a cooperative learning strategy

8/7/2019 a cooperative learning strategy

1/15

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

This article was downloaded by:

On: 10 April 2011

Access details: Access Details: Free Access

Publisher Routledge

Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-

41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Accounting EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713683833

Accounting education: a cooperative learning strategyJames W. Carlanda; Jonn C. Carlanda; Janet C. Dyeba School of Business, Western Carolina University, b School of Business, University of Alaska

Southeast,

To cite this Article Carland, James W. , Carland, Jonn C. and Dye, Janet C.(1994) 'Accounting education: a cooperativelearning strategy', Accounting Education, 3: 3, 223 236

To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/09639289400000021URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09639289400000021

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial orsystematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contentswill be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug dosesshould be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directlyor indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713683833http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09639289400000021http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdfhttp://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09639289400000021http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713683833


2/15

Accounting Education 3 (3), 223-236 (1994)

Accounting education: a cooperativelearning strategyJAMES W . CARLAND', JOANN C. CARLAND*'AND JANET L . DYE2' School of Business, Western Carolina UniversitySchool of Business, University of Alaska SoutheastReceived September 1992Revised September 1993Accepted April 1994AbstractThis paper reviews the experiential learning and learning-styles literature and applies it to accoun tinginstruction. The authors show that the majority of Sophomore accounting students display a learningstyle which is inconsistent with traditional teaching methods. An experiential teaching approa ch ispresented which utilizes a cooperative learning environment. This method resulted in improvedstudent performance.Keywords: learning styles, experiential learning, accounting, institutions

I never teach my pupils,I only attempt to providethe conditions in whichthey can learn.Albert Einstein (Walter and Marks, 1981,p. 1)

IntroductionThis qu ote of Einstein's seems to succinctly state the a ppa rently inherent conflict betweenteaching and learning. If the objectives of educators in management and business are tosup port the learning process, they ma y need to d o more th an simply teach; they may needto create an environment in which stud ents can learn. O ne of the most diff icult courses inmanagement education in which to create such an environment is the Principles ofAccounting course. Like many instructors, the authors have experienced tremendousfrustration in striving to make sophornores literate in accounting. This paper will exploresome of the issues involved in teaching accounting, examine the role of learning styles,and will present a strategy which the authors have employed successfully to increase therate of learning. The focus of the pape r will be changes in th e traditional teaching paradigmwhich can improve the learning process in accounting courses.* Address for correspondence: Dr JoAnn Carland, School of Business, Western Carolina University, PO Box2689, Cullowhee, NC 28723, USA.0963-9284 Q 1994 Chapm an & Hall


3/15

Carland et al.Traditional accounting educationTraditionally, accounting is taught passively by lectures and illustrations of problemsolutions. Practice sets and/or labs are assigned to simulate real-life applications, but thefocus remains on class presentation of concepts and problem solutions. This paradigm andits historic and persistent role have been recognized by the American AccountingAssociation's Future Committee (American Accounting Association, 1986). The traditionalview is that accounting is rigorous and many students are not sufficiently motivated toperform well. Traditionally, the expectation is that those students who succeed inAccounting Principles are those who wish to pursue majors in accounting, a minority inany principles class; those students who are achievement oriented and highly motivated;or, those students who work hard. Further, such students will succeed regardless of theapproach used to teach the course. The corollary is that those students who do not dowell are not interested in accounting; not highly motivated or not achievement driven; or,not willing to devote long hours outside of class. Such students will not do well, regardlessof the approach used.

Research in accounting education has frequently supported the traditional view. Manystudies have shown that key factors in success in accounting are past grades and gradepoint averages (Lavin, 1965;Astin, 1971; Eckel and Johnson, 1983; Dockweiler and Willis,1984; Hicks and Richardson, 1984; Ingram and Petersen, 1987). Many other studies haveshown performance on college entrance exams to be highly correlated with success inaccounting (Cattel and Butcher, 1968; Astin, 1971; Eckel and Johnson, 1983; Schroeder,1986). Yet further studies have demonstrated the value of student motivation and effort(Lavin, 1965; Uguroglu and Walberg, 1979; Baldwin and Howe, 1982; Schroeder, 1986;Eskew and Faley, 1988). One limitation of all of these studies is that they take as giventhat academic performance is equivalent to learning. Consequently, they focus on what ittakes to perform well in the academic accounting setting.Modern researchers in accounting education are increasingly recognizing that learningis different from academic performance and that the structure of the teaching paradigmneeds to change in order to increase the learning rate of all students. Many studies involvingapproaches to modify the traditional teaching approach have been presented in recentyears (Baldwin and Reckers, 1984; Baker et al., 1986, 1987; Brown and Burke, 1987; Togoand Baldwin, 1990; Campbell and Lewis, 1991; Knechel, 1992; Cottell and Mellis, 1993;Geary and Rooney, 1993). Despite this shift in paradigm, some researchers continue tostress the importance of student effort in traditionally designed accounting classes (Doranet al., 1991).Pressure on the academic community to change its traditional perspective of theeducational process is building (Arthur Andersen & Co. et al., 1989; Evangelauf, 1989;Ekroth, 1990; Accounting Education Change Commission, 1990). The authors of this paperpostulate a twofold basis for the pressure. First, the persistent lack of success of largenumbers of students in Accounting Principles is attracting attention from educators.Estimates are that 35% to 45% of enrollees in these courses fail to complete them or earnless than satisfactory grades (Doran et al., 1991). Secondly, poor performance of accountinggraduates in the profession is resulting in calls for classroom changes to emphasize thedevelopment of real-world skills (Evangelauf, 1989) such as critical thinking, oral andwritten expression (Ekroth, 1990) and active learning, problem solving and interpersonalskills (Accounting Education Change Commission, 1990).


