determinants of performance in advanced undergraduate management accounting: an empirical...

Accounting and Finance 42 (2002) 27–40

© AAANZ, 2002. Published by Blackwell Publishing.

Blackwell Publishing108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and 350 Main Street, Malden MA 02148, USA.ACFIAccounting & Finance0810-5391© The Accounting Association of Australia and New Zeland, 2002421March 2002002L. G. Drennan, F. H. Rohde / Accounting and Finance 42 (2002) 000–000L. G. Drennan, F. H. Rohde / Accounting and Finance 42 (2002) 000–000Original Article00Graphicraft Limited, Hong Kong

Determinants of performance in advanced undergraduate management accounting: An empirical investigation

L. G. Drennana, F. H. Rohdeb

aBusiness School, Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland 4229, Australia bSchool of Commerce, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia

Abstract

This exploratory study empirically investigates the performance of students inadvanced management accounting. Findings are that English language as thefirst or subsequent language has no differential impact on introductory levelperformance. However, at advanced levels and in other subjects requiring theapplication of concepts to unfamiliar situations, students whose first language wasEnglish outperformed others. Similarly, students who had studied prerequisitesubjects at the same university outperformed their exempted colleagues (bothoverseas and local) in advanced management accounting. These findings indicatethat the difference due to language differences may not actually be due to lan-guage, but rather that language may simply be proxying for something else suchas a different learning style.

Key words: Accounting education; English language; Exemptions; Differential performance; Advanced management accounting

JEL classification: M49

1. Introduction

In 1999 there were approximately 84,000 full fee paying overseas students atAustralian universities, with almost half of these students enrolled in businessdisciplines.1 University faculty and administrators go to considerable effort to

We would like to thank the editor and the reviewers for their comments and suggestions onearlier versions of the manuscript.1 Source of these data is ‘Overseas Student Statistics 1999’ published by the AustralianInternational Education Foundation, DETYA, 2000. Of these 84,000, almost 58,000 werestudying on Australian soil. Preliminary figures from ‘Overseas Student Statistics 2000’ tobe published by the Australian International Education Foundation, DETYA, 2001 indicatethat in the year 2000 there were approximately 101,500 full fee paying overseas students atAustralian universities with almost 70,000 studying on Australian soil.

28 L. G. Drennan, F. H. Rohde / Accounting and Finance 42 (2002) 27– 40

© AAANZ, 2002

ensure that overseas students can take their places in Australian universitiesconfidently expecting educational outcomes of similar quality to those of localstudents. Early steps in the admissions process are aimed at making it possiblefor students to achieve their educational goals. These steps include setting Englishlanguage entry standards that are appropriate for the demands of the various dis-ciplines2, as well as ensuring that prerequisite subject skills are already in placewhere required.

Given the efforts made to integrate overseas students into the student body, itis therefore of considerable concern that anecdotal reports suggest that overseasstudents experience difficulties meeting the requirements of some subjects. Thegenesis of this study was an attempt to confirm the reality of these anecdotesby empirically examining data describing the students and their results in anadvanced undergraduate management accounting subject. The findings haveimportant implications for Australia’s tertiary education collaboration with othercountries, and are reported in the hope that a better understanding of the issuesfacing students and educators will further the development of strategies aimedat delivering quality educational outcomes for all students.

The performance investigated in this study was in an advanced undergraduatemanagement accounting subject, whose content is generally regarded as challeng-ing because it includes a requirement for interpreting and applying concepts inunfamiliar contexts (Perera and Harrison, 1995). Management accounting in thelate 1990’s is a subject characterised by few rules and many changes, demandingboth quantitative skills and behavioural insights for its application.

In this paper, we examine two variables identified anecdotally with the diffi-culties experienced by some overseas students when studying in Australia. Thevariables are the student’s English language status, and the granting of anexemption from undertaking prerequisite subjects. Both are issues that arise atthe entry point to the university, and both can be dealt with in ways that shouldminimise possible disadvantage. This exploratory study investigates whetherlanguage is associated with differential outcomes in students’ performance insubjects requiring interpretive skills beyond the abstract manipulation of text-book constructs. It examines the relation between students’ results in advancedundergraduate management accounting, and their results in, or exemption from,the prerequisite introductory management accounting subject, and of English asa first or subsequent language.

In the following sections of this paper, we discuss previous related research anddevelop exploratory propositions about the impact of exemptions and languagedifferences on students’ performance. The sample and method of the study arethen described, and statistical results are presented. The paper concludes with a

2 An IELTS score of 6.5 indicates that a student’s English language is ‘probably acceptable’for the less linguistically demanding disciplines (agriculture, mathematics, and computerstudies) but that they will require further English study to cope adequately with the morelinguistically demanding disciplines (medicine, law, and journalism).

L. G. Drennan, F. H. Rohde / Accounting and Finance 42 (2002) 27– 40 29

© AAANZ, 2002

discussion of the implications of the findings, limitations are noted, and suggestionsare made for areas of future research.

