Help! (1 Viewer)

[MrA]

what are the chances of doing well in actuarial studies (i.e. get good grades and understand concepts, etc) after only doing Mathematics Extension 1 in the HSC?

do they cover any parts of the Mathematics Extension 2 syllabus in actuarial?

 

[Supra]

the prerequisite is band 6 in 3u isnt it-so if u get that, u shud b fine

 

[-=«MÄLÅÇhïtÊ»=-]

mate, i did 4u..i forgot it...
math133 is different to 4u hsc. It does cover some things like polynomials (in one or two hrs) and you are supposed to know how to integrate (incl. by parts), but these are things you can catch easily.

Most non 4u actuaries choose to do math135 in first sem and then math136 in second sem. 135 covers lot of 3u/4u hsc things. Math133 is the actuarial express unit where they cram 135 and 136 into one unit and get it down in 1/2 the time. It's better to do 135 and 136 (even for a 4u person, coz every1 gets rusty and forgets things), but then you have to pay an extra few hundred and waste some extra time.

In the end, it's not a huge concern. The maths we do plays with matrices, vector spaces, and 1st and 2nd order differential eqns - things that 4u barely touches.

 

[MrA]

hmm, ok

then i was wondering...why is the drop-out rate in actuarial is so high...is it because that it is so difficult that ppl that did 3u arent as capable, or just that some ppl are too lazy?

 

[ND]

Originally posted by -=MLhtʻ=-

Most non 4u actuaries choose to do math135 in first sem and then math136 in second sem. 135 covers lot of 3u/4u hsc things. Math133 is the actuarial express unit where they cram 135 and 136 into one unit and get it down in 1/2 the time. It's better to do 135 and 136 (even for a 4u person, coz every1 gets rusty and forgets things), but then you have to pay an extra few hundred and waste some extra time.

Wouldn't doing 135 and 136 be way better for your GPA?

 

[-=«MÄLÅÇhïtÊ»=-]

as our acst211 lecturer said, maths is dogwork - something a machine can do. Actuarial is haaaard. Maths isn't ^^.

 

[MrA]

does that mean if u are willing to work hard, then its worth to give it a go if u meet the prerequisite ?

what are the chances of "survival" if u are willing to put in the effort?

 

[-=«MÄLÅÇhïtÊ»=-]

Originally posted by flyin'
Actuarial isn't that hard. It's just hours and hours and hours and hours of work; then it's not hard at all.

u cant talk coz we've only survived 1st yr...dats meant to be a walk in the park..

 

[Wacky]

I think that's still a bit vague. May I ask how many hours per week did you put in, what kind of result did you get?

 

[Mini]

Originally posted by -=MLhtʻ=-

Most non 4u actuaries choose to do math135 in first sem and then math136 in second sem. 135 covers lot of 3u/4u hsc things. Math133 is the actuarial express unit where they cram 135 and 136 into one unit and get it down in 1/2 the time. It's better to do 135 and 136 (even for a 4u person, coz every1 gets rusty and forgets things), but then you have to pay an extra few hundred and waste some extra time.

In the end, it's not a huge concern. The maths we do plays with matrices, vector spaces, and 1st and 2nd order differential eqns - things that 4u barely touches.

but isn't 133 a co-requisite for ACST211? can u survive 211 without it? ... the 136 option sounds great otherwise.
and what is STAT171 like, just in general - do u have to be a math whiz for that too? thanks!

 

[flamin']

Just some hopeful advice for some of you. Some people try very very hard and dont' do very very good.

135 and 136 replaces 133 basically. But u either need to do 133 or 135/136 to do 2nd year.

133 was alright. The exam was easy and I think they are taking more and more stuff out of the course. Well thats the trend looking t the past papers.

I think in actuarial you will have to put in a decent effort sometime otherwise you wouldn't be there.

O and flyin', actuarial is hard. Saying it isn't is like saying nothing is hard, everythign is easy if you work really really really really hard. A lot of us work hard and its still a very hard course. Others will agree, that in some subjects, especially the abstract topics in 133, it takes hours to understand and even then you can't do the problems correctly or in the right method. Don't underestimate the course and say 'hey i can do it if i'm prepared to put in hours and hours and hours... it won't be hard' =p Thats my opinion btw

Some people won't make it no matter how hard they work. But thats with everything. How hard you need to work and whether you survive will depend on yourself in the end...

 

[flamin']

Originally posted by flyin'
Comparatively hard, most definitely. But one can carve a path through a mountain with only a spade (I can't remember the Chinese saying!), if they put their mind to it.

Thats like saying... You can do everything eventually haha. That goes without saying... but in terms of economics and rationality, then if its too hard for you, why keep on tackling a huge mountian? Better off digging a hole at the beach. =p

 

[-=«MÄLÅÇhïtÊ»=-]

i reckon..
think of the opportunity cost of carving a mountain with a spade..man havent u learnt anything from econ111? i fink u should stop cramming for next yr and revise what u've learnt.

 

[-=«MÄLÅÇhïtÊ»=-]

...y are u studying for next yr now then..if its in 1 ear out the other? ...coz if dats the case den u should b studying during the actual exam..dat way its in 1 ear and striaght out onto the exam paper

 

[flamin']

Originally posted by flyin'
Well, I was being purely philosophical there ^o) =p
I'm not sure why one would tackle a mountain? Maybe because they could... and yes, I'm sure that person wasn't rational either. =D

Since when did philosphy and actuarial become best buds? =p Get philosphy away from my quantitative world! Philosphy is nice to think about, but its what reality that matters =p. And in reality, actuarial is a mountain - why you think so many people, who would have a UAI of around 97+ (that work hard etc) drop out in ACST and fail it? Its easy to stick to your guns and be persistant, but if thats all it took then there would be MANY MANY MANY working actuarials and the pay would be very very very crap... =p