April 2007

So how did it go ? I thaught it was a fair paper but i was so under prepared. What you reckon?

 

I didn't write this, but I am very keen to hear what the paper was like.
How did it compare to last year's papers? Was the whole syllabus adequately covered or was there a bias towards a particular practice area?

 

I found it sort of fun, in a strange way. I think there was a good spread - not too much in particular on models or yield curves.

It will go down as the Wembley paper, followed by the Manchester United paper.

I'm also delighted to have found the exam centre with the biggest desks! 1.4m wide!

 

The paper wasn't difficult but I think it isn't easy to score well either. I found myself trying to squeeze things out to write for the number of marks given. Moreover, I felt so tired by the time I did Paper 2.

 

I actually found it very tough. There were far too many pensions questions for my liking. I think the hardest thing to write about was the 14 mark question on expenses being expressed as a % of premiums. I couldn't think of a single thing to say on that. Overall, I'm quite confident I failed (though a large prt of that is probably due to being unprepared rather than a hard paper).

 

I would agree with SummerBub that paper the wasn't easy to score well on, and I found some of the question hard to identify which part of the core reading was being tested.

 

I think this year's paper had a lot more application-style questions in it than in previous years - the first paper had quite a bit of bookwork, but in practically all circumstances you had to apply the bookwork in some way as opposed to just regurgitating it and getting full marks (as could've been done in some of the past papers). The second paper was mostly applications questions - hardly any bookwork at all, most of it seemed to require thinking off the top off your head and coming up with "sensible" answers and suggestions.

A couple of people I spoke to preferred the second paper because they said it was more "common sense", but then again I guess if you spent ages learning all the bookwork it may be difficult to come up with wider thoughts/ideas so I can see how some people would struggle through the second paper.

As it was a resit for me, I knew a lot more bookwork this time, and felt that knowing the bookwork helped to generate ideas.

Who knows what they were really looking for? However I willl be very interested in what the Examiner's report has to say about the papers....

 

I sat CA1 for the first time...and by the looks of it, definitely not the last.

The overall paper wasn't hard, there was just so much of application...well the name of the subject would suggest that (!), but in comparison to the previous papers set, I think that this was harder in the sense that there was less of "direct" bookwork...you know the type of question where you use on e list such as CATERPILLAR to ramp up al lthe marks.

Would be interesting to know which question did people tend to struggle with?

I thought that a 14 marker on discussing expenses was a bit harsh, given the amount of reading available (and past exams as well). Ok you could say that someone needs to think, but 14 marks, I would say that this was pushing it a bit!

For paper 1, I managed to generate some points, but I dont think that this i will be enough to get me through...I enjoyed Paper 2 better...

And what do you think the pass mark and rate will be for this session? I was at the Hammersmith centre and everyone was saying "dunno"...and I have been chatting with some others at work, and the same feeling was shared.

Overall, I think that I did not write enough to pass in the first paper, so failing overall.

 

Was it 14 marks for the expenses as a % of premium or was it 14 marks for the whole expense question?

I dun like the last qn of Paper 2. The part where u have to describe the impact of the 2 pension schemes on the club and different groups of employees, the mortality under this group arrangement.... couldn't relate to the sports complex... Did anyone find this qn hard?

There were many others with no straightforward answers... I guess it's easy to lose marks easily in the 2 papers though there were no particularly hard qns.

 

It was 14 marks just for the bit on the expenses as a % bit. I think there were about 10 marks going for the rest of it.
Also, 7 marks for saying which pension scheme suited the groups of employees in the sports club? That was another 2 line answer from me.

 

After that exam I dont know what to think. I am also interested in what the Examiner's report has to say.

The 14 mark expense question is a bit difficult to find a balanced discussion, how many good aspects of a simple % can there be?

The Mortality/morbitity of the sports complex was a bit too many marks I think, very little I could say there. Maybe I didn't consider enough different employees or something?

I like the Wembley/ Man United analogy by Schnorbitz. Good spot if there was news you could pull on for ideas. I found it hard to relate to the Paper 2 sports question.

 

I feel the papers were set very cleverly and most long questions covered many parts of the course - so yes, you are not sure which part they reallly testing. Also some questions were worded in a very tricky manner so you not sure what examniers expect!

I personally found paper 2 Data question (part 2) for 16 marks was just too much. How did you guys manage to put down sufficent points worth 16 marks?

I guess with regard to 14 mark expense question you could talk a bit - here dont forget the question talks about both Life Insurance and Pension. So the impact for these two classes of business can be different. Also you can talk from a modelling point of view - the simplicity etc..............

