So how did you guys find the CA1 paper? Being a retaker, I found it much better than last year's paper in terms of time management and ability to answer the question. Also I have noticed that the questions are moving further and further away from normal bookwork question. Before, application based question made like 50% of the paper, now its like 80% of the paper - Did anyone notice all those stories? lol. All in all what did you guys think? Oh boy I really need to pass, my borderline FAs were really depressing me and can't afford another one
Spent alot of time learning SOUNDER TRACTORS and a bunch of other mnemonics. Like you say. there seem to be less straight book work and list questions, so maybe this strategy is less valuable than in the past (though I think it still helps with idea generation). Fingers crossed!
I know what you mean! I was quited annoyed about spending all the time learning all the bookwork but feel that I would probably fair a similar chance if I learn no bookwork at all (think of all the lost time that could have been spent doing other things...i.e. having a life ) Please please please I want a pass!!!
Disagree that learning bookwork isn't essential. Unless you know the basics how can you apply it? The profession has never hidden the need to be able to apply so I think the move is fine as it gives those of us with weaker photographic memories a fairer shot.
I agree with Bystander, learning the book work is very essential. However, the difficult part is applying the book work to complex unfamiliar scenarios. Personally I prefer straightforward facts & figures questions which to some extent make you one dimensional in your thinking. This may be the reason why some of us suffer when we get to the CA stages. The CT stages, Calculus, Algebra etc. really spoilt us ( I now know I should have paid more attention in my writing and critical thinking classes )
Agree Particularly since it shouldn't just be a test of your memory - there's no need for it to be actuarial-related if that was the purpose.
April CA1 exam I am surprised by the comments that have been left regarding the recent CA1 paper. I found both papers very difficult and it wasn't for a lack of preparation. I knew all the book work in detail and and had plenty of practice on my exam technique but I found the papers to be almost entirely application based and a bit off-the-wall at time (pension scheme for racehorses). I think having application questions is a good thinkg but I think the Institute should redefine the requirements of the exam. There is no benefit of learning word-for-word bookwork when it will never be asked and it literally takes months to learn the bookwork in CA1. I also found that it was unclear at times what the examiners were looking for. A very tough exam in my opinion and I predict a low pass rate (around 43%).
If you get away from the idea you are learning bookwork perhaps you'll understand better. What is in the course lays down principals and what you need to have is to apply these principles to specific and potentially unusual scenarios. The application is to realise which principles are relevant and make sensible comments therefrom and so prove you understand what you are doing. Just because there were no bookwork qns directly ie regurgitate/resue directly doesn't mean they can't ever crop up but when they do you need perfection. With application it really does sort people out.
I agree with entact. CA1 is an exam where you can study your a**e off, practise a million past papers and still come out of the exam without any confidence whatsoever that you have passed. I can't see what purpose that serves. If intelligent people spend that much time and effort trying to learn something and still not score well - apparently no one scores highly on CA1, not even those that pass - then I, for one, doubt that the content is worth knowing in the first place. In addition, the subject tries to cover too much material, most of which is completely irrelevant depending on your area of work. Not to mention the fact that the material itself is often inaccurate and contradicted by the content of the ST subjects. I always read the phrase "failed to think widely" in the examiner's reports. What a load of rubbish. All that means is that students, despite all those past papers and hours wasted studying, still failed to think precisely in line with that particular group of examiners who were hell bent on being different and/or asking obscure questions. I can see the value of the CT and ST subjects but CA1 is a complete and utter waste of time.
