these days the communications papers have seen more of "having to decide" what to communicate rather than just "communicating ahead" what the examiner has already told u.. the previous papers told u straight ahead what to communicate and u started straight from there, although this was not good. though i like this development, as deciding what to communicate is as important as communicating itself.. however it's hard on time in the exams... i spent significant time in this april'08 exam "deciphering the technical material" provided.. the planning and actual writing came later.. though this new aspect "decipering technical material" has been added to exam, which is good, they haven't added the "time" to 3h 15mins.. aren't we being unfairly treated to the previous generation of actuaries who sat 201? any thoughts on the above and/or the recent papers?
I found all the past papers were only 2-3 pages say, so it took a moment to get over the shock of opening what appeared to be a book when I got my paper on Tuesday. With all those figures / notes etc for both questions, it took me ages to find one of the main points of the letter as it was in one of the later notes, with loads of irrelevant stuff before it - and I know the whole point is to work out what is irrelevant, but as you said, there isn't time to decipher such a largeamount of data. Other than that, I thought it was ok-ish compared to past papers, it just took a bit more investigative work than usual.
