Actuarial Outpost > CAS Normally I would be refreshing the CAS website right now...
 User Name Remember Me? Password
 Register Blogs Wiki FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
 FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

Meet Marianne Westphal, DW Simpson Senior Director

 Thread Tools Display Modes
#411
07-13-2012, 03:47 PM
 Kongo Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 472

Quote:
 Originally Posted by MightySchoop 80 = a couple hundred now?
moron. reread his logic. His original deduction (based on eligible passers)assumed 967 taking 9 and 150ish or so taking 7. I am saying combined it is still less than the 967 and exam 9 is aroudn 200 shy of his estimate. That is expalined by

a)failers not retaking
b)first time eligible people taking a sitting off.

I assume the former
#412
07-13-2012, 04:01 PM
 Kongo Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 472

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Kongo moron. reread his logic. His original deduction (based on eligible passers)assumed 967 taking 9 and 150ish or so taking 7. I am saying combined it is still less than the 967 and exam 9 is aroudn 200 shy of his estimate. That is expalined by a)failers not retaking b)first time eligible people taking a sitting off. I assume the former
just thought abotu it. Thats 120K of less dough for the fellows (600 x 200). Serves them right for fall 2011.
#413
07-13-2012, 04:23 PM
 jenn3539 Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Boston Posts: 413

My range was 52% to 76% and I got a 5.
#414
07-13-2012, 05:27 PM
 Heywood J Member CAS Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 3,735

Well, this was an utterly ****ed up exam, but at least they didn't punish the student body for it (on average).
#415
07-14-2012, 09:20 PM
 Debaser Member CAS AAA Join Date: Mar 2004 Favorite beer: full sail pale ale Posts: 528

Exam statistics posted. Great job on studying better this time around guys, it really shows.

#416
07-15-2012, 12:38 AM
 Bobby Member CAS Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 2,688

Here's an update of the charts I posted last sitting on historical pass ratios for each exam:

Although this sitting saw pass ratios increase a lot compared to the last sitting... they were in the same ballpark as most pass ratios have been in the past ten years.
#417
07-16-2012, 06:33 AM
 gaddy Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 2,274

But, as many expected, they did go from the lowest in history to one of the highest overall ratios in history (combined basis).
#418
07-16-2012, 06:42 AM
 merson Member Join Date: May 2006 Studying for No More... maybe ST9 College: U of Michigan 2008 Favorite beer: Guinness Foreign Extra Stout Posts: 253

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gaddy But, as many expected, they did go from the lowest in history to one of the highest overall ratios in history (combined basis).
Guess I just need to show up for 6US this fall to get a pass?
#419
07-16-2012, 07:09 PM
 Kongo Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 472

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bobby Estimated number of people sitting for exam 9: People that failed exam 9 last year: 604 Exam 5A passers last year: 106 Additional number of people that could have sat for exam 7 or 9 this year = exam 5/5B passers from last year = 178 + 171 ~= 350 Number of estimated exam 7 takers (assuming 40% pass ratio) = 56 / .4 = 140 Number of last years' 5/5B passers that sat for 9 this time = 350 - 140 = 210 Number of estimated exam 9 takers = 604 + 106 + 210 = 920 Number of estimated exam 3L takers (assuming 48% pass ratio) = 90 / 0.48 = 188 Assumed people that took exam 5/5A/5B this time around = 2240 - 920 - 140 - 188 = 992 About 115 people took 5A and 5B this year (based on failers last year), so (992-115)=877 people sat for exam 5. That would put the pass ratio for exam 5 at 431/877 = 49.1%. Note: I ignored the one person that passed exam 7 last year, who could have taken 9 this time around. Summarizing estimates: $\begin{tabular}{ | r | r | r | r | } \hline & & & Raw \\ & Candidates & Candidates & Pass \\ & Passing & Sitting & Ratio \\ \hline Exam 3L & 90 & 188 & 47.9% \\ \hline Exam 5 & 431 & 877 & 49.1% \\ \hline Exam 5A/5B & 96 & 115 & 83.5% \\ \hline Exam 7 & 56 & 140 & 40.0% \\ \hline Exam 9 & & 920 & \\ \hline \end{tabular}$
Bobby, any theory why your estimates were so far off?
#420
07-16-2012, 10:04 PM
 Bobby Member CAS Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 2,688

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Kongo Bobby, any theory why your estimates were so far off?
I don't know why the estimate for exam 9 was so far off.

My estimation of exam 9 takers was split into two portions:
• people that took 9 that came from passing 5/5A/5B
• people that failed exam 9 last year and were retaking it
One of these estimates was far off.

I'm more inclined to believe that people who had just failed 9 would be more likely to quit than those that had just passed 5/5A/5B.

So my hypothesis is that a lot of people that failed exam 9 last year just quit taking exams and became career ACAS's. (Or took a sitting off.)

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:24 PM.

 -- Default Style - Fluid Width ---- Default Style - Fixed Width ---- Old Default Style ---- Easy on the eyes ---- Smooth Darkness ---- Chestnut ---- Apple-ish Style ---- If Apples were blue ---- If Apples were green ---- If Apples were purple ---- Halloween 2007 ---- B&W ---- Halloween ---- AO Christmas Theme ---- Turkey Day Theme ---- AO 2007 beta ---- 4th Of July Contact Us - Actuarial Outpost - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top