Thread: syllabus for CAS 5 in spring 2010

find and replace-easily done.

I don't see any "advertising" in the manual . . . recognition of a company that implicitly provided funding for the development of the text was made, but I don't see how that is "advertising". Reviewing the TOC and the bibliography, it looks like the manual will be a tremendous help. the most interesting thing I saw in the references is one that is an extention of an Exam 4 reference (Dean...

Quote: Originally Posted by blahbla take the worst possible thing you can imagine and multiply it by 10

Quote: Originally Posted by tommie frazier never asked. no point. dated. never asked??? yes it was tested

There is enough of a difference that it will create some headaches for retakers. I think the headaches will be relatively small for most people who knew the material well for 2009. There is some new material, changes in notation and terminology, differences in examples, etc. Some material is no longer on or not covered in as much depth. General concepts will carry over but many details will not. Bottom line, if you learned a lot about...

Quote: Originally Posted by tommie frazier http://www.casact.org/members/index....TOKEN=19316845 ratemaking text available ...and gratuitous marketing plugs for their employer............ The CAS is selling advertising space in its study manuals?

Quote: Originally Posted by nostalgia.jesskang Normally how will the changes be? take the worst possible thing you can imagine and multiply it by 10

Browsed through it. Looks good. If the Yankees win the World Series, do we get to change the references from Wicked Good Insurance Company to Red Sux Insurance Company?

It looks like they are removing the health capitation stuff, which is good as I felt this paper was a bit out of place. Bourdon, T. W.; Passwater, K.; and Priven, M., “An Introduction to Capitation and Health Care Provider Excess Insurance” (and delete “Health” from Learning Objective C.1.)

Based on having reviewed a draft, I believe most of you will prefer the new textbook to the 2009 readings it replaces. I think it is generally well written. The obvious advantages over the 2009 syllabus readings: Consistent notation and terminology. Specifically written for students to read. (Some of the textbook chapters from Foundations were also written for students.) Only includes material the syllabus committee thinks is appropriate for...