Thanks for reading my post. I'm really struggling for time in the practice exams I've tried to date. Both papers feel quite time pressured to me. I have been getting slightly more comfortable with more practice but since we only have a few days left I'm having to accept that I will miss out on some marks for this. Does anyone have any specific strategies for the tight time allowance? For paper one I've been focusing on making sure that all work is covered by the audit trail. This means that I'm regularly missing some of the later bits of the modelling work. As far as I can tell for the mark schemes, this is pretty efficient? I think I don't really loose any marks on the audit trail side for not completing the work? For paper 2 I'm focusing on those results, conclusions and next steps. At the moment I'm just putting in the bare basics (just a couple of sentences) under all of the summary report headings and then going back to the ones where the big marks are.
CP2 is a really time-pressured exam! I think the strategies you're using sound sensible. Targeting the places with the most marks is a good idea One thing I'd always advise is to avoid spending too long on the spreadsheet in Paper 1 (it sounds like you know this already). You get more marks for drafting the audit trail than for getting the calculations spot on, so it's much better to use a placeholder or simplifying assumption and lose a couple of marks for calculation accuracy if it means you get (almost) to the end of the model and audit trail. You might also find that planning your work helps a bit. This might feel a bit counter-intuitive, but rushing head-on into the calculations without having a good grasp of what you need to do can mean you waste time. Planning also ensures you know what results you need to calculate and present (in the case of the Summary in Paper 2). I'd recommend having a read through the IFoA's Guide to CP2 if you haven't already. This is written by the CP2 examination team, so tells you what the examiners are looking for. It's got things like suggested exam timings and common pitfalls to avoid. Finally, you might find it helpful to review the Examiners' Reports for the past papers you've tried. These contain the marking schedules (the marks are quite well broken-down), pass marks (usually about 60%) and Examiners' comments (saying what was done well and where students struggled). Reading these might help you spot any areas to work on and give you some more ideas for how to most effectively use your time in the exam.
Thanks for that Lucy, there's a lot of great advice here. If I could zero in one one point in particular: Suppose I am close to the end of the exam and missing a small amount of spreadsheet work on paper 1. If I started to do this spreadsheet work and gained a couple of marks for this on the modelling side, is it possible that I would also loose some marks because there are calculations in my spreadsheet that have not been documented in the audit trail? Am I correct in thinking that I could actually be better deliberately leaving steps undone if I don't have the time to document them also? I am sure that if this was the case I would actually benefit from proof-reading my audit trail again or something with that time.
I guess you'd need to make a judgment call in the exam if you have a situation like this. Taking the last couple of minutes to proof read your audit trail might get you a mark or two for drafting/clarity, whereas doing a final calculation in the spreadsheet might also secure you a mark or two! Marking schedules usually do have a couple of marks for something like "all methodology steps are set out clearly", so if large sections of your spreadsheet are missing in the audit trail then you won't get these marks. With that said, I think if it's just the last calculation or two you've done that isn't documented, then the examiner is likely to pick up on the fact you ran out of time. I've never marked CP2 for the IFoA (others on this forum might be able to comment!), but if it was me I'd probably give the benefit of the doubt here if it was one or two final calcs that weren't fully described and the rest of the audit trail was well documented.
