"Other valid approaches are given appropriate credit"

[Bill SD]

For several CP2 exams it is difficult to know exactly which results or charts the examiner is after. Would marks likely be awarded for a reasonable interpretation of the requested result/chart or only if exactly matches what the Examiner intended?
[Appreciate this question sadly applies to every IFoA subject but unsure if for CP2 in practice, "other valid approaches are given appropriate credit." and if "appropriate" means a small fraction of the available marks. I would ideally ask this question to an examiner but in the only possible forum (the recent IFoA CP webinar) the advice just seemed to be to somehow learn 'Actuarial English' and better understand the Examiner's intent. So appreciate any insight from student's past attempts or Acted tutors just as reassurance that it's best to follow a reasonable interpretation of question rather than spend excessive time in exam debating which of the possible interpretations the Examiner wants]

For example, Sept 2022 Paper B: "Construct one suitable chart to illustrate the increase in NPV of the total remaining payments for the 100 annuities as a result of the amendment". Examiner wanted a bar chart with a single total of the NPV increases across the annuities while in my practice attempt, I produced a line chart illustrating the increase in NPV of the total remaining payments for (each of) the 100 annuities.

Similarly, the same paper requested: "Construct a suitable chart to illustrate, by grouping all 100 affected annuitants by the remaining term of their annuity". (In my practice attempt) I produced a chart after grouping the 20 different terms into 10 buckets (similar to other exams, like Apr 2023) but Examiner actually wanted a chart showing each of the 20 different terms and critiqued "inappropriate grouping of the data" in its Report.

 

[Lucy England]

The examiners are usually looking for quite specific charts, although there is sometimes a little bit of flexibility in how charts are presented, so it's possible that you might get full (or nearly full) credit for something that's not completely the same as in the model solution.

My understanding is that partial credit is usually awarded for charts that don't quite show what the examiners intended but are otherwise well-constructed. In September 2022, there's a comment in the Examiners' Report that says 'appropriate partial credit' was awarded where such graphs were created.

In terms of interpreting what the question is asking for, I agree this can often take some work! It's helpful to think about the senior actuary's perspective here, as this is the person we're drafting the summary for. In the case of September 2022 (which I'm admittedly not terribly familiar with), it looks like we're considering the impact of a change in annuity payments on the costs of those policies. So the big question on the CEO's mind is going to be 'how much is this going to cost?' The chart with the three columns illustrates this in quite a straightforward way.

You can also think ahead about the results commentary you'll need to write and what type of graph is likely to help with this. This might give you a bit more insight into what the examiners are requesting.

Even if you do create a slightly different graph from what's required, there's still a decent chance you'll be able to write commentary on it and still pick up plenty of marks in this important section of the summary. On this basis, I agree that it's a good idea to avoid spending excessive time in the exam thinking about interpretation of the wording. Instead, think to yourself 'What is the senior actuary likely to want to know about?' and 'How can I best illustrate that in a chart that fits the wording in the question?'

Hope that helps!

 

[Bill SD]

That's very helpful and reassuring -thanks