Curriculum 2019 Exams

Hello,

I am new to the actuarial profession and will soon commence sitting the actuarial exams under Curriculum 2019.
I was wondering whether anyone had any idea as to which order they will be sitting the exams?

Coming from a mathematical and statistical background, I thought possibly sitting the Actuarial Statistics and Actuarial Mathematics exams first may be more logical.

Does anyone have any advice?

Thank you.

 

My post has been deleted. Mr Chainey, you are managing director of Acted and well aware that my post was deleted. Why invite comments if you are just going to have them deleted?

What sort of organisation does this? What example are you setting to new student embarking on these worthless exams?

Please elaborate where this 2.5 old CT exams comes from. I have CT4, 5 and 8 outstanding. I thought these would double in quantity to 6 exams in the new system, but are you telling me that the increase is even more profound?

 

My response is specifically about the order examinations should be taken and I hope it won’t be deleted by Acted. The IFoA have changed their mind on taking the exams in order several times (with the introduction of c2019/chartered actuary 3 times and also on exams required prior to taking CA2 and CA3). Since there was no order I continued to finish the ST and SA exams but then found that since I have a few CTs left, exams which I had passed previously were rendered worthless. This has all got to do with order of exams. The exams take an extensive amount of time. Many people take over a decade. If the IFoA suddenly introduce an order or make the associate suddenly a credible stopping point, this has an inpact on students. The IFoA is not trustworthy. You cannot trust anything they have to say and they may just change the exam system again.

They have recently included a disclaimer in latest doctoring of the curriculum 2019 publications to state there could be some “regulatory” or “legal developments” which they do not explain any further that could lead to changes in the exam system which is to start next year...

 

Infinity is quite correct - the IFoA have altered the rules on the order of exams many times in the past. CA3 is a good example, where at one point you weren't allowed to sit it unless you had passed CT series first, then this got changed. Also for the new Chartered Actuary proposal they said people would have to become associates first before becoming fellows, then seemingly an u-turn to allow those who hadn't become associates yet to sit ST/SA exams. Then they wash their hands of anyone who has been caught out from sitting the exams in a particular order.

 

Almost there. I’m glad you agree with me. The IFoA have changed their mind so many times on this point it is quite ridiculous. If I was an associate I could have just stopped the exams, especially since they are now introducing chartered actuary which means that the fellowship was just a waste of time as you don’t seem to really need it...

 

I bet they get deleted - you're doing exactly what people are complaining about. Start saying it's about order and then manipulating the thread into your grievance against the transition arrangements and the IFoA.
The thread is asking which order order a new student might like to take the exams. Eg do CT7 first if you like economics. You are not making any point that you haven't made on one of your hundred previous posts.
I've reported your posts!!

 

I am making the point that there is no point to decide an order or to determine a strategy on exams which could take a decade (or more now since there are more exams in c2019)
to complete as the IFoA keep moving the goal posts. This is very relevant and I don’t see what you have reported me for. The point I make is very relevant for someone starting the profession

 

So you're recommending they don't start? Very helpful if they've already decided they are going to!!!
Assuming they will still start then they still need to decide what to do first even if you don't think it matters. In fact, given your experiences, perhaps we should recommend that they do the exams roughly in order, and don't jump ahead and do some later ones if they haven't finished the earlier ones. Easy in hindsight to say that but perhaps they are less likely to lose out if anything changes in the future.

By the way OP - there aren't more "subjects". There are a couple more papers, given they've introduced some computer-exams, although if you include the fact that they lost a paper in CP3 then I think there's only one more paper if you're starting from scratch, and the number of exam hours is about the same. Obviously anyone having to resit anything will end up with more exam hours than someone who passes everything first time.

Good luck

 

Yes unfortunately that would be my recommendation. Do not start until the new curriculum is well established. Mr Cribb has said that no one would be put in limbo but many people are put off starting or continuing exams due to the risk of having to shell out large amounts of money on taking exams which could be rendered worthless.

I agree that taking the exams in order is the better choice but then why don’t the IFoA make this a requirement rather than keep changing the rule.

Mr Brown is wrong about the majority of people being happy with the IFoA. As I keep saying there are potentially 10,000 students out of 15,000 who will face extra exams. I am sure they will not be pleased. A few have come out but most are just sheep.

What is also clear is that you do not have a voice or any say in exam matters. Complaints are being swept under the carpet and I have not met a single actuary who has not complained to the IFoA about something or other. I include many senior Actuaries who also have complete disregard of the profession.

Mr Brown still does not seem to understand there are more exams. 11 is a greater number than 9. I would have hoped that any actuary would understand that, even if they were unqualified, qualified in another country or got exemptions at university. Mr Brown also hasn’t comment on my point that the IFoA have lied about these exams being sat and passed independently. The IFoA have changed their tune or made another mistake here. The list of errors is endless and I find it difficult to keep up with the constant corrections of published material which is not even made clear with a notification of an update.

So in summary. Unfortunately it is very difficult for a new person to make up their mind as there are several references including the first few hits on google which say that you will not be disadvantaged by the implementation of the new exam system. If you start now it is at the risk of having exams you’ve taken already rendered worthless due to potential regulatory and legal developments and due to changes in the new exam system. The whole notion of the chartered actuary and FRC review is also out there and should be monitored carefully.

The exams In Switzerland take 3 years or less to complete. You can then get mutual recognition from the IFoA and become a fellow in no time. That would be the wise choice. You just have to give up your house and home and learn a bit of german and find a job in a country with pretty much closed borders. But if you can clear these hurdles you’ll get the same qualification in less than half the time. Not many people have to resit an exam in Switzerland, let alone 6 times.

The IFoA could have prevented this from happening if they would have just honored their original promise not to disadvantage current students. A one to one mapping of exams would be the simple solution. Or not allow foreign qualifications to get such an easy path to fellowship.

But as with many actuaries, they are too proud and stubborn to admit any mistake and have continued down a slippery path which will eventually ruin their credibility and reputation.