It may not be politically correct to say so, but I think this is totally out of order, bringing up topics from subjects that you might have studied several years ago. Fair enough if it's pointed out that material from previous subjects might be examined, in which case, a refresher ought to be included in the core reading for the current subject.
Acted often say these tangential examination questions are "fair game" but I disagree. If studying to be an actuary only took 3 years, then I'd be more inclined to agree, but I certainly don't keep all the files I've ever done for every exam. Isn't the point about these exams not that you remember how to do everything you've ever studied forever, but that you know about it and can quickly remind yourself if you're in a work situation that requires it.
This exam is probably going to have a high number of passers that happen, by chance, to have recently looked at these ratios, even if it was just for 5 minutes, which seems to me to be very unfair. It'll be a "make or break" question and the examination of actual ST5 material will be irrelevant.
I didn't do this particular exam, so I think I'm being pretty objective. However, I have come across similar situations. I remember an exam where the question was not in the current syllabus but was in the equivalent exam when the exam system changed for the next session (as I realised when I had to retake it).
Last edited by a moderator: Nov 11, 2006