Actuarial sheep

there are over 7,000 students who stand to lose exams due to changes to the exam system for CT1,4,5 and 6. A further few thousand will have to take double exams in CT3 and CT8. Why is no one speaking out?

The IFoA have lied to students, employers, their oversight body, the government and other stakeholders about there being no increase in exam requirements

Stop being sheep and speak out.

#baametoo

 

The changes have been advertised well in advance, I believe that there was a consultation period and then notice of these changes.

The changes are aimed at modernising the exam syllabi. The use of R and such like is much more reflective of modern day actuarial work compared to some of the current older exams. The decision has been taken by the IFoA in the interests of the profession. Why else would they implement these changes?

It's a few weeks before the examination sitting - if you are sitting an exam in a few weeks I'd politely suggest you channel your efforts in to preparing for your exams. Use the boards to post questions on exam technique/areas of the course you find difficult. Be smart with your studying, get to qualified status then go make a difference that way - get involved in the profession, become a marker, join Council!

I'm a recently qualified actuary and I failed a few exams along the way. I had a few SARs, sometimes with surprising differences (even where I passed) and I was frustrated at times at how the application of academic judgement didn't always seem fair or consistent (not to suggest that it wasn't fair I hasten to add, I was likely just biased and thought I'd done better than what I actually had). However, I couldn't control a marker's academic judgement. The only thing within my control was my exam knowledge and my exam technique. Learning from acted tutors, the core reading, chatting to colleagues helped me to qualify.

I've seen a few posts (not necessarily from yourself) suggesting of a conspiracy or notion that the profession doesn't want people to pass - perhaps I'm in on the conspiracy, or just got lucky - after all if you don't buy a ticket (or enter the exam), you can't win (or pass) - or perhaps a lot of hard work, and learning from past failures got me over the final line.

All the best with your studies

 

the consultation period was inadequate it has not been advertised in advance. Negative feedback was not taken onboard. As you can see from the council meeting minutes, the IFoA don’t care about our feedback. You can see with the chartered actuary proposal that there was extensive negative feedback. The executives at the council meeting have the novel solution to go ahead anyway and remarket thw chartered actuary proposal after some time when everyone has forgotten. Do they think we are so stupid?

The IFoA published a timetable detailing exams would run up until 2020. They’ve suddenly then deleted that timetable and introduced curriculum 2019. The IFoA have lied to stakeholders in the consultation by promising no increase in exams. When the details of curriculum 2019 were later published there was an obviously an increase. The transition period was inadequate and by the time the IFoA clarified their intentions there was not 4 sittings. Also the IFoA are well aware that 4 sittings is not enough notice for changes in exams from the last time hey changed the system. Furthermore the IFoA have still not published adequate details on the changes. As you can see from other posts with one sitting left they still haven’t described the exam changes adequately. They have made another mistake with the CP3 study times.

In the posts which have been deleted by Acted who are covering up for the IFoA, muppet has pointed out that I have made many mistakes since I have failed exams. When I fail an exam I have to pay the IFoA more money for a resit. I have to waste another Christmas holiday, miss anothe friend’s wedding, have to forgo medical treatment. The IFoA has now made countless mistakes and have hardly issued an apology.

I have tried hard to pass exams. I have passed everything except CT4,5, 8, CA2 and CA3. Other people get these exams as exemptions from university. Foreign students don’t even have to sit half the exams that we have to.

When I pass exams, the IFoA keep introducing new ones. I can’t even enter for exams since they close the exam entry prematurely.

What is so difficult understand? The IFoA have made a catalogue of mistakes and lied. They are incompetent. Their oversight body is being investigated by the government because they are full of corrupt people milking the system for money and taking advantage of people like me.

Acted also has the monopoly on this market which is why they can restrict my freedom of speech on this post.

