Down & out in ....

[c2veteran]

I took course 2 this past sitting & failed with a 3. last spring too my grade was a 3 though my perecentile was much better(31%=May01, 23%inNov'01)- this is going to be my third attempt & i'm desperately looking for advice from guys who took it a bunch of times before passing it. it'd be great if someone in dc area is interested in getting together to study

[Exam Slave]

Find out where your weakness lies.

1. Is it working too slow during the exam?
If so, then you need to do timed practice exams, one a night for the three weeks before the exam.
2. Is it not knowing how to identify the kind of problem at first glance?
If so, then these practice exams will help a bit in this regard. On the practice exam, first thing to do is to skip the problem if you draw a blank. Come back to it later. Same goes for the actual exam: make a note on the answer sheet (circle the number)
It appears that the exam writers are getting very imaginative in hiding the method to take, simply by revising the "scenario" of the problem. They know what the practice exams and previous published exams look like, so they want to make sure people who pass can recognize the scenario as well as do problems.
3. Is it working out the problem, making a simple mistake along the way to get the answer found in choice C, when the exam makers know what mistake some candidates will make?
The practice exams will show you your mistake. After the end of the practice exam, redo all problems you did wrong until you get the right answer. It is punishment that must be meted out. (It doesn't hurt that much.)
4. Is it a lack of confidence in your answer, that makes you ponder your work, causing valuable time to slip away?
Going through the practice exams in a timed format should help with the confidence.
5. Are you putting enough hours and real effort into studying? No intention to offend, but I'm required to ask.

[c2veteran]

1.Speed is obviously somethin i've to work on - attempted 35 in may & 39 this time.
2. even the ones i didn't answer, i think i was able to classify them correctly so i'm pretty sure i know where they are comin from 3. this double guessing business by the examiner is something i know abt but havent really found a way to tackle it as i dont know if i'm a 'typical' candidate-- giving the correct 'wromng' answer

5. I didn't study to a schedule last time so i'm not entirely certain how much i clocked in - somewhere between 250 & 400 hrs is my guess; company time of 120 is definite so thats the glb- i thought i understood the material well esp the macro stuff but that turned out to be my worst-6%!

[gloid]

The brutal honest truth: I would say that if you don't get it next time, you should reexamine your career. Course 2 is nowhere near the difficulty of later exams, even Course 3 & 4. 250-400 hours is about what it should take you to pass any Course 1 throuexam. But, it could be as simple as not prioritizing what to study. You should cover every single topic so that you are familiar with everything. Get a good study guide. Don't aim for a 6, aim for an 8 or 9. Try to be able to take a timed exam at least two weeks before the real exam and be able to get at least 30 right at that point. Prepare for the worst, and it will only be a little worse than that.

[Cynic]

I disagee with Gloid. Course 2 is as difficult as any other courses, depending on what you are good at.

What worked for me in studying for C2 were practice, practice, and more practice. For interest theory, work on as many excercises as you can. For Econ. & Finance, take the old exam questions (MC, T/F), mix them together (there is repetition, but that's okay) and keep answering them until you get most of them correct (this was how I got to memorize this crap). CSM is a good source for old exam questions.

Good luck!

[J-Man]

Gloid is wrong. Course 2 is difficult. It consists of roughly four one-semester college courses and much of this involves intuition for business and economics, not math. This is a paradigm shift for a lot of actuaries.

[gloid]

Aside from my comment about Course 2 not being tough, I think the rest of my advice is quality.

But for my comment, If you argue that Course 2 is a shift, wait until 5, 6, 7, and 8. They are nothing like the exams that you are used to. The material on 2 is not as difficult as any of those exams. I argue that if it takes more than 3 sittings for Course 2, then it will probably take at least that many sittings for 5, 6, and 8 (at least 6 years). I also argue that the material on Course 3 and 4 is very difficult and is also new and also probably constitutes new material for most actuarial students. I believe this material is more difficult than Course 2. Being a successful actuary is a lot more than math problems. You may notice that most of you work in insurance companies or consulting firms. That is a business environment. Shouldn't an actuary be able to learn about business if that is what the career entails (despite the "paradigm shift")?

[WQN]

There is also a learning curve in determining what needs to be done to pass. It might take someone 4 tries on course 2 and then they pass 3 and 4 no problem because now they now for sure what it takes. I don't think you can make assumptions about any of this. Course 2 was far more difficult for me than 3.

[cthawk]

gloid, have you taken course 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 since the conversion. I don't think so, so until you do, just shut up. this sh** is hard enough and to have someone say that you suck, go to hell

egotistical a******s like you are the reason we actuaries suck.

[J-Man]

Course 2 is not to be underestimated, that's all.

Gloid, did you actually sit for and pass Course 2? Conversion credit doesn't really count - the conversion rules aren't really comparable to the current exam.

[ASA_Woman]

.

[C8 Guy]

I agree with gloid

[RedSoxFan]

they're not trying to scare you, just give you a dose of reality. Courses 3&4 are harder than C2, and C5,6, and 8 are harder than those.

we're not trying to say C2 is easy. Its good that the exams are tough so that it limits supply and the benefits are greater when you pass. But 5,6, and 8 are so much harder than course 2. You can't compare them. If you think c2 is anywhere as difficult as c5, you're clueless.

[aNoNo]

On 2002-01-15 11:56, C4 GUY wrote:
I agree with gloid


I also agree with Gloid. This actuarial work is a dead-end if you don't pass the exams for whatever reason.

