Changes to Exams 2, 3 and 4 in 2007

[AFroginBritain]

http://www.casact.org/admissions/syllabus/2007_Changes.pdf

It seems like some of the material of CAS #8 is now going to be covered in exam 2, 3 and 4.

Is it another indication that the CAS will move to an 8 exams structure?

Hopefully, it's going to be too late for me...

[Loki]

I thought the same thing. I wonder if the CAS is contemplating changes to Part 8 as soon as next year? I decided not to sit for it this year so I am very interested in the syllabus for 2007.

[frank_exams]

Looks like a ton of changes and yet they're keeping the life contingency junk!?!?? Where is this stuff used? The cameo in Ch. 18 of Hull doesn't count since Hull develops the material so well that you don't need any background.

Frank
- bitter about taking CAS 3 and not getting credit for SOA M or VEE Stats

[bg23516]

Some work in the Workers Compensation arena makes use life contingencies material.

[Peter Lemonjello]

Looks like a ton of changes and yet they're keeping the life contingency junk!?!?? Where is this stuff used?

In addition to WC mentioned, it is used for Death, Disability and Retirement calculations for med mal.

[GefilteFish144]

Many casualty lines will have their fair share of lifetime pension cases, but like most of the syllabus readings a small percentage of actuaries will actually use the material.

[Maphisto's Sidekick]

I thought that life contingencies needed to stay on the syllabus so casualty actuaries can fully appreciate the Outpost's logo.

[Loki]

I talked to someone on the board of the CAS and they said that the reason for moving some finance material to Part 2 is to meet international actuarial standards for ACAS. I guess what is on VEE is not enough.

[GefilteFish144]

I talked to someone on the board of the CAS and they said that the reason for moving some finance material to Part 2 is to meet international actuarial standards for ACAS. I guess what is on VEE is not enough.

It's good for a temporary solution but the ultimate goal is to move to just 1 class of membership. It seems that other countries have trouble dealing with the 2 classes.

[sd978]

Just wondering if it makes sense to offer 2, 3, 4, and 8 on the same sitting, say for Spring 07. Looks like 70% of the syllabus from exam 8 has been moved to those 3 exams...I already passed 8 and still have 3 & 4 to go. Any thoughts from anyone....

[GefilteFish144]

Just wondering if it makes sense to offer 2, 3, 4, and 8 on the same sitting, say for Spring 07. Looks like 70% of the syllabus from exam 8 has been moved to those 3 exams...I already passed 8 and still have 3 & 4 to go. Any thoughts from anyone....

Life contingencies in itself is a pain, even with some exam 8 review mixed in. I wouldn't take it with anything else if it's my first try.

[Peter Lemonjello]

I talked to someone on the board of the CAS and they said that the reason for moving some finance material to Part 2 is to meet international actuarial standards for ACAS. I guess what is on VEE is not enough.

Would you ask your board contact if that is the reason that CAS moved the finance material to parts 2 (and I think parts 3 and 4 are also affected) like the SOA did, or whether that is the SOA's reason, and CAS is pretty much following along?

i.e. Is this the reason CAS did it or a rationalization for what occurred?

[sd978]

Life contingencies in itself is a pain, even with some exam 8 review mixed in. I wouldn't take it with anything else if it's my first try.


would by any chance part 8 will not be offered anymore starting 2007???

[GefilteFish144]

would by any chance part 8 will not be offered anymore starting 2007???

Not a chance -- drastic syllabus measures are announced at least 2-3 years in advance. While many of the concepts are the same in these exams, the textbooks are different, leading me to believe that they won't tinker around with the Exam 8 syllabus all that much, the assumption being that Exams 2-4 test the material at an introductory level and Exam 8 goes more in-depth. (Similar to the overlap that currently exists with the accounting material in Exams 6-7.)

[PANIC]

[QUOTE=GefilteFish144]Not a chance -- drastic syllabus measures are announced at least 2-3 years in advance. While many of the concepts are the same in these exams, the textbooks are different, leading me to believe that they won't tinker around with the Exam 8 syllabus all that much..QUOTE]

I disagree. Drastic syllabus changes are never announced in advance. Take Y2K for example, sure the CAS announced changes about 3 years prior to the year 2000. However, the changes were not finalized when the CAS made the intial announcement. In fact, the changes were only finalized 1 year in advance. Furthermore, additional changes were made in 2003 and 2005. These changes retroactively changed the prior transition rules!!! All of these changes are indicative of the CAS's failure to plan ahead.

