SOA -- College Credit for Exams

This would be better addressed through networking/mentoring, IMO.

An impersonal letter from the CAS won’t know why a candidate hasn’t taken a set of Exams, nor should it be their place to “guess” at such reasons. And what a candidate “should do next” is another area where the institution shouldn’t be trying to get involved as this does take away personal responsibility.

But having a mentoring program for candidates who have passed some Exams can be of value, especially to candidates who do not have ready access to credentialed actuaries.

There’s a pretty handy clickable flowchart thing I remember looking at closely as I progressed through the early stages. I think it’s bold to assume people will spend little to no time researching the process when they have to spend hundreds of hours taking the exams. I wasn’t familiar with upper levels (or even 5/6), but when I was sitting for MFE I knew lots about LC/ST, C and what was required for ACAS.

That’s fair. I was just trying to come up with options that would address act_123’s concerns. He seemed to be implying that the CAS would be forced to accept credit because the SOA does and I refute that notion.

The CAS has accepted credit from waivers by the CIA so it would be unlikely that it wouldn’t accept waivers granted by the SOA.

2 Likes

Oh, I didn’t know that. In that case yes, that seems likely. Too bad though.

Both CAS & SOA will take exam credits from IFoA earned via university credit.

I’m sure everybody noticed the British invasion into the SOA/CAS. (No, it’s not been appreciable)

1 Like

from the SOA President:

Whole text for posterity

All,

Thank you for sharing your views. Allow me to give you more detail regarding the need to make changes in the SOA’s education and credentialing of actuaries.

You can be sure that the last thing that the Board or I want to do is diminish the value of the ASA and FSA credentials.

The value of our credentials, though, is measured by the marketplace: how much in demand are actuaries; what do employers, regulators, and the public expect from us; and what are employers or the public willing to pay for our services? Employers have been telling us for many years that while they value our intelligence, knowledge of the business, and technical skills, they want actuaries who are also strategic thinkers, good decision makers, great communicators, and business leaders.

The Case for Change

If not today, then in 5-10 years, our existing technical expertise will be challenged and probably surpassed by artificial intelligence, which includes the disciplines of data science, machine learning, and deep learning. Therefore, to maintain our value, the market will demand actuaries who not only possess the technical skills for which we have always been known, but also understand the techniques of artificial intelligence and how to use data analytics to formulate strategy and make and communicate sound and ethical business decisions.

In recent years, careers in data science, math, and statistics have surpassed actuarial science in popularity and career ratings. The number of first-time exam takers entering our pathway has dropped each year for the last seven years. In 2020 the number of first-time exam takers was nearly 50% fewer than in 2013.

Given this trend, the market is telling us something. We can continue what we’ve been doing for decades, but if we don’t change quickly, we will become a smaller profession relegated to signing statements required by regulators. To remain the risk professionals of choice, we must embark on a new long-term growth strategy in the areas of pre-qualification education, professional development, research, member engagement, international growth, and DE&I. Your SOA Board of Directors is initiating action is each of these areas.

Educational Initiatives

The SOA is foremost an educational organization. Our main responsibility is to train both current and future generations of actuaries to be technically competent professionals who are known to be strategic thinkers, good decision makers, great communicators, and future business leaders. We refer to these as adaptability and emotional intelligence skills or AQ/EQ for short.

Your Board has identified five steps to improve the way we educate actuaries:

  1. Review the current ASA and FSA syllabi to make sure they cover the basic techniques of artificial intelligence as well as all the knowledge and skills we expect new ASA’s and FSA’s will need in the next five to ten years.
  2. Develop better methods of educating and testing AQ and EQ skills.
  3. Make the pathway to ASA and FSA more attractive than alternative pathways such as a career in data science. It currently takes an average of eight years to reach Fellowship, and only about 10% of those who start the pathway make it FSA.
  4. Use and/or develop the talent and resources of colleges and universities to help accomplish steps 2 and 3.
  5. Create professional development that promotes life-long learning in the skills that employers, regulators, and the public value.

While our exams are not going away for the vast majority of candidates, the Board and I believe that the University-Earned Credit program (UEC) we announced is essential in helping us train the next generation of actuaries whom employers will value above other competing disciplines. UEC is the first of several changes will be announcing this year as we modernize the curriculum and introduce credentials along the pathway and certificates to supplement the pathway.

