Banner Ad 1

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Study manuals

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Study manuals

    What are the recommendations out there for study manuals? I am looking for a study manual with many practice problems coming from previous SOA exams. Also, does anyone know whether there will be any changes in the existing syllabus? If so, I would hold off for awhile so I could wait for newer editions of the manuals to be published. Much thanks.
    Last edited by Ken; May 30 2005, 03:33 PM.
    Whether you are the lion or the gazelle, when the sun comes up, you better be running.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Ken
    What are the recommendations out there for study manuals? I am looking for a study manual with many practice problems coming from previous SOA exams. Also, does anyone know whether there will be any changes in the existing syllabus? If so, I would hold off for awhile so I could wait for newer editions of the manuals to be published. Much thanks.
    I like the BPP stuff: www.bpptraining.com

    Comment


    • #3
      SOA M manual

      Dear Ken:
      The manual I wrote for life contingencies part of exam M has a l l problems since 2000, and many earlier (especially for Chapter 15, which is new on exam M versus SOA exam 3), you can get it at:
      http://www.neas-seminars.com/Registration/
      you can buy my notes together with Mahler's notes or Kubicka's notes.

      Yours,
      Krzys'

      Originally posted by Ken
      What are the recommendations out there for study manuals? I am looking for a study manual with many practice problems coming from previous SOA exams. Also, does anyone know whether there will be any changes in the existing syllabus? If so, I would hold off for awhile so I could wait for newer editions of the manuals to be published. Much thanks.
      Want to know how to pass actuarial exams? Go to: smartURL.it/pass

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Ken
        What are the recommendations out there for study manuals? I am looking for a study manual with many practice problems coming from previous SOA exams. Also, does anyone know whether there will be any changes in the existing syllabus? If so, I would hold off for awhile so I could wait for newer editions of the manuals to be published. Much thanks.
        I feel a little bad about not supporting Dr. O with his manual being available, but what worked for me seemed to be the Actex/Arch/Mahler combination. The benefit of using Mahler was marginal, so I'm not sure whether I'd deem it necessary. But I would say that Actex and Arch each had its benefits. My primary manual was Actex. It's not for everybody (not everyone likes it), but they have the policy "practice hard, play easy". They drill you with problems that are harder than the SOA past exam problems, which was a good drill for Exam M.

        The syllabus should not be changing (I believe all the required readings are the same), but I hear Actex is revamping its manual. There was a large problem with it in the Spring - it included some topics that were on the old Course 3 but not Exam M. So, they're revising it and will come out with their new one in the middle of the month. It will be $200, but I personally believe it was money well spent.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by wat
          But I would say that Actex and Arch each had its benefits. My primary manual was Actex. It's not for everybody (not everyone likes it), but they have the policy "practice hard, play easy". They drill you with problems that are harder than the SOA past exam problems, which was a good drill for Exam M.
          Hi wat, I am thinking about taking Exam M next spring. I've never studied any related material before. Do you think the Actex and Arch menu would help a newbie like me? How long does it generally takes to study for M from scratch? thanks!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by novrain
            Hi wat, I am thinking about taking Exam M next spring. I've never studied any related material before. Do you think the Actex and Arch menu would help a newbie like me? How long does it generally takes to study for M from scratch? thanks!
            I did it from scratch for May 2005. I had no classes and had to self-study. I did pretty well (I did pass) - it was a matter of sticking with the material and keep trying problems. All in all, I believe it took me a little over 300 hours for everything.

            I think Arch is a good manual for teaching you the material - it explains concepts in a very easy-to-digest way. However, the problems are not very challenging. They are, at best, equal to the difficulty of the SOA exam problems, but most of the time, they're usually easier than the exam problems. That's why I'd advocate the Actex (only the Spring 2005 edition) - the problems were very difficult. But, once you understood the general idea of the problem, the formulas and the concepts were easy to understand on the actual exam.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by wat
              I did it from scratch for May 2005. I had no classes and had to self-study. I did pretty well (I did pass) - it was a matter of sticking with the material and keep trying problems. All in all, I believe it took me a little over 300 hours for everything.

