complete. You can then get mutual recognition from the IFoA and become a fellow in no time. That would be the wise choice. You just have to give up your house and home and learn a bit of german and find a job in a country with pretty much closed borders. But if you can clear these hurdles you’ll get the same qualification in less than half the time. Not many people have to resit an exam in Switzerland, let alone 6 times.
The IFoA could have prevented this from happening if they would have just honored their original promise not to disadvantage current students. A one to one mapping of exams would be the simple solution. Or not allow foreign qualifications to get such an easy path to fellowship.
But as with many actuaries, they are too proud and stubborn to admit any mistake and have continued down a slippery path which will eventually ruin their credibility and reputation.
