View Full Version : Course 3 Progress
bg23516
08-19-2002, 04:25 PM
Just curious where people are.
Me: almost done with Ch. 7 of AM and done with book 1 of Mahler's notes. Ie, Frequency distributions. I also know my stochastic processes decently well, so just need some review on that.
Still, I feel like I'm behind.
How's everyone else?
Double Down Trent
08-19-2002, 04:34 PM
Through first 2 sections of Mahler (Freq & Stoch) and into the third chapter of section 3.
Finished Chapter 3 of AM with enough understanding that I was solving problems like Batten - i.e. reasoning my way through them rather than using some canned formula.
I have NEAS in a little less than a month and I feel fine, except for the fact that I didn't study at all this weekend.
Oh well, but the wife is going out of town to visit her Dad Wed-Sun, so I should get a ton of studying done there, unless I decide to pick up Madden 2003 for my PS2... :tfh:
Brutè
08-19-2002, 10:14 PM
Wow, you guys are way ahead of me. I just haven't been putting in enough time. I'm still struggling with Chap3 of AM. I keep having to go back and reread everything. I'm finding it hard to find time to study, and when I do have the time, I find it hard to concentrate. Any advice?
bg23516
08-20-2002, 07:52 AM
I have the same problem with focus right now; I just hope it will get better.
For Ch. 3, I found that the key is to do lots of easy questions. Go out and find an old SOA 150 or CAS 4A (or is it B?) manual and do old questions. They will be easier than exam level, but many help nail down the concepts. It's then easier to move on.
Bama Gambler
08-20-2002, 10:28 AM
I'm on Section 5 of Loss Distributions in Mahler's Notes. I have read Chapters 3 & 4 of AM, but I'm not comfortable solving exam style problems. I going to Georgia State seminar in a month. I'm hoping Batten can get me up to speed on the AM stuff. I feel like I'm on track.
Bama Gambler
drctypea
08-20-2002, 10:33 AM
im finishing up chapter 9 of AM and havent started the non life material yet. im hoping it is easier than the life stuff :roll:
Bama Gambler
08-20-2002, 11:02 AM
im finishing up chapter 9 of AM and havent started the non life material yet. im hoping it is easier than the life stuff
I think so. I'm using Mahler's notes.
drctypea
08-20-2002, 11:45 AM
i have mahlers notes as well. im planning on using those for the non life material. i feel like im behind.
Michael
08-20-2002, 12:48 PM
Have read through Chapter 5 of AM, working some Actex problems on that material. Have read Loss Model's Ch2 note, and read/worked Actex for loss models & frequency distributions....First time through it all,,,,,hope it sticks!! Can anyone compare Mahler to Actex (for the relevant material)? Thanks!
Bama Gambler
08-20-2002, 01:17 PM
Can anyone compare Mahler to Actex (for the relevant material)? Thanks!
I have both and IMO they don't compare. Mahler's is MUCH better. Mahler breaks it down into little sections that are easy to understand. Read a little section work a few problems. Read a little section work a few problems. Before you know it your flying through the material. Don't let the size of the notes scare you (they did me at first).
Bama Gambler
Mr. BoH
08-21-2002, 08:06 AM
im finishing up chapter 9 of AM and havent started the non life material yet. im hoping it is easier than the life stuff :roll:
I'm on Chapter 7 of AM - and also hoping that the non-life is easier. This stuff is killing me.
Double Down Trent
08-21-2002, 09:06 AM
Personally, I think the AM stuff is easier. But I have had plenty of prior exposure to Life Contingencies and do not have a strong stats background.
Once you get the notation down, the Life Con stuff is pretty easy. Plus, if you've taken Batten or can take a little extra time with it, most of the Life Con stuff is pretty logical and you can think your way through most problems.
I am not using AM and am going through the Actex as my main source of reference. I am through the 6th section of the first volume(Life Con) and haven't even touched the second volume except for a little skimming. I feel that I am on pace and should finish up the life con stuff in the next 2 weeks which leaves 2 full months for the rest of it.
