ST3 September 2005 exam

ST3 examination

I was quite frightened by this paper because I found it to be a rather striaghtforward paper compared to past papers for this subject.....which either means that I misunderstood what was being asked (and therefore failed miserably) or I studied very well for this session.

The only bit that I was abit sceptical about was the number of points you needed to come out with for that "moral hazard question" for 14 marks, but on the whole I found it to be a good paper and it would be a shame to fail such an exam, as ST3 exams generally don't get set like that!

 

I agree... I thought it unusual that nothing was that obscure, unusual to be hit with a 25 marker on each of premium rating and reserving and no tricky question on accounting, reinsurance, etc. I dont know if thats good or bad.

Will be interesting to see how the examiner report deals with 18 marks on reserving methods - seems like too low a number of marks to go through the pros and cons of every method for every reserve, but too high to just detail the issues and one suitable method for each reserve. (I tried somewhere between the two but probably ended up too general and weak on the specifics of the question).

And 14 marks on reducing fraud? I really dont expect the examiners report to give an answer worthy of 14 marks. Hopefully it doesnt just go off on some random tangent. (I tried to break this question down - gave a few points on each of product structure, underwriting, claims, market initiatives, legal, ... but nowhere near 25+ solid distinct points)

Anyone else have trouble knowing what level to aim at for these longer questions? What did you do?

 

ST3 Examination

I just came about with about 10 usual comments...I did not have time to start clutching at straws as this time spent thinking would have mean't I would have suffered in answering the rest of the questions.

Just want to know..... did you relate your reserve method for question 18 to the characteristics of motor insurance - i.e split by bodily injury, property damage, etc?

 

I didnt split by bodily injury, property damage, etc. Guess that would explain the marks. DOH.

 

I found it tough going, but came out with satisfied glow. Much like the kid in readybrek ad.

The only material stumbling point was Q4 on minimum amount of capital. Looked easy at first but soon got stuck.

I also couldn't (and thinking about it, still can't ) define suretyship. LEARN YOUR GLOSSARY ITEMS!!!

Who knows though, I might just pass it.

 

Yes I got stuck on question 4 too.

For the last few questions of the paper, it just seemed really hard to generate enough points for the marks available. I put down (what seemed to be) a huge number of quite diverse points to really try and capture everything but still walked out convinced that I hadn't quite done enough to pass (despite nearly using up the entire answer booklet!).

I'd be interested to know what people reckon the pass mark is for ST3 - some people I've spoken to are convinced it's around the 50% mark and others say they're certain it's around the 65% mark.

 

omega...I know a marker who told me that they reckoned that for the 100 series (exclu 106, 107 & 108) the pass mark was in the low to mid 60s, for 106, 107, 108 the pass mark was in the 70s and for the 300s it was in the 50-55s.

Don't know how much you can take from this cos at the end of the day its all speculation (no one 100% knows) and the pass rate is always going to be around about 35-40% irrespective of whatthe average pass mark is.

 

Hi

This may not be teh most appropriate place for this comment,
but I want to develop on what Deniese just said in her last post - pass marks

hwo are pass marks determined

(i) there is the widely held and maybe somewhat "contreversial" opinion that the examiners determine pass marks so that a set percentage pass in order to maintain upward salary pressure.
for example, 303 has had a historically lwo pass rate in past, is it because it is hard or os there a desire to keep GI a lucrative area in salary sense by limiting suplly of those with GI knowldege

(ii)however i was once told during exam counselling that this is not the case and that theoretically 100% of people could pass ana ctuarial exam and that 100% of poepl ciould fail an exam - though rarely this happens

(iii) we keep seeing on the examiners reports the words "the examiners were disappointed buy the standard of answerrs and lack of application " - if (i) is a valid point are they really disappointed - if they are really disappointed i take it the view in (ii) is
more likely.

so maybe someone has some official view on this subject or
maybe someone will probably add another view to fuel speculation!!! lol

 

examstudent ...... in respect of point (ii) - have you ever seen a 60%pass rate (or a 10% pass rate) in any of the ST subjects (300 series).....pass rates are always consistent. There is no way you could convince me that every yr there is more or less consistency in the % of people passing.