46% pass rate I am definately back on the CA1 drawing board. I have ran out of strategies now and have decided to take a break to recharge. I am thinking of giving CT9 a chance now. I would have wanted to try an ST but I am scared , with the way CA1 is going , I don't want to fall in that bandwagon again plus I'd rather attempt an ST in the April session. Back to CT9, Does it have a higher pass rate? I plan on booking for a december spot online. I apologize for asking it here,I just started reading on ct9 today. Anyway will be back in the future for CA1 for sure
Hi I genuinely believe exam technique is the key. My advice (when you do it again ) is to really look at how solutions are structured. There is actually (from memory) a lot of book work that you can put down. The 'weird and wonderful' questions asked are really a way of testing whether candidates are able to recognise the part of the course really being asked. Don't be put off, the answers are always the same. You then just need to answer the EXACT question posed, remembering you still need to generate around a point for each half mark. As much as possible, try to avoid blind scatter gunning as it might make you feel like you've answered the question well but is unlikely to score. Just keep persevering, that is what I think this whole 'actuarial thing' is all about. It really helps to develop character. Don't be afraid about taking on an ST. If it helps I moved on to the ST's before returning back to ca1 and actually thought it helped me
CA1 is quite a mystery of a subject to me at the moment. Here is South Africa our pass rates are somewhere between late teens % and early 30% at best - something that I have to say is extremely demoralizing - ever since SA started introducing it's own system. Needless to say, we are all wondering why we are so much less compared to the rest of the world and really think we may as well go back to Faculty / Institute. I certainly never failed an exam through them. We still write the UK paper too. This past session was my first attempt at it and like the +/-70% that wrote, I also didn't make it. To be honest I left the exam having given a decent shot at almost every single question and sub-question, but due to time pressure I couldn't write down a two points for each mark. It could very well be that it came down to exam technique, I don't quite know where I fell short. The one thing that did struck me though was the vagueness of the past papers when I was practising. There were instances when I read the memo and though to myself: where on earth was I supposed to source the kind of thinking they had in that solution? It did happen on quite a few questions carrying some big marks. The point though is that none of it came from the notes or necessarily a certain style of thinking from the notes. My opinion is also that they have shifted away from bookwork questions averaging roughly half the paper to something that could very well be less than or around 30% of the paper. There's conflicting views on whether this is a good thing or not and I won't share mine, but what it does pose is the questions I can't quite answer right now: what must one do to pass this exam? I really wish an Act Ed tutor could respond to this or throw ideas around. I am pretty sure it isn't luck. With regards to the April paper I thought that although this trend to have less bookwork questions was there, I thought the paper was somewhat accessible than previous sessions, certainly more than in 2011. I am at the stage where I could recall all of the items I learned from the notes but I am asking myself should I really bother preparing for Sep paper this year if I really know the notes aren't sufficient? Back to drawing board I guess.
I passed (yippee!), hard to know what worked & what didn't. There's no feedback other than a P and I don't remember too much of how I answered (so haven't looked at the examiners report). I still think the mnemonics helped, a mock exam, plus plenty of practice questions and papers.
TheJoe, I agree with everything you said and we are in the exact same boat. April was my first attempt and I think I gave it a good shot, too. I also wonder how on earth they come up with some of the answers! Doesn't seem like knowing the book work would really help in getting to those type of answers. I thought of taking a break and only trying it again next year, but I figured I was so close and while it's all still fresh in my mind I think I will stand a pretty good chance this time round. Plus I am going on an exam skills course, which is said to help with generating ideas and to not waste time in the exam. If it's some out of the box thinking they want, that's what I'll bring! Congrats, tiger! I have to say, I kind of wish I were you a little bit right now... Hopefully this will be my last try. 9 weeks to go.... Best of luck to everyone!
Thanks. Should also add, I did a block tutorial, which helps make sure concepts are cemented, and also focuses alot on exam and answer techniques.
My advice on resits is when retaking do soemthing different. Eg if you didn't have a tutorial do one etc. You may have to pay for it dependent on your employers support package, but heh, its the P you are chasing! Study actively not passively and don't just think 'Oh no not that again'. Not easy, but its the only way.
My Experience I do have some good advice for CA1 based on what I experienced. I did CA1 a while ago, and had a very good stab at it. I used the revision books constantly, and found that I could answer all of the questions, and pretty quickly, too. However, when I actually got to the exam, I found the questions confusing, and there were some questions that I felt were "random." I seriously wondered what the hell was going on, because I knew that I had prepared very well for it, and was shocked that I was so lost in the exam. I eventually got an FA for it, and I was pretty unhappy about it too. When I studied for the retake, I did something slightly different. I realised that the reason why I got lost in the exam wasn't because I was under-prepared - it was because the examiners communicated questions pretty poorly. Therefore, at first glance, the questions could apply to ANY part of the course, thereby making answering the questions real difficult. Unfortunately for me, I didn't spot this while studying the first time round, because the questions that I did were organised so neatly in groups in the revision books - this meant that I knew what the question would be about before I even did it, hence I knew what type of answer would be applicable (eg a SOUNDER TRACTORS answer). However, when looking at a whole exam paper, the questions were so vague and poorly worded that I really didn't know where to start. This leads to what I consider to be my best advice - try to recognise HOW the examiners are asking about certain topics. Although the questions were vague, I discovered that they had at least been consistently poorly worded and vague for each particular topic. What I mean is, despite the fact that all the questions looked like they could be asking about just about anything from the whole course, it was possible to spot HOW to distinguish from one type of question to another by recognising that they phrase their questions about a particular topic in a certain way. It's too long ago for me to remember specific examples, but by way of illustration, a made-up example would be: Describe how TV affects children's behaviours. Now, initially, you could write anything under the sun for that question. However, by looking through past papers, you might find, for example, that whenever the examiners asked about behaviours, they were looking for you to write about reality TV programmes. That's what I mean. There's still no excuse for poor wording of questions, but at least they've been consistently poor, and if you've done enough work, you'd be able to spot HOW the CA1 examiners ask about certain topics. BTW, when I found the formula, I passed it the next sitting.
