> The level of detail you are discussing is many times beyond what will be
> asked. (that's not a slam, just an observation). I was well ahead of the
> pack at Sholom's Seminar; I got a 75 on a practice exam I just took, and I
> am finding some of these posts are beyond what I've been doing to prepare
> for May 8th. Is it just me?
No. :)
At least in past exams, I would occasionally have mild heart attacks in the
couple of weeks leading up to the exam, as people around me would be asking
themselves questions beyond what I was prepared to answer.
Some of this is the result of my own study techniques: I generally don't get
up to speed on the memorization/regurgitation of lists and key quotes until
just before the exam. I don't do well on the "regurgitation" questions on
CAS exams; but hitting lists, etc. very hard (6-8 hours per day) in the last
couple of days has worked for me in the past.
Before the last days, I actually try to learn the material, and try to
develop an understanding of it... and a lot of the picky questions that get
asked don't always tie in to that strategy.
I used to concentrate my efforts on *really* learning the material that had
been asked on past exams. But I think Part 7 last fall showed the flaw in
that technique. *ahem*
(BTW, in his seminars, did Sholom make any reference to the '97 Part 7 exam?
I'm curious about what sort of comments he has about that beast.)
Exam question of the day: If an actuarial student's brain explodes during
the final cramming process prior to an exam, can it be claimed as a Worker's
Comp claim? What sort of a claim would it be, and how would it be recorded
in the NCCI stat plan, according to Moncher?
--Michael D. Adams http://www.rahul.net/starowl mda@triskele.com ___ | It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion <*,*> | It is by the beans of Java my thoughts acquire speed [`-'] | The hands acquire shaking / The shaking becomes a warning -"-"- | It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion