Thesis dedicated to actuarial students

Discussion in 'General study / exams' started by almost_there, Oct 29, 2018.

  1. Ace123

    Ace123 Member

    You clearly stated that Muppet provided evidence - this has been proven to be false - as pointed out by Muppet himself - therefore you have mis represented him/her and should have the decency to apologise - but then again I don’t think you have that in you to admit your wrong.
     
  2. Infinity

    Infinity Member

    I don’t think you understand,

    Muppet has said:

    “The CM & CS subjects each have two papers - a paper-based exam and a computer-based exam. When the IFoA first announced the 2019 strategy they said that you'd be able to pass/fail/resit the two papers separately. But this has changed and they are now taken/passed/failed together (with a 70%//30% loading attached to the two papers). So it's like CP1/CA1: one subject/exam with two papers.”

    This is the evidence I’m referring to. He has noted that the comment on sitting and passing exams independently has “changed” but where has the ifoa actually told students there is a change. They’ve just sneaked this into a modified document which doesn’t even have date on it for audit trail and the Orginal is no where to be found...

    The Ifoa ceo has said in the annual report that no current students will be disadvantaged. Has he apologized to me? No

    His words and actions as well as the actions of the Ifoa will affect my career as well as my wallet.

    And it’s not just a simple mistake, the entire Ifoa has been lying about this particular point and redacting statements they’ve made. They’ve also lied about other points such as whether the new exams can be sat separately.

    Why don’t muppet and ace123 perhaps go and have a look at the original statements made by the Ifoa in the original c2019 document or the annual report and give their opinion on whether they are false and misleading?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 3, 2018
  3. Infinity

    Infinity Member

    When was excel invented? Why is the Ifoa examining me on this cutting edge advance in technology?!!? The content of the courses hasn’t changed. You can find statements from universities that confirm the new exams assess broadly the same subject matter. I will just be taking the Ifoa exams again and liking their pockets with money
     
    almost_there likes this.
  4. almost_there

    almost_there Member

    Page 129
    Thirdly, the three hour, unseen, written examination paper format used by the profession tended to test a limited type of knowledge (Francis, 1990). In the more numerical subjects, hand calculations were often requested, arguably to demonstrate that the candidate understood the constituent parts of such a calculated solution. However, the requested calculations had to be sufficiently simple to permit hand calculation in a reasonable time. This caused two difficulties: • the problems set often appeared unrealistic in comparison with problems encountered in the office • hand calculation itself was unrealistic. In reality, the trainees would have utilised the power and speed of the personal computers and advanced software which were accessible from their desks (Roberts, 1991).
     
  5. Infinity

    Infinity Member

    So the Ifoa has realized in 2018 that hand calculation is not used in the office anymore. A student pointed this out in 1997. That’s nearly 20 years ago...

    the
     
  6. almost_there

    almost_there Member

    Yet bizarrely IFoA will claim their exams are the application of competence standards when no one in the profession must perform such hand calculations under such time pressure & this has been the case for at least 21 years ... lol

    A competence standard has been defined under the Equality Act 2010 as: "An academic, medical or other standard applied for the purposes of determining whether or not a person has a particular level of competence or ability."
     
  7. Admin

    Admin Administrator Staff Member

    Thank you for this feedback. We will continue to edit/delete posts in line with the forum terms of use - and this moderation is often triggered by reports made by other users. We're all for a heated debate but please try to keep comments professional and courteous. It's obviously very subjective about what is and isn't and you won't always agree with us. We also don't read everything. We will be making some edits to this thread when we have time. We try not to change the meaning of anything we leave.

    The majority of edits made recently have simply been deletions of inaccurate information. So for example, you are welcome to ask the question you have done here and the answer is: no, the IFoA have no involvement whatsoever in the moderation of this forum.
    So if someone posts that they do - we will delete that comment.

    We have closed some other threads because the requests for moderation got a bit out of hand, or the discussion drifted way off track. But there are plenty out there that are still open. This thread is an off-topic with a very open introduction, hence remains open - as long you all stick to the rules.

    Thank you
     
    student1990 likes this.
  8. Muppet

    Muppet Member

    This hasn't provided any evidence that they "lied". It's the word 'lie' that I don't like. I made a statement to support the suggestion that they have changed their minds (it's not really evidence but expect some could be gathered without too much difficulty). I don't disagree with everything you suggest. And I am certainly not ganging up on you - a suggestion that I too find a little offensive. I think I will leave you alone to talk to Almost there. You obviously only want to hear certain things and I can't help you with that.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 3, 2018
    Ace123 likes this.
  9. Ace123

    Ace123 Member

    Your right Muppet it's a waste of time talking to Infinity and her sidekick, unless a poster agrees with them they don't want to here other views
     
  10. almost_there

    almost_there Member

    If you had absorbed even parts of the thesis you wouldn't make such a comment. No one is asking for exams to be made 'easier'. The thesis explores why such low pass rates when the profession admits those with unblemished exam records, 2:1 & 1st class honours students.
     
