Uni Stuff > Actuarial Studies
Commerce (actuarial studies) question
brendan:
--- Quote from: shinny on December 27, 2008, 01:08:37 am ---I wouldn't say Methods is a good indication of one's ability to succeed in actuarial studies though.
--- End quote ---
It was more of a indicator of ability to get 38 or above in Spesh, which is the prereq for Actuarial Science program at UoM. You can dispute whether getting above 38 is good indicator of succeeding in subjects required for the Actuarial program, but the UoM math and econ departments certainly seem to think so.
nickalaz:
--- Quote from: Brendan on December 27, 2008, 01:06:59 am ---
--- Quote from: nickalaz on December 27, 2008, 01:04:01 am ---id say thats a bit rough.
getting an A+ in the methods exams should be enough. a few silly mistakes on the exams and you can be down to a score of ~39-42... however you would still have a strong grasp of the concepts to be able to get a score like that.
--- End quote ---
I think it would take more than just silly mistakes to drop to 35 though.
--- End quote ---
i was referring to your '45ish raw' statement.
however i also disagree. With further maths last year, i knew all aspects of the course - and had no difficulty with any of the concepts, but silly mistakes in the exams brought me down to a 37.
brendan:
--- Quote from: nickalaz on December 27, 2008, 01:13:03 am ---With further maths last year, i knew all aspects of the course - and had no difficulty with any of the concepts, but silly mistakes in the exams brought me down to a 37.
--- End quote ---
Well I think the 37 tells a different story as to your knowledge of the content.
dekoyl:
What is so challenging about what actuarial studies has to offer? (I'm not doubting the course, I'm just ignorant as I don't know what the course is. My knowledge of actuarial studies is very limited). Just interested =]
They pay off seems to be pretty good, though. ~$80-100k salary for this year.
shinny:
--- Quote from: gonzo on December 27, 2008, 01:12:21 am ---your specialist study score isn't necessarily a good indicator either. the exam consists of several elaborate scenarios and accompanying questions. it can be difficult to complete it all satisfactorily in 2 hours. the calculus itself isn't particularly challenging and can be mastered without mastering the specialist exam.
--- End quote ---
Well of course there's no perfect indicator except the exam itself, but I'd still say Specialist would be the best indicator as it more accurately measures one's ability to comprehend higher level Maths, rather than just grind questions which can be handled by little kids in Asian countries which you see in Methods.
--- Quote from: Brendan on December 27, 2008, 01:12:56 am ---It was more of a indicator of ability to get 38 or above in Spesh, which is the prereq for Actuarial Science program at UoM. You can dispute whether getting above 38 is good indicator of succeeding in subjects required for the Actuarial program, but the UoM math and econ departments certainly seem to think so.
--- End quote ---
Well that's assuming that people will score approximately the same in either subject, which they clearly do not. Specialist and Methods require quite different skills in my opinion, and many people have quite big disparities between their Specialist and Methods scores, not only shown by my scores, but others as well (I'm not going to pull out a list of evidence but it definitely has happened to my friends too).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version