Hi I'm confused... do I apply to join the Faculty or the Institute? Also, I want to sit 1 or 2 exams before applying for a job - is it best to start with CT1 or can they be done in any order? Any other advice on the exams is greatly appreciated! Thanks Sarah
I think it depends where you're based. Generally, ppl in Scotland apply to the faculty, whereas ppl in london apply to the institute. And ppl elsewhere apply to either (I think). I don't think there's any real difference between them - exams are the same, qualification value is the same. I suppose it's whether you prefer to have FFA or FIA after your name when you qualify!
I think the Faculty has a plus when it omes to work experience. You only need one years experience to work as an Actuary whereas Institute requires three years. But I guess ths is not a big deal as most of us will have more than three years work before qualifying.
I joined the Faculty because its cheaper!! Also its quicker to check your results with the Fac because there is less doing the exams. In relation to which exams to start with, it really depends on your background. CT1,2,3 and 7 could be taken without much knowledge of any other modules needed. It just depends on your preferences. I started with CT1 and got through it in April though the pass rate was very much lower than previous sittings. Maybe they will set an easier paper in Sept to make up for it?? Or maybe they wont. Good luck
CT1 is a good introduction to actuarial maths, so it's probably best to start with that one. But 2, 3 and 7 can all be taken either (though maybe you can get an exemption from 3?)
If I am correct the only real difference between Institute and Faculty is that with Faculty you have to sit an exam at least once every 2 years. Institute has no such requirement. Since the previous education strategy some changes were made. Fees are the same for the two and with both you need work based skills for 3 years. Advantage of Faculty: It's easier to find your name on exams passlists. (I am Institute though) Cheers Erik
Is there still a difference between the Institute and the Faculty? Do I still need to sit an exam at least every 2 years when a member of the Faculty but not of the Institute? I am trying to figure out what which one would be better to apply for but I can't see a difference (apart from location) anymore.
I dont think there are any more differences as far as a student. I think it's location and to an extent the organisational structure (although both are very inter-related) but I could be wrong. Maybe with the merger it won't matter anymore. Long ago the exam requirements were different. an actuary told me they joined the Faculty so they wouldnt have to study GI. I considered joining the Faculty because up to a few years ago there was no work experience requirement but they introduced it so I didnt bother. I was under the impression that it's 3 years for both to be a fellow. I could be wrong as kanch thinks it's one year.
interesting that many think this merger is already a done deal....certainly been communicated that way
when you say confederation - i think of global bodies like FIFA etc So why not call our new body "Institute and Faculty of Actuaries" & in our new merged body, the qualification FIFA could stand for "Fellow of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
lol FIFA sounds like a good idea to me I always thought that MA FIA were good letters to have but seeing how i don't have an MA it doesn't matter
like that one! I don't understand why we can't just stay being the 'actuarial profession'? suppose then we'd be FAPs.... Confederation sounds odd.
That's it - the reason I've been looking for! I went to one of the older universities where you "automatically" get an MA, but I've never bothered. If I do ever make FIA though, I'm applying for it! T.