4/15

Cooperative accounting education 22 5Innovative accounting educ ators are increasingly recognizing th at students have differentlearning styles and that those learning styles will inevitably affect their academic andprofessional success (Baldwin and Reckers, 1984; Baker et al., 1986, 1987; Brown and

Burke, 1987; Togo and Baldwin, 1990; Geary and Rooney, 1993). There are pioneers inaccounting education who suggest that the traditional paradigm must change toincorporate a recognition of learning styles in the pedagogy (Togo and Baldwin, 1990;Geary and Rooney, 1993).

The effects of learning stylesKarl Jung's (1971) theory of personality types forms the foundation for much of the fieldof cognitive psychology. Jun g felt tha t conscious me ntal activity could be sub sume d underforms of psychic activity that remain the same in principle under varying conditions. Hefelt that an individual's th oug ht processes tended to be either 'extraverted', atten tiondirected towards objects an d people in the environm ent, or 'introverted', atten tion directedtowards the inner world of ideas and concepts. He divided perceptive activity, the waysof becoming aware of things, people, events or ideas, into 'sensing' an d 'intuition' modes.People who prefer to stress the five senses, who see reality as only what can be seen,touched, or heard, prefer 'sensing' a s a metho d of perception. Peop le who perceive by wayof the unconscious, who tend to see things in terms of the whole, an d who em ploy 'hunches'are 'intuitives.' He divided judgment activities, the ways in which an individual comes toa conclusion about what has been perceived, into 'thinking' and 'feeling' modes. Thinkingis a mode which links ideas together through making logical connections. Feeling is thefunction of making decisions by weighing relative values of issues. The functions pull indifferent directions at all times. The dynam ics of the theory stress that individuals frequentlychange from one m ode to another as circumstances dictate, but that each person will havea preference for one m ode over the other.

Myers (1962) extended Jung's work to make more explicit his orientation towardperception an d judgment. She added the concept of an attitu de o r a preference for aperceptive or judgment mode. In the perceptive attitude, people are attun ed to informationgathering while in the judging attitude, people are more attuned to making decisions,seeking closure, planning operations or organizing activities.The four pairs of preferred modes of psychic activity evolved from Jung's work areextraversion versus introversion, sensation versus intuition, thinking versus feeling, andperceptive versus judging. Th e 16 perm utati ons of preferences are called 'personality types'or 'cognitive styles' and can be established through the use of the Myers-Briggs TypeIndicator (MBTI) (Myers, 1962). The MBTI is a widely used psychological instrumentwhich assesses an individual's preferences for the various m odes of psychic activity.Kolb (1976, 1984), building on Jung's theory of personality typology, identified fourtypes of learning styles which people em ploy. He d escribed the four types as illustrated inTable 1 . As the table shows, two of Kolb's four learning styles, the divergent and theaccommodation, would clearly benefit from a shift in the teaching paradigm awayfrom lectures and problem illustrations because of their strong preference for concreteexperience.Kolb (1984) correlated his Learning Styles Inventory with the M BTI and reported thathis convergent style corresponded to the MBTI extraverted-thinking style; the divergent


5/15

Carland et al.Table 1. Kolb's learning stylesThe convergent style Relies on conceptualization and active experimentation, andhas as its major strength: problem solving, decision making

and practical application of ideasThe divergent style Emphasizes concrete experience and reflective observation,and has as its major strength: imaginative ability andawareness of meaning and valuesThe assimilation style Emphasizes abstract conceptualization and reflective observa-tion, and has as its major strength: inductive reasoning andan ability to create theoretical modelsThe accommodation style Emphasizes concrete experience and active experimentation,and has as its major strength: doing things, carrying outplans and tasks and getting involved in new experiencesSource: Kolb, D. A. (1984) Experiential Learning, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, pp. 77-78

