I’m heavily influenced by my own educational experience, obviously, but I think that the educational standards of the future should take heed of what CFA Charterholders and Actuaries need to do.
You need to do three things to enter into these clubs:
1. Have experience in the profession (vouched for by an insider). 2. Pass a bunch of (very) challenging exams.
3. Have a college degree.
My question is what the hell is the point of #3? All it does is restrict the pool of candidates to those than can afford to go to college.
The only valuable effect of #3 is that it sets an age floor for beginning the apprenticeship. And there should be a minimum age restriction of some form.
There shouldn’t be any 23 year old fully qualified actuaries. They aren’t mature or experienced enough to fulfill the role’s obligations.
Everyone focuses on the exams because they’re difficult, but the experience is much more important. It’s the apprenticeship that matters for performance.
Why can’t we have more independent exams to signal intelligence and drive and, from that pool of exam-takers, select apprentices? Then make the apprentices work for 10 years or something.
It’d be cheap, it’d be effective. It would make society better off.
Not Unreasonable 