Q7 September 2008

[DevonMatthews]

The syllabus does not state anywhere "Use Monte Carlo simulation to approximate definite integrals", the examiner’s report says that "Very few were able to write down the required estimator and therefore made no progress at all", is this surprising? Worst of all this question carries almost 10% of the marks on the paper. Why do they put things on the paper that a/ are not even in the core reading b/ are not listed in the syllabus objectives.

 

[tiger]

The syllabus and core reading for CT7 will change significantly for the exams from April 2010 onwards.

http://www.the-actuary.org.uk/841502

I don't plan to look at old papers (other than April 2010)

 

[bobbathejobba]

Why do they put things on the paper that a/ are not even in the core reading b/ are not listed in the syllabus objectives.

One of:

• To meet the "higher order" thinking skills required by the examinations
• To show off a clever application
• To torture students
• To maintain professional standards so no riff raff get in

Genuinely you should expect at least one question that is "off the wall" in CT6 (and more if it's the April 2010 paper!) hence plenty of practice needed to get out the standard questions so you're not thinking about these - thus leaving time to try the harder questions.

 

[John Lee]

I don't plan to look at old papers (other than April 2010)

This is the CT6 (not CT7) paper.

Sorry to be heavy - but that is a rather short-sighted approach - as some questions come in cycles of every 5-10 papers (eg aggregate XOL, ruin with XOL, ruin at 1st claim, inflation BF, 1st principles posterior, ...).

You don't have time to think in a CT6 paper - practice is essential to be used to the range of questions that come up.


Same for CT7 as some parts are unchanged and are being tested in a similar manner to previous papers.

 

[DevonMatthews]

You don't have time to think in a CT6 paper - practice is essential to be used to the range of questions that come up.

How would you say CT6 compares (interms of time managment) to other exams? What do you mean by "no time to think"? For example if asked to prove lognormal truncated moments formulae (or even normal) would you recomend just spitting out a solution from the core reading without following any algebra "because you know what you have to end up with", or follow it through completley and consume a bit more time?

 

[tiger]

This is the CT6 (not CT7) paper.

my bad

 

[John Lee]

How would you say CT6 compares (interms of time managment) to other exams? What do you mean by "no time to think"?

I just hear a lot of students say that they ran out of time in CT6 (which I don't hear in my other subjects of CT1 and CT3).

Because it's quite tight on time - you need to be able to "rattle off" standard results without having to think about them, ie practise them so much that you're not working from scratch. You will need the time for the "odd-ball questions" that come up every year.

For example if asked to prove lognormal truncated moments formulae (or even normal) would you recomend just spitting out a solution from the core reading without following any algebra "because you know what you have to end up with", or follow it through completley and consume a bit more time?

I hope that you understand the steps and have practised it enough that you're not having to think about what to do as will have become innate. Hence it should be faster and this will then mean you have the thinking time available for the higher order reasoning questions (ie oddball questions).

Clear as mud?