to th e introverted-feeling style; the assimilation to the introv erted-intuitive style; an d, theacco mm oda tion t o the extrav erted-sensing style (pp. 8 1-94).Keirsey and Bates (1984) developed four domin ant types of tempera ments from th e workof Jung, Kretsc hmer, Freu d, Adler, Sullivan, Maslow an d Myers-Briggs. Th e four groupingsare simpler to work with than th e 16 different types determined by the MBTI and areestablished by examining the dominant characteristics of each typology. The four groupswhich result, labelled SP, SJ, NF, or NT, are called temperaments. Keirsey and Batesnamed the temperaments for Greek gods who embodied th e primary characteristics. Thetempe ramen ts derive from a n individual's dom inan t preferences for sensing versus judgingor perceiving, and for intuition versus thinking or feeling. The temperaments can beidentified with the MB TI o r with the Keirsey Temperam ent S cale (Keirsey and Bates, 1984).Extrapolation of Kolb's learning styles to the temperaments elucidated by Keirsey andBates would result in groups with the characteristics displayed in Table 2.In a survey of business administration students, Kolb (1984) found that students ofmanagement or business administration tended to display the accommodation learningstyle. That style is one which learns best from concrete experience and from activeexperimentation.Accounting majors are different. Baldwin and Reckers (1984) found that accountingmajors tended towards the convergent style. This finding was supported by Brown andBurke (1987) who also suggested that accounting majors tended to prefer the convergentlearning style. Collins and Milliron (1987) found that accounting professionals pre-domin antly displayed the convergen t style and t hat the preference was independent of firmtype or practition er specialty. It seem s clear tha t m any acc ounting m ajors either self-selecttheir studies because of their learning style or that other learning styles are forced out ofaccounting program mes because of a lack of success. Tog o an d Baldwin (1990) found th atthe convergent learning style performed better in the traditional college level introductoryaccounting course. They emphasize that there is no evidence that other styles cannot besuccessful in an accounting programme or an accounting career. Nevertheless, theconvergent learners will have a clear advantage in academic performance in a traditionalaccounting course.


6/15

Cooperative accounting education 227Table 2. Kolb's learning styles extrapollated t o Keirsey and B ates tempera mentsTemperament Learning styl eThe SJ or Epimethean temperament Convergent learning styleThe SJ is decisive, a traditionalist, likes policies, rules, schedules, standards and isresistant to cha nge, but can be pessimistic an d critical and can prese rve useless rulesThe S P or Dionysian temperament Accomm odation learning styleThe SP goes into everything full speed ahead, is practical, flexible, open-minded,excited, enthusiastic, and a risk take r, but d oes not like theory or routine an d livesfor the momentThe NT or Promethean temperament Assimilation learning styleThe N T is a visionary and architect of change w ho enjoys complexity an d hungersfor competency, knowledge and mastery, but may lose interest in a task beforecompleting itThe N F or Apollonian temperament Divergent learning style

The N F is personable, idealistic, empathic, an d charismatic, focuses on individuals,and is participative, but makes decisions based on personal likes and dislikes

If business students tend toward the accommodation style of learning, one can expectsophomore accounting classes to be dominated by that type of student. All businessstudents need accounting skills for success in their future endeavours. Clearly a pedagogywhich is inconsistent with their typologies will hinder their learning. The authors positthat it is time for a recognition that the purpose of accounting education is not to evaluatehow well students perform under a given pedagogy, but to increase their learning. In orderto accomplish that purpose, the pedagogy should strive to accommodate all learning styles.

Experiential learningExperiential learning has been a concept of interest for many years to educators in a varietyof disciplines. Its advocates and its critics are many and varied (Hutchings and Wutzdorff,1988; Henry, 1989; Boud, 1989; Wildemeersch, 1989; Nelson, 1989; Peterson, 1989; Walterand Marks, 1981; Kolb, 1984). Experiential learning is defined as a sequence of eventswhich require active involvement by the student at various points (Walter and Marks,1981). There may be multiple learning objectives but the central tenet is always that onelearns best by active involvement.Jerome Coleman (1976) presents an excellent differentiation between experiential andclassroom learning. He focuses on the sequence of steps in the learning process employedin the classroom and in experiential processes. The learning steps which he identified andthe differentiation which he described have been validated by others in the field ofexperiential learning (i.e. Harris, 1979; Kolb, 1984; Seeman, 1988). Coleman describes thesteps in learning under a classroom process as:

(1 ) receiving information through a symbolic medium such as a book or lecture;(2) assimilating and organizing information so that the general principle is understood;


7/15

228 Carland et al.(3) being able to infer a particular application from the general principle; and(4) moving from the cognitive and symbol-processing sphere to the sphere of action.