The higher powers (lol) can try and convince us that "technically" 100% of people can pass or fail but until I see pass rates change significantly for a given yr (whether for better or worse) I will NEVER believe them.

 

deniese

i see ur point
-but in sept 2003 301 had pass rate of 60%
-in sept 2005 ST6 had pass rate of 25% (so dId CT8)

If though higher powers that be manipulate pass rates, i wonder how they can get away with saying "the examiners were disappointed" "the examiners are concerned about the low pass rates" etc on website/exam reports -

 

i didn't know about 301 having a 60% pass rate, but for ST6, I reckon that's going tobe the standard pass rate given the difficulty of the subject and given the pass rate for CiD (in the old strategy)....who knows, a change may be coming.

 

densies
u talk about change...
i see from april 2005 that ST1 had high pass rtae (54/101 for institute and 9/16 for faculty)
assuming no manipulation
what do u reckon were reasons for thi
is ST1 easier than the rest...

 

who knows....but I have a theory based on 'Mean reversion'

Given the new strategy and a new subject (i.e Health & Benefits), the examiners may have yet to appreciate the distribution of marks achievable in this exam and are still getting a feel for things. However, given time they will revise the way they set the exams (i.e making it more difficult) and when a few exams have been taken, the pass rates will revert to its 'long-run' average (i.e 35 - 40%).

Seriously though - I can't expect the institute to continue seeing such pass rates for ST1 and not do something about it, when ST subjects are meant to be similar in difficulty. Else they'll find ever one taking that exam.

It will change.........

 

ummm
deniese - 2mean reverting" - u speak of exams as though they are like stocks lol

with ST6 on one spectrum (25%) ST1 on the other side, clearly the hypothetrical exam pass/failure probability/rate in ST subjects is ineffiecient at the moment - so arbitrage by shorting (stop sudying) ST6 and going long ST1 (start studying it) hoping to secure a pass at the end ...

but not strictly a pure arbitrage opportunity as u cannot say ur strategy terminates with a pass with probability 1...and there is an initila cost in purchasing the ST1 material and finding no willing buyer of ur second hand ST6 material (which will be duifficult in current climate)

but u can always play the strategy in revesre if u dont pass ST1 after a few attempts as hopefully by then student froces (i.e via lack of numbers sitting ST6) have begun to ease the difficulty of ST6 exam..and so on.... lol

 

well I can assure you, if things don't change, I will revert to taking ST1 as I know I stand a higher chance of passing......

 

Hi all - this is my first post here. I am pleased to see a discussion forum finally for faculty and institute students operational. Congratulations to ActEd.

About St3 - I can never have a good idea about what I have written is what was expected. often I find myself surprised looking at the examiner's report and then realise that my interpretation was different fom the examiners.

This St3 Sep 2005 exam - wasn't very difficult - but thats scary - probably everyone else found it that way. probably the pass mark will be set too high !
I did get stuck on suretyship defn, but I could solve and get an answer to Q 4. I am not sure I wrote enough point on the 14 marks for fraudulent behavior protection.

reserving Q - could generate ideas, but not sure expanded adequately.
last Q about about rating - found it straightforward - but too many marks for what i could remember!!

Does this sound familiar to anyone?

Frankly i am tired of writing ST3 - as I have failed it about 4 or 5 times...i have even lost the count and everytime with FAs. SO I am not really sure what I should do if I fail again!!!

I have been taking that exam everytime with the hope that I'll pass it with just a little more effort and that day hasn't yet arrived.Should I take a break from the paper, take a different paper and then attempt again?

thanks in advance for any feedback/inputs

 

Have you tried exam counselling? They are really good.

 

Yeeeeeeeeehhhhhhhhaaaaaaaa

Can I be in the readybrek ad now??

 

Yehhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa......I passed St3!!!