2. Prior research

Research in the area of student performance in accounting programs hasexplored the impact of prior accounting knowledge, obtained through highschool study, on outcomes in first year financial accounting subjects (see forexample, Rohde and Kavanagh, 1996a; Auyeung, 1991; Keef, 1992). This researchindicates that the study of accounting at high school and academic ability arethe most significant factors determining students’ results in their first financialaccounting subject undertaken at tertiary level. A small number of studiesinvestigate performance in advanced accounting courses. In the United States,Doran et al., (1991) found that prior knowledge of accounting was negatively relatedto performance in the second unit of accounting studies. Within the Australiancontext, Auyeung and Sands (1991; 1992) investigated the relation between students’results in first year accounting and their results in subsequent financial account-ing courses. Contrary to the findings of Doran et al., (1991), Auyeung and Sands(1991; 1992) observed that students’ introductory results have a positive and sig-nificant effect on their results in advanced financial accounting courses.

More recently, a number of studies have investigated factors affecting studentperformance in management accounting. Rohde and Kavanagh (1996b) foundthat the best predictor of students’ performance in introductory managementaccounting was their result in the prerequisite financial accounting subject.Jackling et al., (1994) examined the impact of exempting students from firstyear financial accounting on their subsequent performance in the introductorymanagement accounting subject. In some circumstances exemptions were asso-ciated with poorer performance, but the findings were inconclusive. There is nodocumented evidence about factors affecting student performance in advancedundergraduate management accounting.

Research into the area of management accounting education has examinedthe relation between exempting students from a foundation financial accountingsubject and their subsequent performance in first year management accounting(Jackling et al., 1994). In addition, a number of studies tested the effect of stu-dents not having English as their first language, but with conflicting results(Jackling et al., 1994). This study investigates the ability of students to proceedthrough advanced levels within the discipline of management accounting.

3. Developing propositions

3.1. Predicting performance in advanced management accounting

The first proposition is that students’ grades in advanced management ac-counting are a function of their grades in the introductory management accounting


© AAANZ, 2002

subject. Our aim is to replicate the findings of previous studies (see for example,Auyeung and Sands, 1991, 1992 and Rohde and Kavanagh, 1996b) that con-cluded that results obtained by students in prerequisite subjects were the bestpredictors of performance in subsequent financial accounting subjects. We assesswhether these findings hold for management accounting:

P1: A student’s performance in advanced management accounting is associated withtheir performance in the prerequisite introductory management accounting subject.

3.2. The effect of English language on performance in management accounting

3.2.1. The effect of English as a second language on performance in introductory management accounting

Prior studies of outcomes in first level undergraduate management accountingfound no difference between the performance of students with English as theirfirst language and those without (Jackling et al., 1994). We start by replicating theJackling et al. study for students who had completed the introductory prerequisiteat The University of Queensland and for whom information was available abouttheir first language. The proposition to be tested is:

P2: There is no difference in the performance of students in introductory man-agement accounting between those who have English as their first language,and those who do not have English as their first language.

3.2.2. Effect of English as a second language on performance in advanced management accounting

In investigating performance in introductory accounting subjects, Jacklinget al. (1994) noted that the subjects they researched were primarily quantitativein nature, and therefore, marginal deficits in English language skills would notovertly affect students’ results. The introductory management accounting sub-ject under consideration in Proposition 1 has a similar quantitative focus, but inaddition, begins the process of developing the problem-solving and interpretiveskills students require in the advanced subject.

Since the advanced subject under consideration in this research is both quant-itative and qualitative in nature, we argue that students who are working withEnglish as their second language may experience incremental difficulties. Thisposition is consistent with anecdotal reports3 of overseas students experiencing

3 These reports were primarily conversations with staff who commented that the proportionof overseas to non-overseas students appeared to be different for those students whoreceived passing and non-passing grades. The conversations also tended to indicate that theproblems were associated with the advanced subjects as opposed to the introductory ones.


© AAANZ, 2002

difficulties with the less structured, interpretive content and its application tobusiness problems. However, since there is no published research to supportthis proposition, the proposition is stated in the null:

P3: There is no difference in the performance of students in advanced manage-ment accounting between those who have English as their first language, andthose who do not have English as their first language.

3.3. Effect of granting exemption from the prerequisite subject

A large number of students currently move between institutions while complet-ing their studies. This movement requires universities to constantly evaluatewhether or not to grant exemptions from subjects based on prior studies at otherinstitutions. Before permission is granted to enter an advanced subject, astudent’s prior studies at other institutions would have been assessed to estab-lish that its content was an adequate substitute for the equivalent introductorysubject at their new university. The purpose of assessing the course content isto ensure that, as far as possible where an exemption is granted, the necessaryprerequisite knowledge of a discipline is in place. As a result, there is goodreason to expect that students granted exemptions would not be disadvantagedvis-à-vis their fellow students who have entered the subject by completing theusual introductory subject within the same degree program.