Experiential learning, according to Colem an (1976), follows an almost reverse sequencing.The learning process involves:

(1) carrying out an action in a particular instance and seeing the effects of the action;(2) understanding the effects in a particular instance;(3) understanding the general principle under which the particular instance falls; and(4) applying the concept through action in a new circumstance within the range ofgeneralization.Coleman believes that the advantages of the classroom method include a reduction of thetime and effort required to learn something new. Its disadvantages are that it dependsheavily on the symbolic medium, which is usually language, and it depends upon extrinsicmotivation. O n th e other hand, experiential learning is time consuming; however, Colemanbelieves that it h as a stron g adva ntage in that it depends up on intrinsic motivation. M oreimporta ntly, C olema n believes tha t learning thro ugh the experiential conce pts is less easilyforgotten than learning through the information assimilation of the traditional classroombecause, '. . . the associations that embed it in memory are with concrete actions and eventsto which effect was attached, and are not merely associations with abstract symbols orgeneral principles expressed in abs tract symbols' (p. 58).Astin (1984) was deeply concerned by the motivation required for success in learning.He posits a theory of student involvement in which he maintains that, '. . . a particularcurriculum, to achieve the effects intended, must elicit sufficient student effort andinvestment of energy to bring ab ou t the desired learning and de velopm ent' (p. 301). Heargues that merely exposing the student to a particular set of courses may or may notwork. Astin (1984) defines student involvement as, '. . . the quantity and quality of thephysical and psychological energy that students invest in the college experience', inwhatever form th at tak es (p. 307). Astin's work supp orts a belief that experiential learningcould be a superior approach to education, at least for those students who require astronger involvement in order for their investment of physical and psychological energyto result in learning. Nevertheless, Grambsch (1981) found that schools of business havebeen slow to adopt experiential learning techniques.Both the divergent and accommodation learning styles function better with concreteexperience (Kolb, 1984). Remember that most business students are accommodationlearners (Kolb, 1984). Clearly they would be better served with a teaching para digm whichemphasized experiential learning concepts. Developing such an approach in Principles ofAccounting is eminently feasible.A change in accounting instructionThe authors have employed the traditional approach to accounting instruction for manyyears, but the result always seemed to be boredom and lack of attention within the classand failure to complete the homework assignment outside of the class; at least, failure tocomplete the assignment individually. Like many instructors of accounting principles, theauthors experienced a high failure and w ithdrawal rate. Table 3 displays the distributionof grades on final exam inations a nd the pro port ion of withdraw als from one of the author's


8/15

Cooperative accounting educationTable 3. Historic grade distribution for instructor 1-

Distribution (Ok)Grade 1988-89 1989-90 1990-9 1 TotalA 11 18 18 16B 45 32 29 35C 18 12 16 16D 0 9 12 7F and W 26 29 25 26

Total 100 100 100 100

Table 4. Historic grade distribution for instructor 2Distribution ( X )

Grade 1989-90 1990-91 TotalA 8 11 9B 17 16 17C 28 35 31D 17 15 16F and W 29 23 27

Total 100 100 100

Principles of Accounting classes over the last three years. Table 4 displays the samedistribution of grades for two years for classes of a second author. The basic need for atleast one fourth of the class to repeat the course was a consistent factor in other instructo rs'classes. In fact, every instructor of so phom ore accounting with w hom the au thor s havespoken over the years, claims a similar failurelwithdrawal rate. This anecdotal evidence isconsistent with published experience (Baldwin et al., 1989; Doran et al., 1991). There is nostatistical validity in this observation, but it implies that difficulties with sophomoreaccounting are systemic and perhaps universal.The authors had tried a variety of teaching techniques and approaches in sophomoreaccounting classes without success. All of those were minor variations of the centralconstruct: that is, added review classes, sessions and labs; extra assignments forlow-performing students; retakes o n examinations; more emphasis o n working problems;more emphasis on explanation of concepts; more practice sets; less practice sets;computerized assignments; etc.

In academic year 1990-91, the Accounting Department of the primary author becameso concerned with low performance that it decided departmentally to require weeklyattendance of all Principles students at a three-hour lab, monitored by a faculty member,in addition to the three-hour class meeting. That approach also failed to change the


9/15

230Table 5. Learning styles from a sample of sophomores

Carland et al.

- --Kolb's style Keir sey and Bates temperament PercentageAssimilation Promethea n 12Divergent Apollonian 16Convergent Epimethean 38Accommodaton Dionysian 34

Total 100

performance curve. The Accounting Faculty remained concerned about thehigh level of repeats in the courses, but were unable to find an approach which couldchange it.

As a result of research into teaching effectiveness unrelated to Accounting Principles,the authors began to gain a growing familiarity with the learning styles literature and withthe experiential learning literature. That familiarity led to skepticism about the traditionalperspective towards sophomore accounting. The authors wondered whether the learningstyles of the students were at odds with the methodologies employed.

To pursue that concern, the authors administered the MBTI (Myers, 1962) to their1991-92 classes and divided the students into the temperament classifications proposedby Keirsey and Bates (1984) and the commensurate learning styles proposed byKolb (1984). The distribution is displayed in Table 5.