I am not going to taking 7.5 exams in the new system instead of the 3 I have outstanding now. I am not going to prove my competence in English communication if my foreign colleagues don’t have to. I never signed up to do the modelling exam when I started and I’m not going to do it now. I should also receive exemptions for CT8 since I’ve studied and passed it at university.

THe IFoA have claimed that the majority of students will not be affected but this is not true. I have evidence direct from the IFoA that nearly 10,000 out of 15,000 will suffer this sitting with the added pressure of having the last chance to pass an exam or see it doubling. I cannot take an exam this sitting for personal reasons and don’t even intend to bother to subject myself to this unecessary stress.

People should speak out. How many actuaries have been failed by the system? Had to give up and change career?

 

I don't see how combining 2 CT exams to make a double exam is 'modernising'. I think it's a step back. I'm suspicious of those who justify things with 'modernising' as it suggests those who oppose are dinosaurs opposed to change and progress. This is not the case. For example, I'm not opposed to a computer exam but surely huge chunks of the existing syllabus needs to be removed as well if modernising and the end result should be less exams. IFoA by virtue of their MRA agreements claim equivalence with European associations and their qualification process does not take anywhere as long. There is a far more compelling case to split up all the IFoA exams, including CTs, and holding exams 4 times not twice a year so that they're in a more digestible form so that people can take them more in accordance with their lifestyle.

I remember passing CA1 first time and thinking to myself I would have to quit altogether if I had failed, such would be the pain and misery of attempting this more than once. With CT exams doubling, or becoming 2.5 CTs, this pain and misery will be felt even more widespread than before. It seems to me IFoA don't take into account the health, happiness and wellbeing of their members and what they put them through - and for what? I've not seen it justified why actuaries must be qualified in this extreme manner that other professions don't. Look at CT5, I remember leaving that exam (that I passed, thank God) with almost a broken wrist, completely stressed out having to complete a paper that would reasonable require 4.5 hours in 3 hours, using a calculator. What competency was being tested there that's relevant for being an actuarial professional? Not a single day's work in an actuarial job have I needed to do anything like that.

I think people should also not sneer at those who complain about exams they've invested much time, energy and money into passing only to find them worthless. This is especially painful and wrong when as Infinity points out a pledge was made by Mr Derek Cribb in the annual report that current students would not be adversely affected. Surely he as a highly remunerated CEO has a duty of care towards members and that statement appears negligent. It's not acceptable to just put up with this. It doesn't reflect well on actuarial professionals that we do - it makes us look weak and in turn not respected. Also how could the public have any confidence in us to treat say policyholders fairly when we allow this unfair treatment to happen in our own profession? He has not apologised nor even come up with a remedy such that those who have passed one of the CTs but not the other could have some credit for the new double exam.

I am also critical of IFoA council who, from reading council minutes, are like doormats to those who run the IFoA, who are mostly non-actuaries and have no personal experience or empathy of what they put people through. It seems to me they raise good objections but in the end always give in. That's not good enough and fundamentally something is wrong that students are unable to vote for council members given they are the ones most affected by these changes.

 

Infinity, if you passed CT8 at University why don't you just apply for the exemption? Applications remain open for a few more years yet I think. Did you get any other exemptions from your university studies?

Loads of people change all sorts of careers because they don't like it, can't deal with it, or sometimes don't reach the required standard - eg doctors, teachers, sportsmen etc etc.

If you started a long time ago then I'm afraid that you can't expect the world to stand still and the standards required not to change. It would be very unfair on new students if you were allowed to qualify now without possessing the same skills that they have to evidence. (Equivalence with other qualifications is a different matter and I have more sympathy with that.)

It sounds like you have 5 exams to go. You will still have 5 exams to go: CM1, CS2, CM2, CP2 and CP3. Some of those have two papers, like CA1 does.

Perhaps, you'll find the new CM1 easier to pass than CT5. It's merging with most of CT1 and given you've passed that, you'll be able to do well on the CT1-type questions which might offset the lack of marks you seem to be getting on the CT5-type questions.

