Examiner Reports

HI
obviouslya fetr results examiner reprots are published


however tehy vary in quality and size per subject and wonder what implicatiosn of this are


in 303 for example, teh number of points written suggests sometimes an 1/4 to 0.5 of a mark per point

im 302 and investment 305/301 teh reports woudl seeminglyt indicate mostly 1 mark poer point.

equallys oem of thjsi woudl applya t teh fellowship 440/sa seroes subjects.
can someonne clarify if thsi is true, as mark allocatiosna re nto explicit in reports.

what other imporvemenst shoudl be made to reports?

 

Yeah, it's often hard - the Examiners Reports appear to have too little whilst the ActEd ASET has too much for the answer. I think I would find it most helpful if ActEd clearly indicated on the ASET (maybe in bold) exactly what working is needed, in their opinion, to gain full marks on a calculation question and have mark allocations in brackets after each point in the answers on the more wordy ones. I don't think the Examiners want to give too much away regarding their marking which is why they don't say what credit is given for each point.

I think it's often possible to tell how much each point is worth though - rather than varying between subject, it's more about how well-explained the point is (often 1 mark if there is a lot of explanation) and also whether it's a 'stock point', e.g. tax or regulation (1/4 mark), or a better point (at least 1/2 mark)

 

ummm spelling maybe ?

 

thanks for your reply

-You say that the examiners dont want to give to much away regarding their marking?
Why is this case?
I thought there is suppsoed to be transparency in the process
partial/non disclosure hardly facilitates this.


- You say the examiners solutions are too short yet on teh front of the paper it is stated that "in most questiosn substantially more detail is given than is necessary to secure a clear pass"....

in general, i think improvement is needed to these reports - a fine example is illustrated in the articles in this months edition of the actuary about exams.

 

I think it would be helpful for Acted to produce a summary answer sheet as well as the fuller ASET to give an idea of the answer required in an exam. The fuller ASET is very useful as it gives a complete answer, but is never what any student would produce in an exam due to its length!

Although ASET should be read in conjunction with the Examiners Report, I tend to find the Examiners Reports to be the opposite of ASET, i.e. too brief, and usually I would write fuller answers than are given in the Examiners Report. Something in the middle, e.g. a summary sheet, would certainly be a help.

 

Hi

this board ahs clearly discussed differences between reports and ASET
so it seems ASET appears too long,
some believe examiners report appears too short ( although on front of reports it clearly states that this more detail than required toa cheive a clear pass)
also someone believes a summary sheet is a clear comprimise
examiners reports also vary gretaly in length...


i think the most helpful thinmg to do is for porper reports and marking schemes to be issued by the institute..showing exactly what marks are awarded for and reprts that give an accurate guide as to the level of detail required...
otherwise with sumamry sheets and ASETs and reports altogether there would more than is necessary for revison.

rather than having several potential duplicates that are approximations/guesses, one official document that is close to correct can only help rather than hinder

after all the awarding bodies of most public examinations issue accurate reprts and mark schemes so i don t see why the institute is different

or maybe ACTED could work with institute to prodiuce official ASET

 

I don't mind - just get it right!

Maybe the Professions reports would be OK if they didn't have quite so many errors (both in the paper and the solutions). 103 was a classic error-fest. The 109 paper I sat (April 2003) had a mistake in the question - requiring a negative volatility - what did the report say? Grrr. The 301 paper I sat (April 2004) had an error in it as well.

The April 2005 CT6 examiners solution for the deviance is wrong. I also heard that there was a 104 cock-up a while back.

Rant over!

 

Fret not!

Each time I pass an actuarial exam I have a look at the examiner's report to see if my answers bore any resemblence to their "specimen" solutions. I am yet to see anything that look even vaguely familier! Of course I could just be suffering from amnesia but my point is this: IF U STUDY REALLY HARD, UNDERSTAND ALL THE NOTES, REMEMBER MOST OF WHAT YOU HAVE STUDIED AND ARGUE YOUR CASE WELL IN THE EXAM - YOU might PASS.

 

I once looked at an Examiners report (CT4 (103) April 05) and thought my answers were a lot like the examiners solutions.

I got an FC.