晕倒，大家都去留学吧。。。

I disagree.

I think some credentialed actuaries would be really upset if this gets approved. Keep in mind that preliminary exams plus FAP modules give you ASA. FAP is a piece of cake considering its high passing rate. It is likely that students attending those 25 accredited universities would complete preliminary exams during their undergraduate studies. What the proposal does is to shorten the time to ASA and to produce a large number of ASAs with minimum actuarial work experience, therefore devalue the credentials of ASA.

[quote]mnznismehh 发表于 2009-8-18 08:08
IOA 一直有这种减免的 包括高级课程 所以谈不上价值缩水 更何况以英国来看 同学他们班40来个人 减免的也就十几个 要求还是很高的 至少要在学校里成绩过B-吧 说不定直接考还简单点......

Are you suggesting that passing the 4 preliminary exams is as "easy" as getting a B- average GPA?

这对我们中国学生不公平啊，纯粹是拯救北美精算教育么

可能是国外跟国内情况不同吧,我认识的国内考生一般本科毕业前都能考完preliminary exams,以前四门的时候一般用两个考试季(一年)时间就够了,现在变成了五门,不知道是否会增加一些时间.对国内考生来说,最大的问题不是语言,不是数学难度,而是经费问题,很多考生考到FAP前就停了下来原因是因为FAP的考试费是一个巨大的负担.
所以从这一点来看，对国内考生来说,preliminary exams本来就是小菜一碟,如果以后能通过课程认证,在不额外收认证费的前提下,应该是个好消息,就算国内没有这种认证,要考过也是挺轻松的,这个新政策也没什么大影响.

在国内，的确前四门一般考下来也不难，抵免就抵免吧，我怀疑要修完国外的那些课程花的精力和时间远超过初级考试

恩恩 国内考完preliminary exams也就是一年时间
国外的要抵免的 不会和VEE重叠吧 那才是真的悲剧~~

12# lzw123ccc

If most of you pass all the preliminary exams by the time you graduate from college, then I agree that this proposal would have minimum impact. But then passing the exams is not fun anymore if most people can do it in such a short time.

Stil, if students from the top 25 Chinese universities automatically receive credits for the preliminary exams, there would be a large number of near ASAs enter the job market every year. You really have to find other ways to stand out to land a job.

I think most U.S. undergraduates would not pass all the preliminary exams by the time they graduate. Some hardworking students may but the majority of them may not. So the proposal could have significant consequences in the U.S..

Georgia State Professor Robert W. Batten's response to the FEM proposal (http://www.actuarialoutpost.com/ ... hp?t=172628&page=2)

"In the days since the proposal was made public, I have been profoundlyimpressed by the arguments made, mostly by the younger members (andhence the true lifeblood) of our profession. Overwhelmingly, they havebeen at once outraged and appalled while, in the preponderance ofcases, also being professional and courteous. This, in itself, shouldgive all of us optimism about the caliber of the young men and womenwho will lead the Society of Actuaries into the next few decades. I seeno reason for me to parrot their arguments, virtually all of which I amin agreement with.

I have had the privilege of teaching thousands of young people over thelast 40+ years who were striving to be actuaries. I feel that my rolewas to prepare them, to the best of my ability, for success on theirprofessional exams and for their long-term contributions to theactuarial profession. Yet I never wanted to "play God" and to have anyrole in deciding whether a student would be given credit for anactuarial exam on the basis of a grade I might give in an academiccourse. That, I have always felt, is the responsibility---and theduty---of the actuarial societies through the exam process. I feel thatmy standards as a professor at Georgia State were very rigorous, and astudent who earned an A was totally deserving of that grade. But I alsofelt that my opinion of such a student's achievements in class shouldnot have served as a substitute for a rigorously administered actuarialexam.

In seminar teaching, I have encountered many students with degrees (andgood grades)from prestigious institutions with well-recognized programsof actuarial education who would have had virtually no chance at examsuccess without substantial additional study. Those students, whosubsequently paid the steep price of many hours of further study andultimately passed the exam, are surely more valuable to theirprofession than if they had been given credit because of a gradereceived in a college or university setting.