As Table 5 shows, an extremely high proportion of the classes fell into temperamentsor learning styles which would prefer experiential learning constructs. Kolb's divergentand accommodation learning styles constituted 50% of the classes. The authors nowbecame concerned that the traditional perspective about accounting education would notbe effective with these students. That is, if significant numbers of sophomore accountingstudents display a learning style consistent with experiential learning preferences, the poorperformance in accounting classes might lie with the instructional methodology rather thanwith the students.

Cottell and Millis (1993) describe the use of a cooperative learning structure inAccounting Principles. This approach involved the use of small groups within theclassroom who work on assignments independently of the rest of the class. Cottell andMillis (1993) report improvement in the learning process from the approach and highlyrecommend it to accounting educators. The cooperative learning process, clearly anexample of experiential learning, has many supporters (Kagan, 1989; Johnson et al., 1984;Johnson and Johnson, 1989; Johnson et al., 1991; Cooper, 1990a, b; Hassard, 1990; Astin,1991; Nastasi and Clements, 1991; Cottell and Millis, 1992). These supporters almostuniformly embrace a maxim of McKeachie e t al . (1986) who presented a review of theliterature concerning teaching and learning in the college classroom. They conclude (1986,p. 63):

The best answer to the question, 'What is the most effective method of teaching?' is that itdepends on the goal, the student, the content, and the teacher. But the next best answer is'Students teaching other students'.


10/15

Cooperative accounting educationA change in instructional strategyThe authors decided to literally embrace the maxim, 'the next most effective method ofteaching is students teaching students'. To design an instructional strategy incorporatingpeer teaching, they organized a pedagogy around a totally hands-on approach. Therewould be no lecture, no problem solving, no practice sets, no h omew ork assignments. Theonly assignment made was a reading assignment of the text chapters. The idea was toengage small groups of students in peer teaching under a cooperative environment.There were four classes in Accounting Principles involved in the experiment. Two weretaught by one auth or, two were taught by a second au thor. The students were organizedinto four-person teams. Each team was determined by group ing students by learning style.That is, each group consisted of students with the same learning styles. At the beginningof each class period an assignment was made from the text. The students did not knowthe assignment in advance of the class meeting. Teams worked together to complete theassignment. At the end of the class, a quiz was administered on the material covered inthat class. Students had to take th e quiz individually. The stud ents worked together in acooperative environment to help each other learn. Each stud ent understood that he or shehad to master the concepts in order to pass the upcoming quizzes. Periodic examinationswere also administered individually based on several units of study.The class assignment included short answers for questions selected to reinforcetheoretical portions of the text and exercises and problems to reinforce concepts andprocesses in the text. The team s worked together t o complete the assignment. The instru ctoracted as facilitator and consultant, providing assistance only when a team was incapableof continuing. The members taught each other as they assisted each other in completingthe assignment. The peer teaching was reinforced by mandating that teams could onlyproceed to the quiz in a group. The hands-on approach was reinforced by mandatoryattendance. Students were not permitted to make up class assignments or to make upquizzes. The lowest grade was dropped, thereby permitting one absence. Students wereencouraged t o study togethe r outside of class in their groups. Stu dents were informed th atpreparation for examinations was best served by reworking class assignments and similarassignments from the text in their groups.Initially, the teams had trouble finishing the assignments in the allotted time. Thereseemed to be a great deal of socialization going on in the groups. When they discoveredthat they could not take the quiz until the assignment was finished, regardless of the time,they moved more rapidly. In fact, as the semester progressed, the instructors found itnecessary to adjust class assignment lengths upward as the classes were performing anincreasing amount of work in the allotted time block.The distribution of the class performance is displayed in Table 6 . Clearly, this strategydid not lend itself to statistical analysis. Tha t is, the performance of earlier stude nts taughtunder traditional methods could not be compared t o the performance of the experimentalstudents. Not only were the students different, the exams were different. There were twoinstructors involved in the experim entation, yet their subjective judgme nts were that thefinal exam for the cooperative groups was equally rigorous with those administered toprevious classes.Table 6 shows that the cooperative class had a stronger performance than the earlierclasses. The grade distribution would lead one to conclude that performance had beenshifted upward. Th at is, some Bs shifted into As, some CS were shifted in to Bs, etc. By far


11/15

Carland et al.Table 6. Grade distribution in the cooperative group (1991-1992)

Instructor l Instructor 2Grade Percentage Grade PercentageA 24 A 13B 19 B 19C 10 C 34D 28 D 20F and W 19 F and W 14

