How did people find the CT6 paper yesterday? I thought it was really difficult compared to past papers. It had stuff on there that wasnt on the past papers I had done, and also I found I was really pushed for time. There was a few little parts to questions that I had to leave out completely. That reinsurance question at the end was particularly nasty. This is my first actuarial exam sitting so am unsure as what to expext from the marking point of view. Is it true that the overall pass mark is dependent on how everyone does as a whole????
I found it really difficult. I was very well prepared going into the exam, but there were very large chunks that I couldn't even attempt on the paper. I thought question 8 was extremely difficult to understand. The last question was very hard as well. Overall, I thought it was way harder than the last 2 sittings. Dont know how dependent the pass mark is on how everyone does; everyone I've spoken to about CT6 siad they thought it was a really difficult paper. It's very frustrating when you do the required amount of study and practise exam papers, and then they ask badly-worded questions that are impossible to understand
Try not to worry too much guys. I think that the pass mark is very dependent on how everyone else does. I have done exams where I have missed out big chunks of questions and because everyone else did too, it didnt hinder me passing thankfully. If your impression of the exam was the same as everyone elses and you didnt leave any questions that other people didnt then you are most definitely in with a shout. And in my experience, it is better to walk out of an exam thinking it was hard. If you walk out thinking it was easy, chances are you havent done it properly. Good luck
I wouldn't mind if the paper was demanding, but I thought this paper was just plain awkward. It was long and overly confusing. CT6 had a relatively high pass rate last time, as far as I know. It'll be interesting to see what it'll be like this time round.
Funny!! I like the prediction of the sequence!! Don't worry tooo much guys! Concentrate on the next one, if you are writing again. I'm crossing my fingers for all of you! Fancyme!!
Was question 8 the bayes credability theory question? That had some terrible wording. It was almost like the examiner was TRYING to confuse you. There does seem to br a consensus that it was a difficult paper. I wasn't sure if it was just me being a moan. Hmmm. 73%? If that proportion of people pass that paper then I'll eat my hat. Good luck anyway guys.
U guys aren't the only ones who found it difficult - so there's a bit of comfort - you aint alone! I agree that Question 8 was poorly worded! I bet you though that the answer must be really simple but you can't kick yourself for not getting it because we didn't know what the examiners wanted in the first place. All I can say now is, that I hope in September, it is not a situation of "out of the frying pan into the fire".
Q8 probably wouldn't have been hard if you could figure out what exactly the question was saying. I'd say the pass rate could well drop below 50%.
I thought that question 10 was badly worded - and where in the course do they teach you about how initial surpluses are supposed to be handled with proporational reassurance in ruin theory? I suppose that question was thrown in to distinguish the men from the boys - as in, let's chuck something completely random in and see how you all cope! Let's face it, we're all in the same boat and if we're meant to pass we will. All I can say is thank goodness for MGF's - they do have their uses! Although I'm not sure how I'm going to be applying them to my day to day job - any suggestions? Does anyone actually ever do anything useful with MGF's? K.
Hmmm don't sound to good! Hiya folks. The consensus from here and from emails I've received is that it was messy. Unfortunately, we at ActEd don't get to see the paper until it's published on the website (which is at the end of the exam season). I'll let you know what we think when we do it. To feedback to examiners you could contact Trevor Watkins at Napier House, 4 Worcester Street, Oxford, OX1 2AW Or feedback to your student consultative committee rep - details can be found on the Professions website at: Student Consultative Committee You can make a difference! Work together on this!
I concur! Yup folks - it was more difficult than the last couple of papers. Question 8 was credibility theory (from Chapter 8) but was difficult to understand. Question 10 required knowledge that the premium income is equal to the mean claim amount times the loading factor (which used to be in 106 but got taken out) Also the reinsurance ruin theory was taken out of the Core Reading - so I don't know how you faired with the Q10 bit where you had to calculate the net premium. Please let us know your thoughts - did you get this or was it way out of reach. Sorry some of you feel let down by the system - do make sure your voice is heard - together you can make a difference!
I couldn't understand question 8 at all, and 10 was way, way out of my reach In the words of Michael Jackson, the whole system sucks!
I don't know how they could even consider setting questions for material that isn't even in the course I don't know who would be able to answer this, but what were the examiners looking for in the 1st place? Logical reasoning? Application of material already in the course? I would really like to see the examiners comments on the solutions (if there are any).
The pass rate dropped from 62% to 39% I note that hardly anyone from my tutorial group passed. I was one of the lucky ones, thank God.
Well done Dha! You were so right - so was it that all the students were of a poor standard this sitting or that the paper was of more difficult standard...hmmm. Given that the examiners keep setting large questions on ruin (Ch7) and nothing on the second part of time series (Ch 13) - which is new to CT6 (Ch 12 was originally in this subject when it was subject C2) and nothing on acceptance-rejection which is also new (the inverse transform again used to be in subject C2) it makes me think that the examiners have simply not written to the new syllabus... On the bright side I got 58% of my students through - so I was so proud of them and for those who retake in September then it's unlikley to have another Ch7 off-syllabus question...guess that's not much hope. Please, please, please do feedback to the SCC (see my link in my earlier posting) - it must make a difference if enough of you say something about this! Keep the faith!