A couple of decades ago, there was a similar proposal for collegecredit on actuarial exams which went under the name of the AlternateRoute. It was strongly backed by some of the most prestigious membersof the profession and by what seemed to be a large majority ofacademics. At that time, being the director of a large and successfulacademic program, I could see possible advantages of such a proposal toGeorgia State University. Yet I vehemently opposed it for the reasonsmentioned above, incurring the displeasure of some other academics andBoard members. Fortunately, it died a slow and grudging death, becausethe rank-and-file of the membership also was strongly opposed.

The current proposal, as many have noted, was made public with verylittle response time available to the various constituencies of theprofessional societies. It also seems to be favored by many Boardmembers as well as (I assume) a large number of academics. It is myhope that this will only generate a larger number of comments and thatthe governing bodies will be responsive to what I believe will prove tobe a largely negative reaction.

In my mind, it all comes down to this. Would such a change inqualification for actuarial designations benefit anyone? Probably yes,including some faculty at large in successful academic programs andperhaps some individuals who truly believe that positive academicresults are equivalent to true mastery of course materials. But,certainly most importantly, would it benefit our profession, either inthe short or long run? I have not read a single comment which convincesme that it would."

More discussions here: http://72.3.227.148/actuarial_di ... thread.php?t=172906

个人认为这不是什么新鲜的事情，曲线救国之路早已有之。在英国读书可以通过修课程得到IOA考试的抵免，SOA和IOA的考试也是有转换关系的，而且基本上就像SOA抵中精一样方便 :)

此本人道听途说所得，未经求证，还盼高人批评。

this is unfair

This is off the table for now.

"The (SOA) Board acknowledged the significant concerns raised by themembership and their employers regarding the Future Education Methods(FEM) concept and has agreed not to proceed with the concept in itscurrent form."

http://www.soa.org/news-and-publications/newsroom/press-releases/2009-10-25-board-announcement.aspx

God bless me~hope this proposal not pass

To 11楼：
在国外，读书比考Preliminary Exams容易的太多了！看看现在VEE的要求是什么？70%就可以拿credits！那可是我一学期逃课都可以考出来的分数的说。。。而且读精算的class average一般都会有70%以上，这就意味着，光在我学校就会有200多名的学生会成准精算师，加上我学校的co-op系统，这200多名学生大部分都会有精算工作经验，想必现在做精算业的人都知道，有证书+有经验是多么大的优势，而且这些每年多出的强敌，更会有很多回中国发展，这对中国考生来说也是一个噩梦吧？因为证书还好说，经验就比较难得了。所以说，如果这个proposal通过的话，对国内学生冲击也很大。

At its October 24-25, 2009 meeting, the Society of Actuaries' (SOA) Board of Directors discussed and made determinations on a variety of strategic issues and initiatives.

The Board acknowledged the significant concerns raised by the membership and their employers regarding the Future Education Methods (FEM) concept and has agreed not to proceed with the concept in its current form. The Board directed its volunteer team charged with the oversight of knowledge transfer initiatives to review the strategic objectives of the SOA's educational system.

The Board will ask the Joint FEM Steering and Accreditation Committees to consider alternatives to the current concept and provide a report back to the Board in February 2010. The SOA will also appoint a task force to recommend enhanced communications with our members on this subject.

http://www.soa.org/news-and-publ ... d-announcement.aspx

不可能是本科课程，如果是PHD，也不见得会变坏

天啊。。。太可怕了。。。

恩，暂缓实行了，但估计会重提的。

thank god ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ i strongly against the issue.

肯定是本科课程....至少我们学校肯定是本科....master就不讲和preliminary相关的东西了

早说啊 早说我就不考了 大二就把大三的课都念完了 都快死了.....

不过我教授说 毕业证没用 考试通过几乎没有 只有工作经验有用 不过 找第一份工作 很难×&……%#