Accounting students are familiar with a specific type of frustration: carefully typing into a spreadsheet cell while sitting in front of exam software that seems to be from a different era, only to watch the text vanish off the edge because nothing wraps. It’s a minor issue. However, little things add up when they are repeated under duress. Rebecca Gosden has vivid memories of it. She is employed by the forensic accounting firm FTI Consulting, and she previously took the Tax Compliance and Audit and Assurance exams on the previous system.
She immediately agreed to test the new platform when ICAEW asked. “I found the old system so clunky,” she later remarked, using the kind of courteous understatement that accountants seem to automatically employ. Reading between the lines, she was implying that an already challenging set of exams was made more difficult than necessary by the outdated software. Instead of studying technical material, students were using their preparation time to learn how to use a platform that should have been completely invisible to the experience.
In retrospect, it seems almost obvious how the new ICAEW exam software modifies that calculus. The platform now offers fully functional word processing and spreadsheet tools that behave as any contemporary professional would anticipate. For example, formulas automatically adjust when rows are inserted, cells wrap, and the sum function truly operates across a range of values. These characteristics aren’t unique. They are typical. The fact that they were previously absent indicates how far behind the previous system had strayed.
Julia Pope, an audit assistant midway through a graduate program at Mazars, expressed it more succinctly. She contacted ICAEW directly to participate in the trial, not to voice her dissatisfaction but to contribute to its improvement. Her main complaint was that the old program didn’t function like a true spreadsheet program, with cells constantly merging and formatting collapsing as soon as a new line was added. That word again: “It wasn’t the end of the world,” she remarked, “it was just clunky.” Students seem to have quietly accepted this as part of the agreement for years.
The new exam software is intriguing not only because of its features but also because of its design. Before the full launch, ICAEW asked students to assist with its design and refinement from the start, conducting live trials. That’s not a typical strategy. The majority of exam bodies make system updates behind closed doors and then make the changes public. The choice to conduct open trials, get real student feedback, and make necessary adjustments resulted in something that, by most accounts, feels like it was created for the users rather than just given to them. It’s difficult to ignore that difference.
Additionally, accessibility has been reconsidered. With the new software, students can resize the question and response sections to suit their preferences, change the zoom and color contrast, and use a question flagging system to make it easier to navigate a lengthy paper without getting lost. A notepad, calculator, and highlighter are all integrated and function as intended. They may be modest additions, but they eliminate friction at the exact times when students can least afford it.
The more forward-looking aspect of the story is the incorporation of data analytics software into specific exams, beginning with Corporate Reporting and Audit and Assurance. In the exam itself, students are now working with real-style client data sets, manipulating numbers and coming to conclusions in a manner that closely resembles professional practice. It’s still unclear if this completely bridges the gap between academic evaluation and real-world workplace conditions. However, the direction seems correct.
The integration of the ICAEW Bookshelf is equally useful. Students can now access their own annotated digital copies of course materials from within the software itself, instantly accessible and searchable, for open-book exams. The previous method of switching between systems, or worse, printed materials, was never the best. This is more organized.
Rebecca Gosden’s final statement, “I just wish they’d brought it in a year or two ago so that I could have done all my exams with it,” is what sticks with you after reading this tale. That’s not exactly a critique. It’s more akin to a grudging compliment, which is arguably the most sincere type.