Total 100 Total 100

the most important factor was the reduction in Fs and Ws. As the table shows, adramatically smaller pro portio n of the classes for both instructo rs had t o repeat the course.CaveatsSeveral provisos are apro pos a t this point. The app roach used in this pedagogy d oes requireminimizing one's ego. The instructor appears t o be relegated to the role of a lab m onitor.Th at, of course, is not the case, in th at p lanning the class assignments and mon itoring theprogress of the teams is crucial to success. Further, the instructor must decide when toassist a team and when to deny that assistance. A mistake made in one direction couldimpair the peer teaching process, while a mistake made in the oth er direction could createextreme frustration thereby causing students to withdraw their interest. An un trained la bmonitor or graduate student would be unable to make such judgments effectively.Nevertheless, the instructor's role is considerably less apparent than the traditionalclassroom in which a professor is always at the podium, the blackboard or the overheadprojector.Further, this approach leads to numerous student complaints initially. Students havebecome so accustomed to traditional classes that they instinctively rebel when theirexpectations are not realized. Fu rther, this ap proa ch really requires a great deal of workon the pa rt of the student. Mo st classes truly d o not. All that m ost studen ts have to d o istolerate class lectures and presentations, share hom ework assignments and cram for a fewexaminations. Sadly, many students seem to be solely interested in obtaining certificationin the form of a degree: not in learning anything a nd especially not in work. Th e studentsinvolved in the cooperative class embraced its value toward the end of the semester, butearly in the semester they railed again st having to 'dig out ' information themselves; theycomplained about 'teaching themselves' rather than being taught.In or der t o successfully pursue a strategy of this type an instructor m ust k eep foremostin mind t hat he or she is the principal architect of the learning process. Stud ents not onlydo n ot kno w th e subject matter, they d o not know how learning takes place. Some canlearn passively without any difficulty, but others require a m ore han ds-on approach . Butbe warned: those who most need the approach will be most vehement against it in theearly stages.A major factor with regard to the experiential method may well be noise tolerance.


12/15

Cooperative accounting education 233Admittedly, a classroom filled with individual teams working and talking, together is noisy.The authors found that the noisier the classroom, the better the assignments seemed to beprogressing. Quiet teams simply seemed to work together separately. Noisy teams trulygot involved in sharing their ideas about the assignment with each other.Further, the length of the class period is a major factor because the cooperative methodis considerably slower than traditional methods. Two of the classes involved in thisexperience were night classes with three-hour class meetings. The other two classes wereafternoon sessions meeting twice each week for 75 minutes. The afternoon sessions provedentirely too short. The longer class meetings allow the instructor to make strong contactwith each group and to have enough time to ensure full involvement by the groups. Inthe shorter class periods the instructor had difficulty answering all questions from allgroups. More importantly, the shorter time period simply did not provide enough time toachieve full involvement by the students. Ten minutes were lost at the beginning of theperiod as students shifted into groups, traded greetings, prepared books and materials,read the assignment, and prepared to work. The last 10minutes of the class were lost to'clock watching' as student attention began to wander in preparation for departure. Thatleft 55 minutes of concentrated time which was simply inadequate. In a group setting withpeer teaching, each problem takes longer to complete than normally expected becausestudents must discuss it and compare notes about it.The real learning takes place in gaining insight from each other. There must be time forthe exchange of ideas in order to facilitate that process. The three-hour night classes provedideal for this cooperative approach. There was enough time for in-depth discussion andfor the instructor to answer all questions from all groups. Further, there was lesscompetition for student attention as few students had further activities scheduled afterclass. The mental readiness for an in-depth work session seemed to make a tremendousdifference.Like students, instructors have varying temperaments. That means that some will bemore tolerant of experiential constructs than will others. It probably also means that someinstructors will be more receptive to the idea of new pedagogic strategies than will others.ConclusionsClearly, this exploration was not statistically sound. Consequently, the results cannot beextrapolated. Admittedly, the construct used needs refining. Nevertheless, the results of thecooperative learning strategy clearly supports the possibility for success with an experientialconstruct in sophomore accounting.Future studies into cooperative learning might be better served by assigning studentswith different learning styles to the same group. Such an approach might blend thestrengths of the various types into a stronger learning environment. However, it is clearthat in any given class the distribution of student typologies will not be uniform. This cancomplicate a mixed grouping strategy because there are simply too few students in sometypologies to be represented in every group. Consequently, a valuable aspect of futureresearch might be to compare the grades of mixed groups to the grades of uniform groups.Such a study could reveal whether the stronger networks which result from uniform typeswork better than the blending of strengths of divergent types.For these authors, the cooperative approach has proven attractive, and they plan toemploy cooperative techniques in a variety of courses. The final determining factor for the


13/15

234 Carland et a l.au t h o r s w as a s t a t em en t o v e rh ea rd i n t h e h a l l i n a n ex ch an g e b e tw een s t u d en t s ab o u t t h esuccess o f the exper ience . One s tudent sa id to her f r i ends , 'I m a d e a g o o d g r a d e i nA cco u n t i ng an d i t w as fu n! ' O n e r a r e l y h ea r s s t u d en t s des cr i be s o p h o m o re acco u n t i n g a s'fun'. If t h e co o p e ra ti v e ap p r o ach h as t h e p o w er t o ad d t h a t d i m en s i o n , i t i s we ll w o r t hthe effort.

