Hi all, I will be joining this to get my Associate title. Please share your experience on this course. Thanks.
Hi all, I am also being asked to attend this online course. Could anyone share this with more info, particularly about online debates? I am not sure about how online debates work. Thanks.
Congrats for your associateship! I did the PSC course one year back and don't know if the structure changed. But this is how it went for me. During the course, there are five sessions, each of which includes a range of exercises, and a group discussion. At the end of the course, there will be a Question & Answer session with the course facilitators. Introduction to Professionalism: This session consists of several elements providing a rounded perspective of the nature of professions in general, professional ethics, and the particular structure of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries. The Actuaries’ Code: This session draws on the lessons from the previous session and considers the conduct expected of actuaries by the Actuaries’ Code. Generic Case Studies: This session outlines four case studies relating to the ethical issues that can arise in general areas of actuarial practice. Actuary in the Doc: This session centres around a 35-minute video of a dramatised investigation into the alleged misconduct of an actuary. Specialism Session: This session is a chance for you to focus on your own specialist area and to work with others in your field. You will watch a presentation from a specialist actuary before working through two topical case studies. The course will finish with a general question and answer session. This is your opportunity to ask facilitators on the course any questions that you may have about the course content, any issues raised by the course, or any questions you may have relating to professional skills within the actuarial profession that have not already been covered by the group discussions. It's really interesting! I hope this sheds some light. Enjoy and best of luck.
Hi, is there a deadline from purchase of the Professionalism course with when you have to read the materials and do the assessment? I paid the fee on the website and have access to the content but am thinking of deferring the CB3 module to the next sitting, so not going through the content until then. is this acceptable?
Hi, Yes, the PSC course has a timetable and you will have to complete certain tasks before a deadline. Just to confirm, I see you mention CB3 upwards: You don't need PSC course to do CB3, you only need to do Professionalism Course Stage 1.
Ah right, thanks for the reply! In that case, I am referring to the PCS 1. Do I have to complete the course materials a certain length after purchasing it?
When I did the PSC (December 2019), all materials were in the VLE. Sorry, I cannot be of much help. Anyone who did an earlier version might be able to help you.
Thanks for the info. It is indeed very helpful. Can I say that this course structure is similar to CB3?
CB3 is structured in the sense that you need to watch videos from i-coach, then do a workbook, participate in a game and taking an online quiz. Here for each item, you would need to do some reading and participating in discussion with others. A moderator will check your participation and if not you will be removed from the course.
Has anyone done either PST stage 1 or stage 2? How many hours overall are required for each stage? Thanks!
How many sessions are available in a year? I checked that the next available session is in September. Will there be another one in the same year after this September session?
I've attended many Professionalism Courses, both online and in person over the 30+ years since I qualified. Most have seemed very good and worthwhile at the time, and I believed that the IFoA really was acting as an ethical and professional organisation. But it all now seems a sham in the face of the IFoA completely ignoring the overcharging of loyal policyholders via #loyaltypenalty #pricewalking. These policyholders were often older, less tech savvy, or simply more trusting that insurance companies would follow Treating Customers Fairly. Especially since actuaries with a public interest duty and the Actuaries' Code were there to help make sure that nothing unethical was done. The Citizens' Advice Bureau said in a super complaint to the FCA (Financial Conduct Authority) in 2018 that #loyaltypenalty was incompatible with Treating Customers Fairly. It seems obvious to me that they were right. Why did the IFoA actuaries who worked for the many home and motor insurers involved fail to see this? Why did the IFoA's General Insurance Board fail to see this? So far the IFoA has been silent about actuaries' culpability in this scandal (under which millions of policyholders were overcharged by probably over £1bn per year for many years). The FCA has finally had to intervene to stop the practice from next year to "reduce harm" in the insurance markets. In its public statements about it, instead the IFoA has said it welcomes the changes (why didn't it stop the practice far earlier then?) and said that other professionals were just as involved as actuaries were in calculating premiums. That may be so, but does the IFoA really believe that is a credible justification for actuaries and the IFoA not "Speaking Up" about this practice years ago? After more than 6 weeks of challenging the IFoA, its General Insurance Board, Regulatory Board and its Presidents on this, I have yet to see any credible defence against the charge that #loyaltypenalty breached Treating Customers Fairly and the Integrity, Impartiality, Speaking Up and Communications principles of the Actuaries' Code. For anyone attending a professionalism course, ask the IFoA about this: if they can give you a credible answer then I'll be (very pleasantly) surprised. Of course if the IFoA does have an answer, it begs the question: why haven't they published that answer? It is naive of the IFoA and its members to think that its silence in the face of questions about the ethics of it having allowed (and not only allowed, but *taught*) price walking /loyalty penalty has gone unnoticed by the public, politicians and the government. (See this thread: https://www.acted.co.uk/forums/inde...ilure-that-happened-on-the-ifoas-watch.17694/ and https://www.reddit.com/r/Actuary_news/comments/ohibs7/doingtheifoasjobforit_insurers_involved_in/ for some more details).
For those of you who have completed this - during the week of the course, do they require: 3 further comments on each case study (so 12 further comments across the 4 case studies); or 3 comments for every 2 case studies (so 6 further comments across the 4) ?