  11. student1990

    student1990 Member

    So 20 years later, marking schemes, marks achieved and pass marks are published. Some things have changed.
    Impossible to quantify how many - but its fairly obvious that some don't prepare properly. In fact many students have admitted just that. There are many reasons with they might not prepare properly of course - apathy; work/study/life balance; over-confidence; personal circumstances etc etc.
     
  12. almost_there

    almost_there Member

    Only because students from 2012 onwards started dropping subject access requests at IFOA and reporting them to ICO.
     
  13. Infinity

    Infinity Member

    I don’t think the pro ifoa camp have read the previous posts. The ifoa have not decided to reveal the marks by themselves. They’ve been pressurized into doing so and were illegally withholding information for years.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 7, 2018
  14. student1990

    student1990 Member

    I have :). But I'm not necessarily for or against. But that's happened all over the place - GCSE, A'level etc. Not a bad thing.
     
  15. Infinity

    Infinity Member

    I took GCSEs and A levels. Got good grades too. I never had to take my GCSE or A levels six times over. It’s much more clearly defined, no one argues that GCSEs are easier from one school to the next. The ifoa exams take longer than GCSEs and A levels put together. I learned more during my GCSEs than with my CT6 exam where I had to calculate some averages... I took GCSE and A level English, why do I have to prove my competency in English again?
     
    almost_there likes this.
  16. Infinity

    Infinity Member

    This thesis is a must read for any actuarial student. It contains the truth about the actuarial exams. Fatigue, useless and irrelevant study material, difficulties of managing work and family life. Why are there are these haters when a 300+ thesis has been written about it? I’m only at about page 100, but the author has done a fabulous job to capture the essence of the actuarial profession
     
  17. Infinity

    Infinity Member

    I thought the same thing. But it is very relevant. It’s not good for though. It demonstrates we’ve been mislead for 2 decades.
     
  18. almost_there

    almost_there Member

    This thesis is on the bullseye. Such as end of page 149-150:
     
  19. Infinity

    Infinity Member

    “Thus by design, some of the courses to be studied were of limited relevance to the actuarial trainees' office work. About half of the actuarial students found it difficult to value this breadth in their training. They did not feel that it served its espoused purposes of permitting transfer between different spheres of actuarial work, and developing understanding of the range of actuarial activity”. This is a prophecy not a PHD. Haven’t I said this previously.

    There’s even a bit on why full subjects were split into two to make it more digestible which is the opposite of what is happening now with the new CM and CS subjects.
     
  20. Infinity

    Infinity Member

    “However, the requested calculations had to be sufficiently simple to permit hand calculation in a reasonable time. This caused two difficulties: • the problems set often appeared unrealistic in comparison with problems encountered in the office • hand calculation itself was unrealistic. In reality, the trainees would have utilised the power and speed of the personal computers and advanced software which were accessible from their desks (Roberts, 1991)”.

    So since 1991 the Ifoa has been making us do these actuarial exams for nothing. Introducing an excel paper in 2018, nearly 30 years after someone has made the observation that the computation required in actuarial exams is outdated!!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 8, 2018
  21. Infinity

    Infinity Member

    “During their studies, nearly all of the actuarial students formed a view of the assessment criteria which was at variance with their initial expectations. Firstly, they all became aware of a 'hidden curriculum' (Snyder, 1971) of which a principal constituent was opaque assessment criteria. The actuarial students felt that neither the professional body nor the examiners themselves were willing to make clear (at least not officially) what was required to satisfy the assessment criteria: they had to find out for themselves. (Their quest for, and use of clues will be discussed in the next chapter.) In effect, discovering enough about the assessment criteria to tailor their examination answers appropriately, was an unexpected assessment criterion. To the overwhelming majority this was not a valid assessment hurdle. There were two competing explanations for the opaque assessment criteria, both unpalatable to the actuarial students. On the one hand, the suspicion that the hidden agenda was the tripping up and failing of candidates, rather than the support of and passing of candidates. Students cited historically low pass rates combined with the normally high level of prior educational achievement of actuarial students, as evidence of this. Without naming it as such, they were suggesting the operation of gatekeeping. The competing explanation was incompetence on the part of those within the profession who were responsible for communication with students on matters relating to the professional examinations. This was unpalatable because it suggested the paradox of an unprofessional, professional education system. “
     
    almost_there likes this.

Share This Page