As actuaries, we’re often presented with situations that ask for varying levels of detail. Technical stakeholders may be interested in the nitty-gritty detail, while executive stakeholders may be more interested in a high-level explanation. A key part of an effective communicator’s skill set is crafting a message that resonates with the intended audience. While these considerations are important in a professional setting, they also are important to consider when sitting for CAS exams.

Written response questions typically come in three flavors: Concise, standard, or deep and thorough responses. Thankfully, there are context clues that can inform the candidate on how to respond. 

Questions that are looking for a concise response will typically use the adverb “briefly” and are typically worth ¼ point. These questions can typically be answered in a sentence or less. No additional credit is awarded for a more detailed explanation, but credit could be lost if the additional detail proves to be incorrect. 

For an example of this question type, consider Question 9.a from Fall 2019 Exam 5:

Briefly describe one similarity and one difference between the purposes of risk classification and individual risk rating. (½ point)

From the point total, we can infer that “briefly” describing a similarity and a difference is worth ¼ point. The responses for this question should be short and sweet. Just a sentence for each item is appropriate. 

Standard response questions will not use an adverb and are typically worth ½ point. Since these questions are worth twice as many points, the exam writer is looking for a more in-depth response than the “briefly describe” questions. It’s important to find the right balance when answering these questions; providing too little detail may result in lost points, while excessive detail can lead to wasted time.

For an example of this question type, consider Question 5.a from Fall 2019 Exam 6U:

Describe one reason that a rating agency may change the outlook, rather than downgrade the rating, of an insurer whose financial strength has declined. (½ point)

It’s clear from the absence of adverbs and the point total that the exam writer is looking for a standard response. A few sentences are appropriate.

The final flavor of written response is a deep and thorough response. Questions of this nature are the strongest prompt used by the Syllabus and Examination Working Group and seek very detailed responses that demonstrate a deep understanding of the material. These questions typically use the adverb “fully” and are worth at least 1 point.

For an example of this question type, consider Question 4.c from Fall 2019 Exam 6U:

Fully describe receivership, including an explanation of rehabilitation and liquidation. (1 point)

From the “fully” adverb and the point total, we know that the exam writer is looking for a deep and thorough response. Full credit explanations will likely be at least a few sentences in length and demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the material.

Please read questions carefully and pay attention to point values on all CAS exams that contain written response questions. It is in the candidate’s best interest to only provide as much information as is necessary to receive full credit. Extraneous detail provides no benefit and consumes valuable time on the exam, reducing the available time for responding to other questions.