              I think Arch is a good manual for teaching you the material - it explains concepts in a very easy-to-digest way. However, the problems are not very challenging. They are, at best, equal to the difficulty of the SOA exam problems, but most of the time, they're usually easier than the exam problems. That's why I'd advocate the Actex (only the Spring 2005 edition) - the problems were very difficult. But, once you understood the general idea of the problem, the formulas and the concepts were easy to understand on the actual exam.

              Thanks so much for answering my questions!
              Actex's menu is completely new now. I am not sure whether it's worth trying ($200).
              Do you think the study manuals are sufficient to replace the text books or is it better to study all three books before working on the the manuals?

              Comment


              • #8
                I solely used the ASM manual and I think I did pretty well on my exam. I don't think the texts are necessary. I've had no previous exposure to the material and learned by solving all the problems in the book
                Whether you are the lion or the gazelle, when the sun comes up, you better be running.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Ken
                  I solely used the ASM manual and I think I did pretty well on my exam. I don't think the texts are necessary. I've had no previous exposure to the material and learned by solving all the problems in the book
                  Thanks for replying and congratulations.

                  Did you read the three textbooks at all? Do they help us gain a much deeper understanding in the material? How many practice problems do the ASM manual have?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I only have 1 of the 3 textbooks because I need it for a class I'm taking now. Since the type of problems they ask in Actuarial Mathematics are so different from what the SOA asks you, I don't think the book is that helpful. I did look at it a few times to see how they derived some formulas, but aside from that, I didn't use it. I don't know how many problems the book has because it's on loan right now, but I filled 5 notebooks just solving practice problems.
                    Whether you are the lion or the gazelle, when the sun comes up, you better be running.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      If you happen to take the CAS 3 exam, Mahler's notes are *very* helpful for the loss models and aggregate distributions info. The stats stuff was somewhat helpful - then again, the stats questions were difficult this time around. Not completely undoable, but you *really* had to dig hard into the notes to get comfortable with that section - something I didn't have a problem with on the rest of his notes.

                      I haven't seen Dr. O's manual on life contingencies, but I've heard good things about it. If you're considering going to a seminar for this exam and you're planning on taking the SOA's Exam M, make sure to go to an SOA seminar. Dr. Batten (who does an *excellent* job teaching the life contingencies for the NEAS seminars) will NOT cover the SOA material in the NEAS seminars since they are geared toward the CAS exam.
                      "You better get to living, because dying's a pain in the ***." - Frank Sinatra

                      http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blogger_ar...blogger_id=174 - where I talk about the Blues and the NHL.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Irish Blues
                        If you happen to take the CAS 3 exam, Mahler's notes are *very* helpful for the loss models and aggregate distributions info. The stats stuff was somewhat helpful - then again, the stats questions were difficult this time around. Not completely undoable, but you *really* had to dig hard into the notes to get comfortable with that section - something I didn't have a problem with on the rest of his notes.
                        Thanks for your advice. So I presume that you took the CAS 3 and did well. Is it true that if one is unsure whether to take M or CAS 3, it's better to do M first?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          question for Ken

                          Originally posted by Ken
                          I solely used the ASM manual and I think I did pretty well on my exam. I don't think the texts are necessary. I've had no previous exposure to the material and learned by solving all the problems in the book
                          I, too, have no previous exposure to the material. But unlike you I don't have a class in actuarial mathematics and therefore will not be buying the actuarial mathematics book, like you did. Looking at the free samples from all the study manuals out there, BPP seems to be the easiest one for a newbie like myself. ASM, on the other hand, seems to cater to people previously exposed to the material or taking a class simultaneosly with it. What was your experience with ASM in terms of clarity of teaching the material to beginners?

                          P.S. Does the ASM manual come with any new real practice exams?

                          Appreciate it.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X