BTW, ActEd don't seem to be dong a very good job at restricting your freedom of speech, given the number of posts you have made in numerous places throughout their forums. I actually think they've been pretty lenient with you and a few others for posting very similar things numerous times whenever you see a slight opening. I hope they can keep this topic in here from now on. Throwing out accusations like that doesn't do you any favours and probably alienates people against you. They are perfectly entitled to moderate their forum - as nearly all forum owners do. I use some others and they are far stricter about getting you to post in the right places and not keep asking or saying the same thing over and over again.

And finally, I have lots of admiration for anyone who can keep at it for so long. I would never have kept going. Cut my losses and tried something else I think. So I hope you can reframe your emotions and either to decide to move on, or get your head down, be positive and clear the rest. As things are, I'm not convinced you are helping yourself.

But good luck.

 

What, that exams he's sat and passed have become worthless and now he's faced with more exams than previously? You cannot be serious, man.

 

Good constructive post almost there. I agree that making the exams bigger is a backward step. It's also not consistent with how they are usually sat at universities who give exemptions, where subjects are broken down into smaller modules.
Hopefully the new Excel exam will reduce the CT5 problems you mentioned though - with some number crunching in the paper exam being replaced by a simple spreadsheet.

 

It's more than that isn't it. One doesn't merely sit these exams just to acquire skills and knowledge but does so as it is a term by which the Fellowship qualification is conferred. From 2019 that exam no longer counts. As IFoA have stubbornly failed to credit these exams in the new system they should do the right thing and compensate people who've sat worthless exams.

 

A) if you haven’t noticed, the IFoA discontinued the exemption process for CT8 (actually in the middle of my application) without telling anyone. Students at university are still able to utilize their exams for CT8 exemption though.

B) I didn’t take an Actuarial science course and get 8 exemptions like some people. I didn’t know it existed. It’s not fair that those who have taken these courses get an easier ride. It is a common joke in the industry and actuaries who have passed at university are initially not treated the same, but after a while everyone forgets and you’re a qualified actuary. Same with foreign qualifications....

C) no I don’t think everyone is entitled to finish. What I think is that people are entitled to some honesty and professionalism from the IFoA. I think we’re entitled to have our complaints heard and when there is a mistake on the part of the IFoA (which has happened on countless occasions) some concession to be made. I expect the ceo tells the truth and doesn’t lie in annual reports. I expect the IFoA doesn’t lie to the government about its examination process

D) you’re an actuary. There are now 11 separate CT exams. Do you seriously think this increase is justified? The uk government then have told the IFoA that they should reduce the number of exams. Just because a subject is singular in name but contains two exams, it’s the same as one current CT subject? There is an increase in number of exams, exam hours, study time and time to qualification in the new exam system. The IFoA has promised people in the consultation that there wouldn’t be. I do not see what you you are arguing here. The situation is absurd.

E) Acted have deleted several of my posts without even telling me. I had to go back and check to see if my post was still there. This time they have sent me a message to say that a post was deleted. I am not being alienated. I am being victimised and harassed because I have noticed wrong doing on the part of the IFoA and Acted. I keep asking that people perhaps read the newspaper rather than their Acted notes to find out what the reality of the situation is. The FRC is being investigated for unethical and unprofesssional business practices. The IFoA is not doing anything different. The FRC is has a shameful reputation and so does its CEO. The IFoA is following their lead

F) I haven’t made the conscious decision to leave CT5. I tied to enter and I couldn’t as it was full. In any case it would have been difficult for me due to my personal situation. The IFoA does not want to take this into account and will make me take two exams next year. I will not be doing this.

G) so after nearly finishing the exams and spending 16 years on them you suggest I should cut my losses? All because the lying and cheating individuals at the IFoA have decided to cream more money from Students and make them take extra exams to cover material they’ve already demonstrated their competence? If the new material is so important, why don’t qualifieds have to take their exams all over again?