UEC

The SOA’s pathways to ASA and FSA have changed multiple times since our founding in 1949; indeed, they have changed multiple times since I became a Fellow in 1980. Every time it changes, some of our current credentialed actuaries think the new entrants are getting a break!

As we announced, under UEC the SOA will be approving in advance the syllabus, the final examination, and the grade that will qualify for earned-exam credit. These university courses and exams will be different from what you remember, and AQ/EQ skill practice must be part of the overall curriculum Let’s not forget that while the SOA exams are certainly difficult, the pass mark is six out of ten.

We are starting the program with schools that have qualified as Centers of Actuarial Excellence because these schools’ actuarial programs have already met stringent guidelines (Centers of Actuarial Excellence (CAE) Program Overview), offer courses that cover VEE and most of the ASA syllabus, and submit to oversight by the SOA. All of them may not apply right away as there is additional coordination with the SOA required to participate.

And for every school that chooses to participate, the SOA needs volunteers to accomplish the necessary monitoring and review. That’s one reason why we are not in a position today to offer this program to the hundreds of schools that offer courses in the ASA syllabus. But we need to begin with some schools, and the CAE’s are a logical place to start. There are no other cash-related or preferential reasons as some have asked. We expect the program will be successful and, if so, it will grow over time.

Diversity

While 28 of the CAE schools are publicly funded and many are located in metropolitan areas, the Board realizes that these schools are not necessarily the ones that attract large numbers of bright students from underrepresented communities (in the U.S., Black, Latino, and Native American populations). Therefore, as we also announced, the SOA will be creating a program to provide financial, educational, and even staff support to schools with diverse student bodies to develop courses that would meet the same strict standards as for the CAE schools. This program may take a year longer to develop, and for financial and staffing reasons, it, too, will have to start with a limited number of schools.

Summary

In closing, I want to point out that the idea of using universities to educate actuaries has a long history around the world. For example, The Institute and Faculty of Actuaries in the United Kingdom has had an exam and university credit program for decades. Their oversight of universities’ curricula and exams is similar to what we are proposing. The Institute of Actuaries in Australia has made similarly extensive use of their universities for decades as well. Fellows of these two institutes who apply and satisfy SOA professionalism standards and courses have, for many years, been recognized as Fellows of the SOA.

As another example, for about the last ten years, the Canadian Institute of Actuaries has had a university exam exemption program applying to the ACIA and FCIA designations. That program has been recognized for the past decade by the Casualty Actuarial Association for ACAS and FCAS designations and through mutual recognition by the two Institutes mentioned above as well as the Actuarial Society of South Africa.

The aim of the long-term growth strategy is to increase the awareness and diversity of the profession while ensuring that actuaries remain highly sought-after professionals who develop and communicate solutions for complex financial issues. We need to make changes, and I trust that you can see that we are making them in a thoughtful way that maintains the high standards that we all value.

Sincerely,
Roy Goldman, Ph.D., FSA, MAAA, CERA
President, Society of Actuaries

The concern about machine learning/data science is flawed in my view. As with the CAT modeling revolution we didn’t need to become experts in the CAT models themselves, the same will be true of machine learning techniques for lines with vast homogeneous data. And the notion we’ll be able to compete directly in that space against the eventual Math PhDs is absurd, we’ll continue to be the math-oriented business people that we’ve historical been.

3 Likes

I would like to ask Dr Goldman if he would have been a better strategic thinker, decision maker, communicator and business leader if his educational background had been an undergraduate degree in actuarial science…

1 Like

“…but nonetheless we’re taking action that will do exactly that anyway”

1 Like

I think he must be referring to the aggregate value of the credential when summed over all that attain it.

2 Likes

Out of curiosity if checked the educational background of the board as well as the past, current president elect. If you exclude Canadians I could only find three that went to a CAE and of those three, two were Masters degrees where they had a mathematics undergraduate degree.
If the board represents the thought leaders of the profession why isn’t it dominated by those whose education is an undergraduate degree from a CAE? I assume the answer would be in the past these schools weren’t as excellent as they are now.

1 Like

I almost missed this post & was coming here to say this. I thought it was a well-known, poorly-guarded secret that CAS already accepts some exam waivers for prelim exams from CIA & IFoA (possibly more).

IIRC (?), this started when SOA deftly turned the joint prelims into SOA prelims by noticing CAS had failed to protect its stake in them.

Yeah, I forgot to mention in my earlier post that the SOA keeps better lawyers on retainer than does the CAS.

