Advisers may be given recognition for education undertaken prior to cut-off dates listed by FASEA but will require their professional associations to request its inclusion, according to the head of the education body.
Addressing delegates at the 2018 FPA Congress in Sydney last week, FASEA Chief Executive, Stephen Glenfield said the inclusion of the CFP and FChFP designations in recognition of prior learning was to serve as an example for the treatment of designations under the incoming standards.
Responding to questions from FPA Chief Executive Dante De Gori, Glenfield said the designations quoted in a recently released education policy statement “…were prime examples of designations where we know what was in the study undertaken and we are comfortable with that”.
“For all the other designations that are out there, the accreditation policy puts in a process to apply for certification and I expect that most of the major associations that offer education will come to us and we will assess those as quickly as we can,” Glenfield said.
Seeking clarification on the dates listed, De Gori asked if an organisation like the FPA could submit a designation that was offered prior to the dates listed by FASEA and receive accreditation if it was approved by FASEA
“That is correct. We chose a couple of examples we knew very well, it is now for the associations to make that representation,” Glenfield said, adding that while an adviser may hold more than one professional designation they would only receive a maximum of two credits towards the new education standards.
Glenfield also told attendees that Adviser Exam would be applicable for all practitioners but had yet to finalise the number of resits available for those who fail the exam.
“The exam is targeted at a level that we expect all planners to be able to do, and specialisation exists over and above that,” Glenfield said, adding that FASEA was looking at an exam structure that would require advisers to only resit the parts of the exam they may have failed.
If you were disabled, you would be given much more leniency with exams. Technically there should be no limits to resits, otherwise it is discrimination against those who struggle with exams. Failure to perform in an exam does not mean you will fail the client in the field, as your Tech Services support is only 1 phone call away. As long as you get your Statement of Advice correct, with the help of your Tech support team, or via your dealer’s support, the client is not at risk or disadvantage. This is yet another example of educators not understanding how things work in the real world.
This sounds like either a cop-out or just pure laziness (or both!). ‘It’s up to the association to apply for it’. In other words we will make things as difficult as we can with the hope that many couldn’t be bothered, all at the expense of the adviser. If FASEA were serious about all of this they would dig deep into the industry, look at the accreditations, education and all other formats of education and ensure those advisers who have worked darn hard over the years to educate themselves through various courses would not be disadvantaged. FASEA don’t care one iota about the advisers or the industry, rather what they are perceived to look like to the general public and their peers. ‘Hey look everyone, we are being big and mean and waving our big stick around like the school yard bully’. I would like to see these people in front of a client doing a plan for them. They wouldn’t know where to start!
I sound like a broken record, but at age 61 & 32 years advising my clients, never a complaint or issue over those three decades – my experience, professionalism and ability to provide sound and ethical risk insurance advice adds up to one big fat zero! I failed my Matric exam in 1975. I am simply not suited to the strict boundaries of academia and the pressure cooker environment of an exam room. Industry experience and client interaction skills will never be achieved via an exam and issuance of a certificate declaring you’re now competent and proficient in providing advice to risk insurance clients – the only advice I give.
Comments are closed.