M a n y A cco u n t i n g t each e r s h av e a l r ead y ab an d o n ed t h e t r ad i t i o n a l m o d e . F o r t h o s e s t il lem p l o y i n g t r ad i t io n a l m e t h o d s an d w h o a r e u n h a p p y w i th t h e ir r e s ul ts , t h e co o p e ra t i vel ea rni n g en v i ro n m en t h o l d s p ro m is e . C o n v e rg en t l ea rn i ng s t y le s s im p l y d o n o t d o m i n a t ebusiness schools . I t is t ime to recognize that different learning s tyles cal l for differentpedagogies.

ReferencesAccounting Education Change Commission (1990) Objectives of edu cation for accou ntants. Position

Statement Number One, Bainbridge Island, WA.American Accounting Association, Committee of the Future Structure, Content, and Scope ofAccounting Education (Th e Bedford Comm ittee) (1986) Futu re accou nting education: Preparingfor the expa nding profession. Issues in Accounting Education, 1 (l), 168-95.Arthur Andersen and Company, Arthur Young, Coopers and Lybrand, Deloitte Haskins and Sells,Ernst and Whinney, Peat Marwick Main and Company, Price Waterhouse and Touche Ross(1989) Persp ective s on Education: Cap abil ities for Success in the Accounting Profession.Astin, A. W. (1971) Predicting Academic Performance in College, New York F:.ee Press.Astin, A. S. (1984). Student involvement: a developmental theory for higher education, Journal ofCollege Student Personnel, 25 (3), 297-307.Astin, A. W. (1991). VMI case dramatizes basic issues in the use of educational research, Chroniclesof Higher Education, 37 (44), A36.Baker, R. E., Simon, J. R. and Bazeli, F. P. (1986) An assessment of the learning style preferencesof accounting majors, Issues in Accounting Education, 1 (l), 1-12.Baker, R. E., Simon, J. R. and Bazeli, F. P. (1987) Selecting instructional design for introductoryaccounting based on the experiential learning model. Journal of Accounting Education, Fall,207-26.Baldwin, B.A., Ha nsen, How e a nd Wasso n (1989). Repeating the first college level accounting course:empirical evidence from four institutions, Journal of Accounting Education, Spring, 9-23.Baldwin, B. A. and Howe, K. R. (1982) Secondary level study of accounting and subsequentperformance in the first college course, The Accounting Re view, July, 619-26.Baldwin, B. A. and R eckers, P. M. (1984) Exploring the role of learning style research in acc ountingeducation policy. Journal of Accounting Education, Fall, 63-76.Boud, D. (1989) Some competing traditions in experiential learning. In Making Sense of ExperientialLearning: Diversity in T heory and Practice (edited by Weil and McG ill), pp. 38-49. Philadelphia:Open University Press.Brown, H. D. and Burke, R. C. (1987) Accounting education: a learning styles study ofprofessional-technical and future adaption issues, Journal of Accounting Education, Fall,187-206.

Campbell, J. E. and Lewis, W. F. (1991) Using cases in accounting classes, Issues in AccountingEducation, 6 (2), 276-83.Cattell, R. B. and Butcher, H. J. (1968) The Prediction of Achievement and Creativity, Bobbs-Merrill.Coleman, J. S. (1976) Differences between experiential and classroom learning. In ExperientialLearning, Washington: Jossey-Bass Publishers, pp. 49-61.Collins, J. H. an d M illiron, V. C. (1987) A measure of professional accoun tants' learn ing style, Issuesin Accounting Education, Fall, 193-206.


14/15

Cooper a t i ve account ing educa t ion 235Cooper, J. L. (1990a) What is cooperative learning? Cooperative Learning and College Teaching, I

(l), 2.Cooper, J. L. (1990b) Coo pera tive learning and college teaching: Tips from the trenche s, The TeachingProfessor, 5 (4), 1-2.Cottell, P. G. and Millis, B. J. (1992) Cooperative learning in accounting, Journal of AccountingEducation, 10, 95-1 11.Cottell, P. G. an d Millis, B. J. (1993) Coo pera tive learning structu res in the instruction of acc ounting,Issues in Accounting Education, 8 (l) , Spring, 40-59.Dockweiler, R. C. and Willis, C. G. (1984) On the use of entry requirements for undergraduateaccounting programs, Accounting Review, 59 (3), 496-504.Doran, B. M., Bouillon, M. L. and Smith, C. G. (1991) Determinants of student performance inaccounting principles I and 11, Issues in Accounting Education, 6 ( l ) , 74-84.Eckel, N. and Johnson, W. A. (1983) A model for screening and classifying potential accountingmajors, Journal of Accounting Education, Fall, 57-65.Ekroth, L. (1990) Why professors don't change. In Teaching Excellence: Towa rd the Best in theAcademy (edited by L. Ekroth). Stillwater, OK: Professional and Org aniza tional Developmen tNetwork in Higher Education.

