I got a response from President-Elect candidate John Robinson:
Concerning the UEC program:
My first reaction was that, unlike 2012-2013 when college credit was first discussed by the Board, members were not consulted. My grapevine tells me that none of the CAE schools were consulted in the development of the program (I hope the grapevine is wrong), and one of them has decided it will not participate. As you know, OLA has complained that the “bias” towards CAE schools will be a setback to minorities. There is a provision that extends the program to HBCUs; but very few HBCUs have Act Sci, and without a professor to support it, the program is unlikely to reach their students. Most of the comments that I get are concern that it will produce a lower quality of candidate than the exams. The lack of buy-in by important stakeholders may cause at least a re-consideration of the direction.Concerning the thrust of the exam system changes:
There is a legitimate need to ensure that pre-ASA candidates can perform work that employers of actuaries expect of them. Currently, this includes applying tools and techniques that data scientists are trained to do. Where to draw the line between pre-ASA candidate and data scientist is a tricky question. I am confident, however, that at the Fellowship level, our multi-disciplinary (economics, finance, life and non-life contingencies, investment, risk management) analytical perspectives, combined with our code of conduct, will continue to be valued by those that use our services.I welcome any opportunity to hear your concerns for our profession or the SOA - whatever you think an incoming SOA president should be aware of.
You have my permission to share my response on GoActuary.
I told John that I’d convey any comments from here to him. I’m all about sharing.