The 2007 changes are drastic and the CAS is only giving Exam3 candidates one chance before the changes are implemented. (At least the SOA gave their candidates two full attempts to pass Exam M after announcing their changes). Furthermore, from the information I obtained, the material being moved to Exam 3 will eventually be eliminated from Exam8. This indicates to me that the CAS will eventually eliminate 1 of the upper level exams.

Clearly, these changes may help some candidates, but will adversely affect the travel time of others. Therefore, these changes are unequitable, unless the CAS establishes transition rules to make these changes fair to everyone.

PANIC

[sd978]

[QUOTE=GefilteFish144]Not a chance -- drastic syllabus measures are announced at least 2-3 years in advance. While many of the concepts are the same in these exams, the textbooks are different, leading me to believe that they won't tinker around with the Exam 8 syllabus all that much..QUOTE]

I disagree. Drastic syllabus changes are never announced in advance. Take Y2K for example, sure the CAS announced changes about 3 years prior to the year 2000. However, the changes were not finalized when the CAS made the intial announcement. In fact, the changes were only finalized 1 year in advance. Furthermore, additional changes were made in 2003 and 2005. These changes retroactively changed the prior transition rules!!! All of these changes are indicative of the CAS's failure to plan ahead.

The 2007 changes are drastic and the CAS is only giving Exam3 candidates one chance before the changes are implemented. (At least the SOA gave their candidates two full attempts to pass Exam M after announcing their changes). Furthermore, from the information I obtained, the material being moved to Exam 3 will eventually be eliminated from Exam8. This indicates to me that the CAS will eventually eliminate 1 of the upper level exams.

Clearly, these changes may help some candidates, but will adversely affect the travel time of others. Therefore, these changes are unequitable, unless the CAS establishes transition rules to make these changes fair to everyone.

PANIC


2 very interesting and different view points. It sucks when drastic changes happen and not a piece of mind for exam takers with having to deal with changes all the time......

[Loki]

When I talked to my board member friend about moving some of 8 to the earlier exams, I also asked about how this relates to going to one credential and having 8 exams. He said the move of the material to earlier exams was completely unrelated to going to one credential and reducing the number of exams. It is purely to meet international actuarial standards.

I don't think this is a rationalization for going along with the SOA. The SOA has 2 credential levels and I imagine they would have the same issues with meeting international actuarial standards as the CAS has.

[PANIC]

The only issue the CAS should be concerned with is determining what the requirements are for signing the Statement of Actuarial Opinion and consistently maintaining the same requirements for all active candidates. If the CAS is unable to do this, then the Federal Government should step in.

"International Standard" is an oxymoron. "American Standard" makes toilets.

[Loki]

It all goes back to the CAS approving mutual recognition, which I think was a huge mistake.

[GefilteFish144]

It's difficult to maintain an "international standard" when you're dealing with a wide variety of accounting regs, but the reality is that it's a global market. To keep the profession centered on North America is short-sighted and deprives American actuaries of a wealth of business opportunities.

[PANIC]

I agree. There are many business opportunities throughout the world. But I do not understand what the CAS thinks it is going to accomplish by changing the exam structure for the 4th time in 7 years. Before you know it, the CAS will add Spanish, French, and Pig Latin to the exams, so we can complete internationally. What is the purpose? This is turning into the "flavor of the month" campaign...

[stoodawg]

PANIC's post...very funny indeed...I agree that the CAS should protect its current members and worry less about the international community..before MR, it cut both ways..

[GefilteFish144]

I've heard that many of the CAS board members don't care much for the direction the SOA exams are going in, but on the other hand it's tough to break off from the SOA because they don't want to limit the options of actuarial students who have not yet decided which society they want.

[PANIC]

The fact of the matter is the CAS has members on the "Joint-Board". Unfortunately, the CAS waited until the last minute to decide to take the wrong course of action.

No transition rules!?! The CAS only makes changes based upon what is convenient for the CAS administration- instead of doing what is fair and equitable for all active candidates. It is sad, but true.

These changes create a window of opportunity for some candidates, but for others it increases travel time. Furthermore, the travel time statistics are distorted and made useless. The only meaningful statistic left is the failure rate. Yet, the CAS brags about having 4,000+ members...