The SOA leadership has reached a new low.

[Kenny]

Originally Posted by bdschobel

Yes, of course. My post is consistent with that. My point is that someone who can't pass, say MLC, might find out much sooner by failing P repeatedly. That's good for him, good for potential employers and good for the profession.

Bruce

Wouldn't he find out sooner by failing MLC repeatedly rather than taking P a couple of times, finally passing it, (and perhaps doing the same with FM) then failling MLC repeatedly? I don't think your argument makes much sense.

ETA: see next post before responding

[Kenny]

Originally Posted by Colymbosathon ecplecticos

The problem with not testing probability and hoping that MLC will catch people that don't know it is that the MLC exam is a multiple-choice exam with a limited number of questions.

While it would be easy to make an MLC question that required setting up and evaluating an integral in order to compute a probability needed to answer the MLC question, the N minutes allocated for each problem would all get used up on the first two parts, making it a poor MLC question.

That is a reasonable argument.

[campbell]

Originally Posted by SamTheBellhop

Using that logic, maybe colleges not give grades for intro courses (or at the very least make them Pass/Fail). After all, if you ace the advanced courses you've obviously mastered the subject and it should be irrelevant how you did in the intro class.

Well, actually, that's how I got credit for at least two math classes when I was in college.

[campbell]

Originally Posted by Heaven's Thunder Hammer

I want the old school European apprenticeship exams, you know the ones where you couldn't eat or sleep for two days straight? and locked in the room? In those two days you had prove complete mastery of those subjects. It would be ****ing AWESOME.

What about something akin to the Medical Boards?

I can't remember exactly how long the exams were that my sis took, but I think it was over two days.

[tbakos]

Originally Posted by Danny Boy

Yes, I think economics should be tested. VEE is a joke, just like the modules are a joke, just like the FEM proposal is a joke. I'm not sure why the folks at the top have made it so complicated - test the material and call it good. What I am sure of is that Bruce was once of of those guys at the top and was a supporter of some of the jokes. I guess it's just not funny to him anymore.

OK, then, we have a difference of opinion. That's all. I've moved along quite well over a 40 year+ career without ever being tested on economics ... or ERM, for that matter.

What I use every day is an ability to understand, analyze, and manage risk. That, I think, is the core of actuarial work and what our validation process should be focused on. Clearly, I also have an understanding of economics as well as many other things gained through CE type processes ... which are probably necessary to do the work I do.

What is at issue here is what is in the core subject matter that actuaries, in general, must know to be called actuaries? You think economics belongs. I don't. It would, certainly, be nice to test that but what subject matter (not methods) would you exclude in order to do that?

[tbakos]

Originally Posted by HiLine

I'm glad you're not an actuary. If you somehow became the president of SOA and proposed one single ASA exam that tests everything in the 5 preliminary exams you would reduce the membership by 99%.

Leaving (dare I say it?) only the 1%!!! To the park!

[Double High C]

Occupy Martingale Road?

[Heaven's Thunder Hammer]

Originally Posted by campbell

What about something akin to the Medical Boards?

I can't remember exactly how long the exams were that my sis took, but I think it was over two days.

Really? That's interesting, I didn't know that. I'd say that the cost of proctoring would dramatically more. Do the medical students have to pay?

Originally Posted by tbakos

Leaving (dare I say it?) only the 1%!!! To the park!

Tom that is a brilliant point. :P

[JasonScandopolous]

Originally Posted by urbansombrero

C and MLC are fine with me. I dont see your point.

Although I entirely agree that P and FM are almost entirely contained within MFE/3F and 4/C.... Here are functions that 1/P and 2/FM serve:

1) Cash cow for the CAS/SOA: thousands take these cheap-to-administer tests... these are significant revenue (profit) sources for the actuarial organizations, if I'm not mistaken.

2) Most people will be coming from a four year bachelors degree, and they will not have faced a test as difficult as 1/P or 2/FM in their entire years of college. Before I get the "you went to a dumb college, then" argument, consider the on-your-own nature of studying for the test, the SAT-style trickery in the questions, and to a lesser extent the length of the test. If you didn't have 1/P as a stepping stone, I don't think there are many 21 year old college kids who would be able to muster the confidence or effort to tackle 300/400 hours of studying... especially since most of them would be smart kids who probably didn't study more than 10-20 hours for anything in their life before.

Neither 1 or 2 necessarily justify them existing, but I offer these as rationales for why they do exist (1) or maybe should exist (2).

[limabeanactuary]

Originally Posted by Heaven's Thunder Hammer

Really? That's interesting, I didn't know that. I'd say that the cost of proctoring would dramatically more. Do the medical students have to pay?

Well, given that they have to go to medical school for some years before sitting those exams, I'd sure say they pay.