Benefits and Opportunities in Mediation and Arbitration

RESPONSIBILITIES & LEADERSHIP

Education

The First Course
Students’ Perceptions of Introductory Accounting

By Clement C. Chen, Keith T. Jones, and D. David McIntyre

College accounting programs have experienced declining enrollments for some time. Some have suggested that the decline might be attributable to misperceptions about the profession, perpetuated by the introductory course’s failure to portray accurately the changing nature of accountancy activities. A study by Geiger and Ogilby (Journal of Accounting Education, 2000) surveyed students in the first introductory accounting course and found that the assessments of this class, by accounting and nonaccounting majors, declined over the course of the semester. Moreover, the most significant predictor of becoming an accounting major after the class was a student’s selection of accounting prior to taking the class, followed by a positive response to the instructor, the perceived usefulness of the course to the student’s career, and the student’s level of boredom in the course.

Considerable research supports a “confirmation bias,” whereby individuals more heavily weight information that is consistent with an existing perception. With respect to a student’s choice of major, initial impressions come from many sources, including family members, guidance counselors, and other respected individuals. To the extent that those impressions are unfavorably biased against accounting, introductory course instructors face an uphill battle in changing these perceptions; this makes it difficult to generate sufficient interest in those who might otherwise have an aptitude for accounting.

The authors’ study adapts some of the items in Geiger and Ogilby, and adds other factors often considered important in generating student involvement and enhancing the learning process. Geiger and Ogilby surveyed sophomores currently enrolled in the first introductory accounting course; this study surveyed a variety of students ranging from sophomore to graduate levels, all of whom had already completed the first course in a prior semester.

The results suggest that perceptions of the introductory course are not highly positive, and that students perceived the course to be less useful to their careers than did those surveyed by Geiger and Ogilby. Furthermore, this study reveals that sophomores thought the course significantly more useful than did juniors and seniors. It also underscores the need for an interactive learning environment that increases student interest levels.

Methodology. As part of a larger study examining students’ perceptions of accounting, the authors surveyed 556 students enrolled during the Spring 2002 semester at a large Southeastern university. The students ranged from sophomore to graduate level and were enrolled in various accounting and other business courses. As is typical, the first two accounting courses at this university are taken by students from most majors on campus, and by all business majors. Several survey items, primarily based on the Geiger and Ogilby study, were aimed at assessing perceptions of the first introductory accounting course. Students responded on a five-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Results

Exhibit 1 presents the questions about the first accounting course, along with the mean response grouped by major.

With the exception of item four, Exhibit 1 shows a significantly different mean response between accounting and nonaccounting majors. Item four indicated that the first accounting course was not as time-consuming as some claim, and accounting majors did not appear significantly more inclined to spend time on the course.

Two factors that might have motivated time spent on the course—the difficulty students had with it, and the interest they found in it—may have offset each other, leading to the similar results for majors and nonmajors.

Interestingly, when asked if the first course would help them to do well in their careers, neither group responded in a highly positive manner. Accounting majors indicated a mean response of 3.77, compared with a mean of 3.31 for nonaccounting majors.

It appears from these results that students don’t perceive much value from the course. That is, students are not really sold on the first course’s relevance to their career. Student responses were broken down by class (from sophomore to graduate student) to determine whether class standing had any effect (Exhibit 2).

Sophomores provided a higher assessment of career benefit than did other respondents. Compared to the juniors and seniors in both major groups, sophomores provided a significantly higher benefits rating than upperclassmen. The difference between sophomores and graduate students is not significant. It appears that graduate students, perhaps because some have gained work experience, assess at least a higher benefit to the first course than do those who are juniors and seniors. Taken as a whole, the results suggest that students do not perceive a high level of future benefit from the course.

Accounting students were also more likely to agree that the first course instructor created an interactive learning environment. This result was unexpected, because several different instructors teach this course. Another possible explanation for these results is that accounting majors simply had a higher overall interest level in the first accounting course. Regression analyses yield interesting results; interest in the first course is a significant predictor of students’ assessment of whether an interactive learning environment exists. In fact, the interest level overwhelms any association between major and students’ assessment of learning environment. Nonetheless, interest level explains only 28% of the variance in assessment of learning environment. Although statistically significant, this latter finding suggests that there are factors other than major and interest level that explain how students perceive the classroom environment.

Further regression analysis reveals that when the preceding model is reversed, both major and classroom environment are highly significant predictors of students’ interest levels. This suggests that accounting majors are inherently more interested in the first course, and that creating an interactive environment is likely to help make the course more interesting.

Another unexplained difference is that accounting majors perceived more performance feedback from their instructor on their course progress. One plausible explanation is that accounting majors simply interact more with their accounting professors. In addition, the results reveal that accounting majors were more motivated to do well in that course than were their nonaccounting counterparts. Although the survey respondents are at a large research-oriented school, most accounting courses (including principles) are not taught “auditorium style,” and class sizes are similar to other schools.

Analysis

The results suggest that many challenges remain if the first course in accounting is to generate sufficient interest and motivation to sway high-aptitude students toward accounting. Although it is widely believed that the first course is an important recruiting tool, most respondents were not overwhelmingly stimulated by the course.

A considerable body of research literature from psychology, performance evaluation, and even accounting suggests that two phenomena may occur when students form their perceptions of courses and instructors. First, the “confirmation bias” discussed earlier may occur, making it difficult to overcome students’ preexisting notions about accounting. Importantly, if a student concludes from the first course that accounting is boring, or otherwise gains a negative impression, this will likely be carried over into the second course. In many schools, the second course is managerial principles and has a much different focus from the first course. Although perceptions gained in the first course should not have an effect on perceptions of the second course, few would doubt that they do.

A related phenomenon, the “halo effect,” occurs when an impression on one dimension affects and biases impressions on other dimensions. For example, an instructor’s personality affects students’ perceptions of that instructor and the course. To the extent that such perceptions become biases extended to other courses and careers, there are implications for instructors and practitioners trying to stimulate interest in the field.

Based on the study results, there is considerable room for improvement in the first accounting course. For example, an interactive classroom environment may be an important factor in generating student interest. Apart from the interest level generated by the course or instructor, the more basic question should be, Are students convinced of the relevance of accounting principles to their career? Geiger and Ogilby found this factor to be relatively important to students’ choice of a major. The results in this survey are strikingly different; students, including accounting majors, did not believe strongly that the course is important to their careers. Importantly, the current study further revealed that juniors and seniors rated the course as significantly less useful than did sophomores.

Not all students will be equally interested in accounting any more than any other field. General attitudes, aptitudes, and motivation levels, among other factors, all have an effect. Presumably, the more that students are convinced of the likelihood they will apply the concepts in their careers, the greater their interest and motivation. Accounting instructors would do well to stress the importance of accounting principles to their students’ careers.

On a positive note, the Geiger and Ogilby study did not suggest that students changed their major from accounting to another field based on their declining perceptions; but neither did they appear to gravitate toward the field. If the first accounting course is to be a viable recruiting tool, course instructor assignment should be made with care. The authors agree with Geiger and Ogilby that the course must not only be more engaging, students must also be convinced of the course’s relevance.

Clement C. Chen, PhD, CPA, is an assistant professor of accounting at the University of Michigan – Flint.
Keith T. Jones, PhD, CPA, is an assistant professor of accounting at Eastern Kentucky University in Richmond.
D. David McIntyre, PhD, CPA, CMA, is an assistant professor of accounting at Clemson University in South Carolina.