Eskew, R. K. and Faley, R. H. (1988) Some determinants of student performance in the first collegelevel financial accounting course, Accounting Review, 63 (l) , 137-47.Evangelauf, J. (1989) Accounting educators plan to update curriculum, debate tighter e ntrancerequirements for CP As. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 35, May 10, A31-A32.Geary, W. T. and Rooney, C. J. (1993) Designing accounting education to achieve balancedintellectual development, Issues in Accounting Education, 8 (l) , 60-70.Grambsch, P. V. (1981) Business administration. In The Modern American College, Washington:Jossey-Bass Publishers, pp. 472-86.Harris, E. (1979) Effects of experiential learning on formal teaching and learning processes, AdultLearners in Higher Education: Equity and Excellence, 24 (3), 41-2.Hassard, J. (1990) Science Experiences: Cooperative Learning and the Teaching of Science, Men10Park, CA: Addison Wesley.Henry, J. (1989) Meaning and practice in experiential learning. In Making Sense of ExperientialLearning: Diversity in Theory and Practice (edited by Weil and M cGill) pp. 25-37. Philadelphia:Open University Press.Hicks, D. W. and Richardson, F. M. (1984) Predicting early success in intermediate accounting: theinfluence of entry examinations and GPA, Issues in Accounting Education, Spring, 61-7.Hutchings, P. and Wutzdorff, A. (1988) Experiential leanring across the curriculum: assumptionsand principles. In Knowing and Doing: Learning Through Experience, San Francisco: Jossey-BassPublishers, pp . 5-19.Ingram, R. W. and Petersen, R. J. (1987) An evaluation of AICP A tests for predicting the perform anceof accounting majors, The Accounting Review, 62 (l) , 215-23.Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., Holubec, E. J. and Roy, P. (1984) Circles of Learning, Alexandria,VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, R. T. (1989) Leading the Cooperative School, Edina, MN: InteractionBook Company.Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. and Smith, K. A. (1991) Cooperative learning: increasing college

faculty instructional productivity. An Ashe-Eric Higher Education Report No. 4, Washington,DC: The George Washington U niversity School of Education a nd H uman Development.Jung, K. G . (1971) Psychological Type s, translated by R. F. C. Hull. Collected Works of K. G. Jung,Vol. 6, Bollingen Series XX , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Original work publishedin 1921.)Kagan, S. (1989). Coop erative Learning Resources for Teachers, San C apistrano, CA: Resources forTeachers.


15/15

236 Carland et al.Keirsey, D. and Bates, M. (1984) Please Understand Me: Character and Temperament Types, DelMar, CA: Prometheus Nemesis Book C ompany.Knechel, W. R. (1992) Using the case method in accounting instruction, Issues in AccountingEducation, 7 (2), 205-17.Kolb, D. A. (1976) Managem ent in the learning process, Calgornia Management Review, 19 (l) , 21-31.Kolb, D. A. (1984) Experiential Learning, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.McKeachie, W. J., Pintrich, P. R., Lin, Y. and Smith, D. A. (1986) Teaching and Learning in the

College Classroom: A Review of the Research Literature, Ann Arbor, MI: The University ofMichigan Press.Lavin, D. E. (1965) The Prediction of Academic Performance, London: Russell Sage Fo undation.Myers, I. (1962) The Myers-Briggs T ype Indicator M anual, Princeton, NJ: Educational TestingService.Nastasi, B. K. and Ciements, D. H. (1991) Research on cooperative learning: implications for practice.School Psychology Review, 20 (l) , 110-31.Nelson, J. K. S. (1989) Generating integration and involvement in learning. In Making Sense ofExperiential Learning: D iversity in Theo ry and Practice (edited by Weil and McGill), pp. 101-15.Philadelphia: Open University Press.Peterson, S. L. (1989) Reducing student attrition: towards a more successful learning environment.In Making Sense of Experiential Learning: Diversity in Theory and Practice (edited by Weil andMcG ill), pp. 170-8. Philadelphia: Open U niversity Press.Schroeder, N. W. (1986) Previous accounting education and college level accounting examperformance, Issues in Accounting Education, 1 (l) , 37-47.Seeman, H. (1988) Why the resistance to experiential learning? Education Digest, 54, December,28-30.Togo, D. F. and Baldwin, B. A. (1990) Learning style: A determinant of student pe rformance for theintroductory financial accounting course. In Advances in Accounting: A Research Annual (editedby B. N. Schwartz) 8, pp. 189-99.Uguroglu, M. E. and Walberg, H. J. (1979) Motivation and achievement: A quantitative synthesis,American Educational Research Journal, Fall, 375-89.Walter, G. A. and Marks, S. E. (1981) Experiential Learning and Change, New York: W iley.Wildemeersch, D. (1989) The principal m eaning of dialogue for the construction and transformationof reality. In Makin g Sense of Experie ntial Learning: Diversity in Theo ry and Practice (editedby Weil an d M cGill), pp. 60-9. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

a cooperative learning strategy

Documents