You guys have people on retainer!?

But . . . ML is now changing what is “homogeneous” and companies that employ it in their ratemaking decisions (either via underwriting models or as part of testing a more traditional rating structure) are likely to be able to “skim the cream”.

I agree that there still needs to be those with a solid understanding of such models along with the business acumen to address both regulators and agents/brokers to answer such questions as “why did my rate go up?”. But inherent in the definition of “data scientist” is having an expertise with the underlying data.

1 Like

Yup, that’s what I was going to say, too.

But I have no fear that CAS candidates won’t know what exams they have credit for. You have the be reasonably good at navigating that sort of thing to pass any of the exams.

1 Like

Copying somebody else’s reddit post, behind the spoiler

https://www.reddit.com/r/actuary/comments/o2brru/my_take_on_uec_as_someone_who_switched_to_data/

My take on UEC as someone who switched to data science

From the statement by SOA president Roy Goldman on the UEC:

In recent years, careers in data science, math, and statistics have surpassed actuarial science in popularity and career ratings. The number of first-time exam takers entering our pathway has dropped each year for the last seven years. […]

The long-term growth strategy is to increase the awareness and diversity of the profession while ensuring that actuaries remain highly sought-after professionals…

There’s been a lot of discussion about this lately. I am someone who’s been in insurance for the better part of a decade and who switched to data science during that time. I can understand the desire to “stay relevant”, but I believe this fails to address the true underlying reason for why the profession (at least by exam takers) seems to be declining in popularity, and therefore I don’t believe the UEC will help in achieving the goal that the SOA wants to achieve.

First, data science stems from the same core fundamentals as actuarial: strong statistical background, coding and modeling, business intelligence, etc. Data science is simply these skills expressed and applied to a much wider set of applications. Actuaries actually make some of the best data scientists (indeed, many top Kaggle competitors have actuarial backgrounds). In this sense, data science isn’t competition for actuarial jobs, it’s competition for actuarial skills. This is a great thing for young candidates, though perhaps not so great for the SOA. Data science offers a broader scope of opportunities for people interested in analytics and applied statistics, whereas the actuarial path is only really useful in insurance.

Second, “awareness” isn’t really the issue. Actuary has been at the top of “best careers” lists for many years. Lowering the barrier to entry may get more people in, but here’s the thing: Students are NOT choosing data science because it’s easier. Students are choosing data science because they believe the work is more exciting. Building computer vision models for Uber sounds a lot more appealing than insurance reserving. Building recommender systems for Google sounds a lot more impactful than pricing GLMs. And while most of data science isn’t as glamorous (neither is actuarial, let’s be honest), the general perception is there. Indeed, while I don’t spend my days building deep learning models, the times I did spend doing so were much more interesting and memorable than my days building insurance GLMs.

In short, the SOA/CAS cannot by themselves make the profession more appealing, especially not by loosening credentialing requirements. In order to become more appealing, the entire industry will have to address these core issues:

  1. The actuarial credential and profession has to be seen as valuable beyond just the insurance industry.
  2. The work that actuaries do must be seen as innovative, impactful, and cutting-edge.

This is not a knock on actuaries, I’ve seen lots of innovative and creative work from actuaries. But if the goal is to “stay popular” in the face of data science, I think these points shouldn’t be ignored. In the long run though, no matter how hyped up DS is, it is here to stay. So perhaps the reality is simply that there’s going to be more competition for the talent that actuaries possess going forward. And as I’ve mentioned, that may not be so great for the SOA, but is a great thing for us.

Thanks for the link. It was interesting and not surprising at all.

I just sent an email:

just watching the parade go by

Separately, I’ve got nothing new to say since the last attempt (to be explicit, 2009), but there are various people who are new to the whole brou-ha-ha.

On the GoActuary site, there’s a discussion thread on the current attempt:

https://community-new.goactuary.com/t/soa-college-credit-for-exams/2921

I linked to some other threads on Reddit, just to keep things in one place.

I’ve been trying to encourage people to send letters to the SOA, as in general, I don’t expect any Board members to waste time reading discussion boards if people won’t bother to go to the trouble of writing any formal response letters.

Not that the Board asked the membership for its opinion this time.

As in the materials from my prior email, the Board tried the “not asking the members” approach for the 1989 attempt. I doubt it will be much more successful in the internet age, but we shall see.

-mpc

1 Like