Skip to main content
The Actuary: The magazine of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries - return to the homepage Logo of The Actuary website
  • Search
  • Visit The Actuary Magazine on Facebook
  • Visit The Actuary Magazine on LinkedIn
  • Visit @TheActuaryMag on Twitter
Visit the website of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries Logo of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries

Main navigation

  • News
  • Features
    • General Features
    • Interviews
    • Students
    • Opinion
  • Topics
  • Knowledge
    • Business Skills
    • Careers
    • Events
    • Predictions by The Actuary
    • Whitepapers
    • Webinars
    • Podcasts
  • Jobs
  • IFoA
    • CEO Comment
    • IFoA News
    • People & Social News
    • President Comment
  • Archive
Quick links:
  • Home
  • Students
  • 2012
  • 05

Student: Examining knowledge, not memory

Open-access content Wednesday 30th May 2012 — updated 5.13pm, Wednesday 29th April 2020

Do actuarial students take too much for granted when it comes to core technical revision, asks Matthew Welsh


31 MAY 2012 | MATTHEW WELSH
Sudent book, Illustration: Phill Wrigglesworth

A little orange book

It was a special day when I got my little orange/yellow/gold book. I finally felt like an official member of the actuarial student community. I had, in my hand, the key to unlocking the secrets of the profession. I still remember flicking through the yellow (or manila, depending on your preference) pages at the front. Sure, I understood bits of it, but seeing it was my first opportunity to peek and immerse myself into the arena in which I would have to prove myself.

I had little idea of who Kolmogorov was and I thought Black-Scholes was a kind of rum cocktail until that point. I consoled myself with the fact that all the detail that lay behind these formulae would be mine given time.

A confession

I will admit that I can remember when studying for the core technical (CT) exams, my attitude was very much along the lines of determining the minimum level of knowledge to pass. Indeed, I found that the orange book would often negate my need to know formulae, their derivation and how they actually worked. I felt like I was plugging numbers into formulae, taking for granted their derivation.


A lack of rigour?

Let me be clear - I am not accusing the Actuarial Profession of not setting standards high enough. Far from it, I believe that the Profession demands the highest level of dedication for its acolytes in order to gain entry into the fold. It's just that I would do things differently 'if I ruled the world'.

I am, in spite of my opinion about the power of the orange book in the actuarial syllabus, a great believer in being practical. Some would argue that the inclusion of proofs and the like can lead to dogmatic memorisation and rote learning, which is not especially demonstrative of higher intellectual faculties. I would agree with this sentiment - it is not the learning of proofs that I would wish to see demonstrated, rather, the knowledge of proofs that can lead to far more demanding questions. That is, applying the knowledge of a proof to form an answer.


Mulling it over

I guess, at its core, my gripe with the actuarial exams is not that they aren't challenging enough. Rather, I feel that they are a test of how quickly you can work through questions accurately rather than delve deeply into a problem and emerge on the other side with a calculated answer. I rarely felt that, in an actuarial exam, I was able to deliberate over a difficult question with considered application; if it spilled over the requisite 1.8 minutes per mark, it was comprehensively skipped. I view this as a great shame and a possible reason for the rumour that the bell curve for exam marks has a small standard deviation - perhaps predictably for actuarial exams, it feels like there is a formula for passing them!

I would prefer that there were fewer questions in the CTs but that they demanded more in terms of ability to work with the nuances of the results we are asked to use. Being an expert on which page to use in the formula book should not, in my ideal world, give you an advantage over your peers.


Resolve to be involved

Lucky me, to have a platform to air my opinions. I doubt that the current set of examiners would agree with me - and I have a great respect for the effort and energy that is put in by the Profession in developing these exams. I have sat at my computer and written about how I would try things differently, but so what? Without involving myself in the process, my opinions mean little.

Maybe you feel the same way or have your own views about the exams and want to actively participate in the debate? The student consultative forum

(www.actuaries.org.uk/students/pages/student-consultative-forum) is a way for students to participate in the discussion.

Then, when you're qualified, get involved with the examinations team. They are always looking for volunteers, especially as markers for the exams?

Filed in:
05
Topics:
Professional

You might also like...

Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linked in
  • Mail
  • Print

Latest Jobs

Senior Underwriting Risk Manager

London (Central)
£85K-£95K + Benefits
Reference
124386

Reserving Manager (Contract)

London (Central)
£1200 - £1400 per day
Reference
124385

Life Actuary - Contract - IFRS 17 Financial Impact

England, London / England, Bristol / North Yorkshire, England
£900 - £1150 per day
Reference
124384
See all jobs »
 
 

Today's top reads

 
 

Sign up to our newsletter

News, jobs and updates

Sign up

Subscribe to The Actuary

Receive the print edition straight to your door

Subscribe
Spread-iPad-slantB-june.png

Topics

  • Data Science
  • Investment
  • Risk & ERM
  • Pensions
  • Environment
  • Soft skills
  • General Insurance
  • Regulation Standards
  • Health care
  • Technology
  • Reinsurance
  • Global
  • Life insurance
​
FOLLOW US
The Actuary on LinkedIn
@TheActuaryMag on Twitter
Facebook: The Actuary Magazine
CONTACT US
The Actuary
Tel: (+44) 020 7880 6200
​

IFoA

About IFoA
Become an actuary
IFoA Events
About membership

Information

Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
Cookie Policy
Think Green

Get in touch

Contact us
Advertise with us
Subscribe to The Actuary Magazine
Contribute

The Actuary Jobs

Actuarial job search
Pensions jobs
General insurance jobs
Solvency II jobs

© 2022 The Actuary. The Actuary is published on behalf of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries by Redactive Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Reproduction of any part is not allowed without written permission.

Redactive Media Group Ltd, 71-75 Shelton Street, London WC2H 9JQ