Improving on Our Mission: Collecting Feedback

The Candidate Liaison Committee (CLC) mission included in our quarterly Future Fellows publication states, “The committee should advise the CAS and its committees of the interests of the candidates regarding matters that come before the CAS and its committees.” As currently written, our mission does not call out the work we do to collect a broad range of feedback from candidates sitting for CAS examinations.

In my last year as chairperson, the CLC have become increasingly focused on new goals of improving how we can collect, summarize and prioritize feedback from candidates, and how we share it with other CAS committees to influence decisions on and improvements upon the current examination and admission processes.

How We Collect Feedback

Older issues of Future Fellows and its predecessor, The CAS Student Newsletter, published a letters to the editor section. These days the CLC still wants direct contact from students, but we get very few questions through our online feedback form. In this issue of Future Fellows, we want to reintroduce ourselves as a resource for candidates and hope you will use our future surveys and direct email options to share your feedback in the future.

Over my time with the CLC, we have employed five primary methods to get candidate feedback about the current exam process:

1. Exam surveys. While the Syllabus & Examination Committee (SECOM) does spend a lot of time reviewing the details in the examination surveys, they may have a different perspective than those taking the exams. In our quarterly meetings, the CLC also receives a copy of the surveys including all comments and we discuss what we see as some of the important points for each exam.
2.    
   • CLC Candidate Representatives. Part of the CLC volunteer group is made up of candidates who have sat for at least one CAS exam but have not yet received their ACAS designation. Our candidate representatives include both those who progress quickly through the exams and those who struggle. These representatives are highly committed to helping improve the exam process for all candidates and volunteer their time between their daily jobs and sitting for CAS exams.
   •    
     • Colleagues and connections. Committee members often hear concerns from their coworkers. At times, we actively solicit feedback from our coworkers on more pressing questions. After the Exam 5 TBE sitting, many of us met with focus groups of candidates and their managers to learn about the issues of that exam administration.
     •    
       • Social media. We do monitor discussions on the Actuarial Outpost, especially immediately after exam administration through the end of the appeals process. Within our committee, we have volunteers specifically focused on different sections of the Outpost. We are also keeping an eye on Reddit as we are starting to see more use of that forum.
       • Surveys. Prior to our major survey initiative this summer, we did get some candidate feedback through surveys that other CAS committees would send to candidates. In some cases, we were able to help suggest specific questions to be included.

How We Summarize and Prioritize Feedback

Standing topics to discuss at our CLC quarterly meetings are the Exam Surveys and social media monitoring. We note new and recurring feedback on issues that are challenges for candidates moving through the exams and admissions processes.

We also discuss specific questions we receive from the SECOM or the VP-Admissions. This may happen during quarterly meetings or in ad hoc conversations on our committee email list, which we use to raise immediate concerns without waiting for the quarterly meeting.

The CLC Annual Survey and Hot Topics Surveys that started this year have resulted in a new process of summarizing and prioritizing feedback. Sarah Manuel, a volunteer with the New Members Committee, dedicated a lot of time to creating the surveys and working with the CLC volunteers and CAS staff to administer them. This involved proofing and testing the surveys pre-launch and coordinating CLC volunteers to review the multiple-choice and free-form survey responses with a goal of summarizing and recommending actions based on the results. Summarizing survey results started in September 2019; detailed analysis of each question was supported by Elizabeth End, Chip McCleary, Nate Williams and Laura Hemmer. This was more effort than I anticipated and I’m doing what I can to add volunteers to the CLC to support more of this in the next year.

One thing that we learned was that several survey respondents said that they were acquainted with an ACAS who knew the material extremely well but had given up on the exams. I personally helped summarize survey questions related to whether the additional effort to pursue FCAS designation is worth it. As someone who struggled through my last two exams, I had often asked myself this question. It was interesting to read about the broad range of challenges candidates face in pursuing this goal and what motivates them to keep trying on those FCAS-level exams. Most readers would not be surprised that the key motivator was not really a perception of additional knowledge but an expectation of higher salary potential. These surveys help us tabulate sentiment in a way that is more well-balanced than reading isolated posts on social media.

How We Share Feedback

We have two primary avenues for sharing feedback:

• Monthly SECOM meetings. Each year, two of our volunteers who have already received the FCAS designation act as liaisons to the monthly SECOM meetings. A standing item on the SECOM agenda is an update from the CAS; in those meetings our liaisons can share the feedback that we believe is important. The SECOM also discusses current challenges or plans for change that can result in questions that our liaisons bring to the CLC for more feedback.
• Direct communication with the VP-Admissions and SECOM Chairperson. When appropriate, we immediately share concerns. As the chairperson, I also reach out to both parties to identify any other topics in candidate feedback that may interest them. Historically, we have discussed these topics in our meetings and solicited input from our colleagues, but recently, we’ve included some of these questions in our surveys.

We are planning more formal actions based on our survey responses. The first step is to share an executive summary, details on the results and recommended action steps with VP-Admissions Jeanne Crowell and the SECOM Chairperson Jason Russ.

At our annual December in-person meeting, we will have discussed next-step recommendations that the CLC can take to improve two-way communication with candidates over the upcoming year. Finally, we will be posting survey results on the CAS website for our readers and other interested CAS members to see what candidates are thinking as well as some of our recommended action steps, such as focused, short Hot Topic Surveys and changes to annual survey questions.

 In the future, we also want to share the feedback with the candidates. Experience shows that we are more likely to receive honest, open feedback and great ideas from others when we show that we’ve listened to what we’ve been told. Furthermore, we’d like all candidates to feel they are part of a community and are not alone in facing the challenges of the exams.

Tell Us What You Think

Your feedback does have an impact on the exam and admission processes. We want to know what you think about CAS exams and admissions as well as the ever-changing career landscape for actuaries. The best feedback is the kind that includes actionable ideas for change, not just statements of problems. Tell us what could be done differently and what would have made the exam problem or syllabus content better or less frustrating. We read your concerns and try to come up with ideas for change, but we also welcome your ideas.   Thank you for reading! We hope you will share your thoughts, concerns and questions with us. Please use the CAS contact form.