Overall I rate this exam to be a reasonable paper (Just that I was under prepared)and one of those exams you never know whether you have done enough to get you through or your are just short. I think with a paper like this a lot depends how others have faired.

How many of you found typos and inconsistencies? I spotted few!!!!

 

I can remember them spelling the word "and" with four letters, one of which was a t. Can't remember any others.

Ah well, it was my first attempt, and since discussing it with one of my colleagues, I'm a bit less confident I got lots of points down. I certainly had a lot to talk about for most of the questions, but getting the specific points that I think they're looking for... not so sure. I thought the wording on the long-term care insurance was not very clear.

On the phone to one colleague: "On that last question, it didn't say that it was a football team. It could have been bowls or golf." Me: "In a stadium near a large provinicial city centre?"


Sometimes it seems the question writers are a bit inspired by what's going on in the news, especially when it comes to the risk mitigation bit: the "national sports stadium" was pretty obviously Wembley (several years late, millions of pounds over budget); in a previous paper there was a "tourist attraction" in a city, which reminded me of the Thermae Bath Spa (several years late, millions of pounds over budget).

I wouldn't be surprised if this turned up in the next paper: it's on the syllabus, and was publicised the day of the exam! http://www.environmental-finance.com/onlinews/0412all.htm

 

My first attempt too (and hopefully last though hope only goes so far)

I also found a few typos. Someone at my centre comented that the Applications in CA1 had an 'S' in some places and not others.

I would have thought better proof reading would have been done. Though we hope the examiners are more forgiving than we are regarding spelling grammer etc.

They could have been a little more specific with some of the details in the questions.

 

Yes I agree this was a bit daunting at first - but I think once you work out the different sources of data - I came up with about 6/7 - then it's about 2/3 marks discussing each source.. which perhaps isn't all that bad...?

I think with a lot of the big mark questions, you almost have to write down your thought process explaining how you arrive to the actual answer, as opposed to just giving the answer, no matter how obvious the answer is... my problem when I first sat this was that I didn't write enough, and didn't explain the obvious...

Fingers crossed I've written enough this time....

I don't think they mark you down in CA1, STs or SA exams if you haven't got perfect spelling or grammar - they're more interested in the points. Of course if they can't read your handwriting then that's another matter!

 

Just 70 hours until the results... I'm nervous again already.

 

Hi,

Just wanted to know if anyone passed the Apr07 sitting first attempt?

I thought I did ok, but apparently wasn't enough to secure a pass... I really wonder what extra things I could have written in the exam to get another 1-5 marks.

Any tips on how to prepare the course to do better the next sitting?

 

Results

Hey

So congrats to everyone who passed and commiseration to those who didnt.

Sadly, my name wasnt on the list last Thursday night. I was apparently 1 -5 marks short of being awarded that damn PASS...anyway, it was my first attempt - that's what I'm saying to myself to get motivated again.

I'd be really grateful if those of you who resat the paper could give me some advice on what to do next. I've got three months to get myself ready again.

My plan is to do the Y assignments again, and mocks, and work through the Q&As again. Focus a bit more on the ASET this time, and try to improve my style. Does that sound right?

Also, I'm planning on taking CA3 next time as well. Will that be too much? Should I just wait for April 08 to take it?

Thanks in advance.

El

 

El

I failed CA1 on my first attempt but got it on my 2nd. I think what you're planning to do sounds good especially with doing the ASET papers.

Also, have you considered doing a tutorial if you didn't do one on your first attempt?

As for doing CA3, I personally don't think it would be too much to do alongside CA1 this sitting.

 

Thanks for your reply, and advice.

I did got to the tutorials, and did the X assignments. I have already booked a revision tutorial for September.

Just one last question - How much time did you spend on memorising the material the second time round, and how much was devoted to doing exams questions?

I am planning to spend around 20 hours pw on CA1. So hop fully that's going to be enough.

Getting an FA is the worse possible thing. As someone else said, it means that you could have passed, but we decided to fail you to see if you can do it a little bit better again!

 

Thanks for your reply, and advice.

I did got to the tutorials, and did the X assignments. I have already booked a revision tutorial for September.

Just one last question - How much time did you spend on memorising the material the second time round, and how much was devoted to doing exams questions?

I am planning to spend around 20 hours pw on CA1. So hop fully that's going to be enough.

Getting an FA is the worst possible grade. As someone else said, it means that you could have passed, but we decided to fail you to see if you can do it a little bit better again!