Description: Learning excellence is of value to both candidates and credentialed actuaries learning new areas. Learning mastery and excellence requires 1) use of executive function (EF), multiple brain areas, for example, verbal, formal (algebraic), computational, and geometric (rule of four), and 2) goal-setting, skillful breaking down of complex tasks into subtasks each of which are simultaneously 2a) clear and specific, 2b) achievable in a short time and 2c) challenging. 10 examples are presented illustrating use of the "rule of four" to achieve elegant solutions to otherwise complex problems as well as goal setting using fellowship-exam approaches, approaches to multi-component problems, and skillful use of databases as visual organizers. The material reflects a new approach to learning complexity that is easier to use than the pedagogic hierarchies and unifies them.

Description: A typical course has some "hard" parts. These "hard" parts are the places where weaker students begin to fail, lose interest, and give up. The paper introduces a metric by which to evaluate each course topic. High metric values indicate "hard parts" of courses. The paper recommends spending more course time on hard parts and less course time on easy parts. The paper also recommends using disclosure: Tell students - this part of the course is "hard" and they may feel uncomfortable which is why more time is being spent on it." This approach to hard parts works! Failure rates are significantly reduced, while retention, satisfaction, and student scores improve.

Description: Article describes accomplishments as Chair during the year. Four accomplishments are mentioned: i) Actuarial Research Conference ii) Early Career Award, iii) Establishment of Outstanding Educator Award, iv) Push to create surveys from the section containing a reservoir of ideas that can be used for webinars, podcasts, etc.

Description: This presentation proposes a solution to the student actuarial paradox “I mastered the syllabus but failed the exam,” by utilizing the two-dimensional syllabus vehicle which pedagogically focuses on the two dimensions of content and problem difficulty. This presentation advocates the PMR characterization of three levels of problems difficulty: Plug-ins (easy), Monkey-wrench (intermediate), and Research-type(hard) questions. PMR was developed by examining difficulty levels in SOA exams, and problems of various software vendors. The author's students routinely score high on the SOA FM exam; it is hoped that these methods will assist other instructors in their quest for good pedagogy. Very briefly: “Plug-ins,” refer to multi-part problems, for example, calculating the price of an annuity that is first increasing and then level; “Monkey-wrench” problems specifically refer to plug-in multi-part problems where one component is a monkey-wrench, an issue the candidate has not previously encountered. It might be a non-typical modeling or it might be a non-typical algebraic simplification or it might be an unexpected integration of distinct modules in a manner that the candidate has not yet seen. “Research-type questions” refer to problems requiring some type of experimentation for example, looking at initial cases, seeing a pattern and then applying methods

Description: This article studies the syllabus as a dynamic, interactive teaching tool that informs and is informed by both solutions of complex course problems and student difficulties with these problems.