H) I am only having to say the same tho go over and over again as you are also saying the same thing over and over again. You do not seem to understand. Your comment about cutting losses is ridiculous, perhaps as you don’t know my situation. But now that I have explained it partially to you, do you really think that after 16 years I should go and find another profession?

I) You make this out to be some individual problem of mine. There are 10,000 students sitting affected CT exams this time. A few have commented but most are sheep as I’ve pointed out. This is not my problem alone. As I keep saying. More people should speak out.

 

I can only count 7 exams, with 11 papers. The eleven papers aren't separate. Eg in CM1 there are two papers. The marks are added together and you pass or fail CM1.

 

I don't think I said that. I said that I probably would have done (probably many years ago) if I had been in your shoes, because I don't think I have your determination. It's entirely up to you what you do goign forward. My advice is just to make your mind up and go for it.

 

After spending 16 years chasing a qualification, what other option is there to complete it? Especially when you’re so close to the finishing line?

Why are the IFoA making me do exams again? How was i supposed to know that the IFoA would change the exam system and make me take 6 exams instead of 3. Especially when:

A) the IFoA ceo and many other IFoA publications have stated in the annual report and other places, that current student will not be disadvantaged?

B) a timetable was published (for the purpose of long term exam planning) which clearly states that exams would be available until 2020

There is nothing wrong in agreeing with me Jamie Brown. I have nothing against you. I am only arguing with you as what you say is not based on any evidence and is just opinion. The facts I have stated above above cannot be Contested and are backed up with significant evidence. And like I say I’m not the only one affected. There are 10,000 students. Where is everyone???

 

I think we’re getting somewhere. Correct There are 11 exams, 7 subjects. Previously the IFoA said that these papers should be sat and passed separately. Now they claim they should be sat and passed together. Taking 11 exams rather than the previous 9 is obvious more difficult. Would you not agree? In my case I have also passed CT6 and CT1. So I will have taken 13 exams to complete the CT series which is absurd.

 

Yes I started many years ago but I left CT5 as there was no ordering to exam taking as per the other posts... I have only had to take it suddenly now since the IFoA have given me 3, yes 3 sittings and not 4 to pass the outstanding CTs before they double in quantity. I tired to enter for CT5 well on time and was told it was full.

 

there are now still 11 exams as opposed to 9.

For the potential 10,000 students who have also taken ct exams in the old system, they will end up taking potentially 13 exams to pass the ct series which is also more than 9.

I am not sure how I can explain this better?

Do you follow now?

 

He is being serious. That is what he and the IFoA think. I wonder how many of these posters actually work for the IFoA or Acted

 

Don’t be sheep - speak out. I’m not studying for exams this sitting. I have some health issues and I can’t be bothered to study given the last few sittings where someone was cheating In exams and the IFoA have ignored it, they’ve changed the exam dates so that I can’t attend the exam anyway and I am not putting off my medical treatments and ruining my health and life for the sake of these ridiculous exams. I also don’t want the unnecessary pressure of passing when the ceo has said that I won’t be disadvantaged as a current student by the changes to the exam system? I would suggest people speak out and tell us about how the behaviour of the IFoA is ruining your life.

 

No I don't. You have found it difficult to pass some of the old exams.

You don't have to pass more subjects, you just have to sit more papers. If CA1 was examined with one paper rather than two, would it be harder? We are taught that diversification reduces random fluctuation risk and so if you have two papers to prove your worth rather than one, then you aren't gong to suffer as much if the odd question doesn't suit you.

 

this deserves explanation. The IFoA have come down like a ton of bricks on people who have cheated in the past - what are you alleging here?

 

this is what I don't understand the most. If they are so ridiculous why are you bothering? It's just letters after your name. If you have a good job then why not just carry on with it, sod the exams, and enjoy the rest of your life.

 

I reported an incidence of cheating in the exam. The invigilator acknowledged it. The IFoA don’t seem to have done anything about it largely because of the other complaint I’m making