[gloid]

On 2002-01-15 13:14, LeeGreenwoodIsCool wrote:
they're not trying to scare you, just give you a dose of reality. Courses 3&4 are harder than C2, and C5,6, and 8 are harder than those.

we're not trying to say C2 is easy. Its good that the exams are tough so that it limits supply and the benefits are greater when you pass. But 5,6, and 8 are so much harder than course 2. You can't compare them. If you think c2 is anywhere as difficult as c5, you're clueless.


That's exactly what I mean. Yes, I did pass course 2 under the new system, and I have sat for and passed Course 2, 3, and 4 under the new system. I have done a lot of reading for Course 6 already. The truth is these exams get harder as you go along, and Course 6 is going to be twice the work of Course 2 if I am lucky. I am not being egotistical, just realistic. Maybe it takes some getting used to to know how to pass these exams, and that is fine, but if comprehension of the material is a problem this early, then there will be an incredible amount of work to do on later exams, so be prepared for it.

[bbe431]

I agree with Gloid.

I just passed C2 and got a 9. I had no any manuals but the texts. I had micro and macro econ courses taken back in my school and I self-studied the interest and finance part. The amount of the materials is huge, but not hard---it's a matter of practice. So don't frighten yourself before you jump in study. Especially after several sittings, you are under stress for sure. Throw those away and concentrate on study and tell yourself: I will pass.

For macroeconomics part, read the notes provided on the website is enough. Do old problems and think about the answers--why they are correct. For Micro part, actually they always tested very limited areas, as far as I observed---compensated demand, uncompensated demand, budget constraint, basic equilibrium rules on comsumption and production--just do questions. Interest theory is the part I dreaded most, since it needs REAL serious attention, at least for me. As a matter of fact, a larger share(or combination with finance) in Nov. 2001 exam falls on this part. This part is not hard, again, but needs very clear mind. You have to make sure you understood the basic setup of the concepts and points behind each question. This can only be improved better and better by practising. Only reading the materials is not an ideal way. One month before the exam date, you should get independent of the texts and manuals and tackle the exam questions or questions from other sources independently. That way you can think independently and better understand the materials. "Reading" the solutions definitly will not help much on real exam sitting.

So I'm going for C3. I just started and the feeling is very different. Reading the texts might work in the long term, but not a good strategy exam-wize in such a short period if you want to pass and get a nice score. If you never heard of most of stuff to be tested, it is a real challenge. I haven't looked at past exam questions yet(it's not time yet), but I'm sure I'll need to put more effort in than when I tackled C2. I can imagine exams 5 after will be testing people in a far more comprehensive way and you need a coherent knowledge system which is not that easily built only by practising.

C2 is kind of basic knowledge you need to handle later exams, just like C1 in some sense. Especially for those end level exams (C8), they might be the corner stone for you to solve the questions with tailored solutions. So C2 is very important. For people who never had the related courses, it might be hard---due to the sole reason that you are not familiar with it, but not that you cannot "crack" it. As long as you are smart(I believe everyone here is, otherwise will not choose this career), you'll nail it---but this doesn't mean you can nail it without putting effort in. That's the key. :smile: Make yourself a plan and just do it. Think about nothing else. So, good luck this time.

[Joe]

Keep your chin up. Don't give up. I've had my share of 5's and 4's. If you have the will, you'll do it.

[Dr T Non-Fan]

I know way too many people who couldn't pass an old 10 or 15 credit exam after four or five times. Yet, a little persistence, and a little tweaking of what one considers free time, usually does the trick.
Find your weaknesses, make a plan (and make it conservative -- start acting like an actuary! -- in case something comes up, like the hockey playoffs), and stick with it.
Also, read the questions carefully! Lots of times, one additional (or deleted) word can change the whole complexion of the question. And, the error answer is right there, waiting to be blackened in.

[Anonymous]

Gloid, I think the reason some people are pissed at you is that you offered "unsolicited" advice. Whether your advice was good or bad is irrelavent. The original poster asked for study advice, not career advice.

I don't know if you know those people that think they know everything and will give you (unsolicited) advice on everything from your career to what tie you should have worn that day. But most of us know and hate those people, and you definitely sounded like one of them.

[tesla_styx]

Kepler,

Your advice seems rather unsolicited as well. and oops so does mine. I hate people like me and you! j/k.

[Anonymous]

My post didn't advise anything. It was just an observation. :smile:

[tesla_styx]

The advice was implied. :smile:

[Anonymous]

Course 2 would be difficult for someone who was say a Math Major but never took any Economics or Business courses. The first time I took it I scored a 4--I aced the Economics, did mediocre on the interest theory and bombed on the Finance. I passed the second time, but that was after intense reviews of Finance and Interest Theory.

One thing that helped me was that I stored my answers in my calculator and then when the key was out, I took a look at how many problems I got wrong and what type of problems they were. I found I had a weakness in Amortization, options and Finance questions worded specifically to confuse the candidates.

I went through all the old exams and focused heavily on these areas in addition to practicing regularly on the problems I was strong in. I attended GSU's Course 2 Seminar and got help from the Finance Professor, as well as learned new tricks on how to use the calculator functions to quickly calculate PV and FV of increasing/decreasing annuities.

These factors helped me pass Course 2 on my second attempt.

[Anonymous]

Seriously, anyone not passing 2 on the first try will NEVER make it all the way and become an FSA, like me.

[Bullseye]

Max...

I hope you are joking

[Anonymous]

Course 2's been around only 2 years, most people don't even have the experience of attempting the entire FSA curriculum yet so how would he know.

[The Drunken Actuary]

On 2002-01-17 10:10, maxpayne wrote:
Seriously, anyone not passing 2 on the first try will NEVER make it all the way and become an FSA, like me.

Guess it's a good think I didn't quit that PT job at the gas station. BTW, do you mean, 'like you' as in you're an FSA or 'like you' as in you didn't pass course 2 on the first try.