The Drunken Actuary
08-21-2002, 11:00 PM
Shouldn't you change your name?
The Drunken Actuary
09-30-2002, 09:23 PM
Well, where are you now?!?!
retaker
10-01-2002, 08:48 AM
I agree with you Boyden, LC is definitely the easier topic. Have you guys started doing old exam problems yet?
So what do you think Boyden, Bamma? Are you guys going to pass Course 3 on the first try?
retaker
10-01-2002, 08:49 AM
Sorry, I meand Bowden. :P
Bama Gambler
10-01-2002, 10:54 AM
Did you also mean Bama (not Bamma)?
I think I have a chance to pass on the first try.
Double Down Trent
10-01-2002, 03:41 PM
I would say my chances of passing on the first try are exactly 0, as this is not my first try. Second attempt taking the exam, third (fourth if you count college, but I wasn't paying any attention then) time studying for the exam.
I would say my chances of passing it this time around are around 60%.
drctypea
10-01-2002, 03:46 PM
i feel less and less confident everyday...very frustrating... :swear:
Mr. BoH
10-01-2002, 04:03 PM
i feel less and less confident everyday...very frustrating... :swear:
Glad I'm not the only one. . . .
bg23516
10-01-2002, 06:47 PM
another vote for less confident today than yesterday, as drc says.
Sheer willpower is keeping me from sleeping instead of studying.
megasoft
10-02-2002, 12:07 PM
Anyone using Arch-3? :-? i found it quite good. the book helps me to understand the concept. But I am now stuck by Ruin Theory (those deductible, policy limit and their distribution, blah blah....).
My progress is pretty good, the only thing i worry is i keep forgetting the stuffs i've studied earlier..... :shake:
Brutè
10-02-2002, 12:47 PM
I use Arch3. I find it pretty good. My progress sucks however.
drctypea
10-02-2002, 12:51 PM
i have used arch 3 also along with other manuals..i have made it through most of the material twice but some concepts still give me some trouble..i am waiting for it all to hopefully click..still reviewing stuff and trying to do more problems because they expose what oyu really need work on...
megasoft
10-02-2002, 01:03 PM
besides Arch-3, i also use Actex (previous 2000 edition) that i borrowed from a frien who passed C-3. Actex is far too hard to understand if it is used solely. But it does contain a lot of question.
I hope I can have a 6 (this is what all i need) this time... God bless me. :wink:
Macroman
10-02-2002, 08:45 PM
I use Arch3. I find it pretty good. My progress sucks however.
I think it may be time not to worry about every little detail..A lot will fall into place with practice problems....You need to have about 70-80% of the material down pretty well to be sure of a pass...
HI!
I am just starting my final review and I am FREAKING out!!!!
I feel like I am running out of time way too quick. I have been using Batten and Actex for the Life cons part and Mahler for the non life parts. Just so much material to get through.
I find I can do the Actex study manual problems okay but still cheat a bit for some formulas. Batten is TOUGH! Anyone agree here or is it just me????
What are you guys doing as far as review? Do you redo questions or do others you haven't done yet or just read through some? I keep changing my mind and am not sure of the best approach.
Hopefully these next few weeks will fly by so we can get this over with.
Brutè
10-03-2002, 08:45 AM
Keep doing problems. I don't think reading will help much at this point. Just keep trying to do exam-type problems. Preferably ones you have not already done. That's my humble opinion but I am way too far behind to actually follow this advice myself.
Bama Gambler
10-03-2002, 11:12 AM
Batten is TOUGH! Anyone agree here or is it just me????
Before Batten seminar his manual was useless to me. After the seminar priceless.
Oh that is not very encouraging - I am not taking his seminar!!!
Is it just that he gives more reason of why to look at it that way?
Bama Gambler
10-03-2002, 02:41 PM
Oh that is not very encouraging - I am not taking his seminar!!!
Is it just that he gives more reason of why to look at it that way?
It just really helped for him to talk you through the way he approaches the problems.
retaker
10-03-2002, 05:55 PM
Unless they have changed course 3 in the last year or so, it would behoove you to be able to work every problem in the Batten/London book.
