2019 Education Strategy

After 18 versions and countless modifications such as no students will be disadvantaged, to most students will not be disadvantaged to the average student won’t be disadvantaged, I can still find contradictions in their documents.

 

I doubt it. I think he or she is interested in finding out how many days someone might get who is studying CM1 in their first year of actuarial work.

 

If the exams have breathtaking new content, shouldn’t study days be provided? Previously the comments were why don’t you get on with it. So now, study for 250 hours without even any support from the employer? Great solution...

 

I’m pointing out to the new student the reality of the exams. Half of people who start do not finish. Hardly anyone finishes in the 3 years suggested on the ifoa website (which is the only guidance published by the ifoa)

 

That's for an individual employer to decide. If they are taking on a new graduate who has gone through their assessment centre and they believe will make a good actuary in the future then I'm sure they will want to support them with the provision of study days.
This assumes that there's competition for high calibre graduates.
In some parts of the world, there are so many people applying for each student actuarial job that employers don't need to give much support at all - and expect their student to do it all off their own backs. I'm not saying I agree with this - but it's a result if the supply and demand in that region.

 

Hi guys, I am also planning to take CM1 in April. I know its kind of risky to take a new exam but dont you think that the questions will be simply a Merger of CT1 and CT5. So lets say 5 questions CT1 and 8 questions CT5?

 

To get Fellowship some have to show some competencies twice, others once, some not at all if coming via MRA route. The purpose of a professional qualification is to vouch to the public of one's competencies. Try getting a discussion with IFoA about competencies and they won't engage, they'll just refer to this agreement or that transition document or whatever (not their annual report 2016/17 however). They will allege to have rigorous processes yet can show no document we can peruse to see how it all maps together, to satisfy ourselves it is fair. What an absolute shambles of a system.

 

A merger very much goes against the grain of education in general. I remember when I did A-levels- it all rested on one (or two?) 3-hour exams after 2 years in school. Then modules and coursework came in, breaking up the assessment into more manageable bits and I remember at the time this was deemed to suit women better and their pass rates improved as a result. IFoA are putting PR out there how keen they are to get women into the profession yet are doubling up exams...

 

I remember seeing people laughing when they got all English exams (except SA) via MRA path....
I know of people who could achieve an FIA qualification in one day + 1 year work experience in the UK.
That's definitely the quickest way to qualify.

 

I don't believe it is good enough to be told by IFoA everything is properly in place as a result of rigorous processes yet simultaneously suppress documentary evidence to support what they're saying, when the evidence is out there of serious mapping deficiencies. There are mapping deficiencies clear as day regarding the MRA arrangements and the curriculum transition arrangements including PPD.

 

How come everyone else’s posts get to stay and mine deleted? Acted apparently conducted and investigation into my bullying accusation. They said they couldn’t find anything. When I point one out they delete my post. Perhaps if you stopped deleting posts you’d find the evidence

 

Students who passed ST9 before 2012 do not need to go to a CERA seminar but students who passed after 2012 do need to pay and attend a seminar in order to gain CERA qualification. The changes are always requiring to do more and spend more and delay the qualification.

 

I think actuaries are well placed to assess whether these changes are cost-neutral or add additional costs & time to the qualification process. IFoA may want to portray themselves a 'global' but they're not relinquishing their special status in the UK to allow global competition here- until they do so there is a monopoly and we're suffering from the classical disadvantages of that. Acted are not exempt from this criticism; indeed the Morris review of 2005 described Acted as a virtual monopoly. I predict this screenshotted post will be deleted.

 

Yes I’ve often wondered about CERA. Buy one get one for free I’ve heard the ifoa say. After reaching the gold standard of fellowship, why would you require another qualification??