Actuarial Outpost

Actuarial Outpost (http://www.actuarialoutpost.com/actuarial_discussion_forum/index.php)
-   Chat with the Candidates & Exam Committee (http://www.actuarialoutpost.com/actuarial_discussion_forum/forumdisplay.php?f=35)
-   -   I can't believe Errol Cramer went there (http://www.actuarialoutpost.com/actuarial_discussion_forum/showthread.php?t=296942)

Arthur Kade 07-11-2015 10:17 AM

I can't believe Errol Cramer went there
 
June/July issue of The Actuary (p11)

Quote:

We offer one of the world's "high credentials" in actuarial science, I believe the equivalent of a Ph.D.
We really have got to quit this circle-jerk that FSA is the equivalent of a PhD. To anybody who has even a passing acquaintance with what a PhD entails, this makes us look foolish galactically stupid.

Arthur Kade 07-11-2015 10:21 AM

Really the whole issue is a colossal circle-jerk, with the editorial (p6) reiterating the claim that actuaries could have helped during the 2008 crisis because actuaries understand "that the distribution function for most risks ... have longer fatter tails", "it's even more important to calibrate [models] appropriately", "model drift" and "spirals".

Or perhaps it's because we have the Actuarial Control Cycle, I'm not really sure.

:shake:

JohnLocke 07-11-2015 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthur Kade (Post 8144027)
June/July issue of The Actuary (p11)

We really have got to quit this circle-jerk that FSA is the equivalent of a PhD. To anybody who has even a passing acquaintance with what a PhD entails, this makes us look foolish galactically stupid.

Every time someone tries to equivocate the two, I cringe and feel a little embarrassed for our profession.

JohnLocke 07-11-2015 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthur Kade (Post 8144028)
Really the whole issue is a colossal circle-jerk, with the editorial (p6) reiterating the claim that actuaries could have helped during the 2008 crisis because actuaries understand "that the distribution function for most risks ... have longer fatter tails", "it's even more important to calibrate [models] appropriately", "model drift" and "spirals".

Or perhaps it's because we have the Actuarial Control Cycle, I'm not really sure.

:shake:

More cringing.

Colymbosathon ecplecticos 07-11-2015 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnLocke (Post 8144030)
Every time someone tries to equivocate the two, I cringe and feel a little embarrassed for our profession.

While I agree with the sentiment, I personally cringe when people misuse the word equivocate.

jas66Kent 07-11-2015 11:21 AM

That's precisely what happens when you put too much focus on exams, and not enough focus on getting an actual actuarial education. And no.....writing exams != actuarial education.

I see this often in industry. You have a whole gaggle of people trained only to look at problems via the way they regurgitated them back to the examiners during the exams, so if anything new comes up(which requires out of the box thinking) they don't know what to do, and usually end up failing rather spectacularly at coming up with a solution.

JohnLocke 07-11-2015 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colymbosathon ecplecticos (Post 8144032)
While I agree with the sentiment, I personally cringe when people misuse the word equivocate.

(looks up word in dictionary)

Ewww...I butchered that one.

JohnLocke 07-11-2015 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jas66Kent (Post 8144042)
That's precisely what happens when you put too much focus on exams, and not enough focus on getting an actual actuarial education. And no.....writing exams != actuarial education.

I see this often in industry. You have a whole gaggle of people trained only to look at problems via the way they regurgitated them back to the examiners during the exams, so if anything new comes up(which requires out of the box thinking) they don't know what to do, and usually end up failing rather spectacularly at coming up with a solution.

Uh...I think I agree with what I think you said. To clarify, 2 master degrees != actual actuarial education either.

jas66Kent 07-11-2015 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnLocke (Post 8144046)
Uh...I think I agree with what I think you said. To clarify, 2 master degrees != actual actuarial education either.

I'm not arguing that is not somewhat accurate.

But.....MSc's + exams + experience >>>>> exams + experience

The main problem with business folks is that they can only really deal with problems that they have seen before. That's where their experience lies. The plug and chug nature of the exams process (which causes people to forget the vast majority of things that they studied) does not lend itself well to an ameliorated long-term problem solving ability. And I think that's where an advanced degree (masters or ph. D) makes a big difference.

JohnLocke 07-11-2015 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jas66Kent (Post 8144060)
I'm not arguing that is not somewhat accurate.

But.....MSc's + exams + experience >>>>> exams + experience

The main problem with business folks is that they can only really deal with problems that they have seen before. That's where their experience lies. The plug and chug nature of the exams process (which causes people to forget the vast majority of things that they studied) does not lend itself well to an ameliorated long-term problem solving ability. And I think that's where an advanced degree (masters or ph. D) makes a big difference.

I do not believe this. Masters and ph.D give you a narrow skillset and help you hone what faculties you already have.

Plenty of people in this world have Master's Degrees but not critical thinking. I've also met some people with Bachelor's that are great problem-solvers running circles around those same people with all their fancy credentials. I bet everyone who works in an office had similar anecdotes.

I don't care what pieces of paper you have. I care what you can do.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Page generated in 0.17680 seconds with 9 queries