Thanks for the advice. I guess I will spend a lot of the remaining time with the Batten book! Hopefully I will start getting more of them right soon!
Retaker - did you attend a Batten seminar as well or did you just work with the manual?
retaker
10-04-2002, 08:56 AM
I went to his seminar 2 years ago. He is the man. He is too good.
Also, he was extremely willing to help with questions after the seminar and was generally a very nice guy. A little aggressive teaching style, though.
That exam is hard as crap! All the exams are like the following, but Course 3 is especially so. You can know all the material, but you have to really be able to think well and fast for this one.
thanks - well I think thanks
you have completely scared me now! I know a lot of the material but sometimes still need to look at the solution to help me out with the tough ones. I find I do this more with Batten and was hoping it was just a tough manual!
I find that for some as soon as I see it - I can't believe I couldn't do it on my own.
I guess I just have to pray that the next few weeks will really pull this stuff together.
I wish I could go to one of his seminars now.
Girl, Batten's problems are difficult especially if u did not attend his seminar. His logic did not always make sense to me when I tried doing problems from his manual before the seminar. I think u will get a better handle of the problems if u do them a few times. Another suggestion I would like to make is try doing Batten's problems the way u learned the material. The solutions might be a bit lengthy, but u will still get the right answer. I think Batten has a different way of presenting the material and that is why, in my opinion, u have to take his seminar in order to understand his logic.
Bama Gambler
10-04-2002, 11:00 AM
Girl, Batten's problems are difficult especially if u did not attend his seminar. His logic did not always make sense to me when I tried doing problems from his manual before the seminar. I think u will get a better handle of the problems if u do them a few times. Another suggestion I would like to make is try doing Batten's problems the way u learned the material. The solutions might be a bit lengthy, but u will still get the right answer. I think Batten has a different way of presenting the material and that is why, in my opinion, u have to take his seminar in order to understand his logic.
Couldn't have said it better myself!!
retaker
10-04-2002, 11:28 AM
For actually solving the problems on the test, Batten's way is always better. He thinks of things actuarially not statistically. Not only does this save you much time and effort, but in doing so you show that you understand what is really going on.
Bama Gambler
10-04-2002, 11:33 AM
For actually solving the problems on the test, Batten's way is always better. He thinks of things actuarially not statistically. Not only does this save you much time and effort, but in doing so you show that you understand what is really going on.
I agree. Which raises the question: why are the SOA's solutions always approached from a statistical point of view? My guess is that AM is written from a statistical point of view. The actuarial approach is usually logical while the statistical approach seems to be more mechanical.
Bama Gambler
Thanks for your help - I guess I am feeling a bit better now -
That must be why some of his solutions look greek to me!
I will go through them a few more times - and I guess I can't get hung up on his solution as long as I can do the problem. I just find it discouraging if I don't know a question and then look at the solution and it is crazy too.
So I think I need to try and solve it without following his solutions - probably too late in the game to try and LEARN his methods? I am kicking myself for not signing up for his seminar.
Thanks again!
retaker
10-04-2002, 02:12 PM
If I remember correctly, there is some dialogue in the Batten LOndon manual. He tell's you about his thinking, sometime.
Michael
10-04-2002, 03:46 PM
I haven't heard the distinction between "actuarially" and "statistically" as distinct means of solving problems, never having seen his manual/seminars. How do you draw the distinction?
Bama Gambler
10-04-2002, 03:51 PM
I haven't heard the distinction between "actuarially" and "statistically" as distinct means of solving problems, never having seen his manual/seminars. How do you draw the distinction?
Well, for example Batten rarely uses integration to work the exams questions, because most exam questions follow a specific mortailty assumption (ie Constant Force, DML, etc.) Instead he uses an understanding of the these laws to solve the problems. He also explains the logical nature of the recurisve formulas. In addition he tends to use the relationships between types of Insurances and annuities to solve a great number of problems. Hope that helps.
vBulletin® v3.7.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.