However, studies that examined the impact of granting exemptions have re-ported conflicting results (Loveday, 1993; Jackling et al., 1994). One reason forthe conflicting findings on this question may be that examining course contentdoes not address differences in educational processes and assessment approaches.Differences between Australian and some overseas environments, particularlyAsian, are identified and discussed by Ballard and Clanchy (1991), and Biggs(1997). Biggs argues that students whose previous learning has been solely inan Asian style classroom may experience difficulties adapting to the Westernstyle classroom. Within Australia, Perera and Harrison (1995) identify differ-ences between universities, contrasting unstructured problem-solving approacheswith the more structured textbook methods that continue to be applied in somesubjects and institutions. Thus, granting exemptions for content, without parallelconsiderations of process and application, regardless of the location of the ante-cedent university may result in students being ill prepared for the demands of aproblem-based advanced subject.

Mixed and inconsistent findings of prior studies again suggested that theproposition should be stated in the null form:

P4: There is no difference between the performance of students in advancedmanagement accounting who have completed the prerequisite and those whohave been granted anexemption on the basis of courses studied at anotheruniversity.


© AAANZ, 2002

3.4. Combined effect of language and exemption on performance in advanced management accounting

An increasing trend in Australia’s educational collaboration with other coun-tries involves offering students the option of completing their first, and some-times their second year, in their home countries before articulating into the laterstages of their degrees in Australia. One effect of these arrangements will be anincreasing proportion of students in advanced subjects in Australian universitieswhose first language is not English, and who enter via the granting of anexemption for the prerequisite subject4. Any possibility of there being a doubledisadvantage accruing to students studying in Australia under these schemeswould have far-reaching policy implications. We test the effects of differentcombinations of the two conditions on performance outcomes in the advancedmanagement accounting subject. The proposition is again stated in the null,since there is no prior research to suggest otherwise:

P5: The separate and combined effects of both language and exemption haveno effect on the performance of students in advanced management accounting.

4. Method

4.1. Population and data collection

The 1997 enrolment in advanced undergraduate management accounting at theUniversity of Queensland comprised 367 students who completed the assess-ment. For each student the following details were extracted from student records:information relating to their first language, admission details, and their results inor exemption from prerequisite subjects.

4.2. Variables

The dependent variable in this study is the grade in advanced undergraduatemanagement accounting. Students are awarded a grade of one through seven(with seven being the best) based on their performance in the subject through-out the semester. Descriptive statistics of all variables used in empirical testsare shown in Table 1. Students’ grades in the prerequisite subject, introduc-tory management accounting, are expressed as a ranking of three through

4 While some Australian universities actually offer their own subjects offshore, others(including our own University) assess the subjects offered in overseas Universities andmake a determination of their equivalence to the relevant local subject. Where this practiceis adopted, the student’s academic record indicates an exemption from the equivalent localsubject, not a credit for the same subject. Thus, whether the student studied the equivalentsubject in Australia or offshore, the exemption process is identical.


© AAANZ, 2002

seven.5 Where an exemption has been granted on the basis of obtaining thesame knowledge in a similar subject at another university, there is no grade forthe student for that subject. This independent variable, exempt, was coded onefor students who had entered the advanced subject on the basis of an exemptionand zero for students who had studied the prerequisite at the current institution. Theindependent variable indicating whether a student has English as a first languageis dichotomous, with possible answers being either ‘yes’ (coded as zero), or ‘no’(coded as one).

5. Results

The correlation matrix is presented in Table 2. The matrix presents the correla-tions between a student’s performance in advanced management accounting andtheir entry and language status. The matrix also presents for the 303 studentswho completed the prerequisite at the current institution, the correlation betweentheir introductory and advanced results and also the correlation between lan-guage and their performance in the introductory subject.

5.1. Predicting performance in advanced management accounting – replication

For the 303 students who completed the prerequisite and advanced manage-ment accounting at the same institution the correlation matrix (Table 2) reveals

5 No student who fails introductory management accounting (i.e. receives a grade of 1 or 2)can proceed to the advanced subject.

Table 1Descriptive data for variables

AdvResult IntroResult Language* Exempt*

Mean 4.31 4.75 NA NAMedian 4 5 0 0Mode 4 4 0 0Std Dev 1.3 1.000 NA NASkewness 0.325 0.628 NA NAKurtosis 0.261 −0.271 NA NAMin 1 3 0 0Max 7 7 1 1n = 367 303 367 367

*These variables are ordinal data, thus certain descriptive statistics are not applicable AdvResult – grade achieved in advanced management accounting (1 through 7)IntroResult – grade achieved in introductory management accounting (3 through 7)Language – whether English was first language (0) or not first language (1)Exempt – whether students were not exempted from prerequisite (0) or exempted from it (1)


© AAANZ, 2002

a significant positive correlation (Pearson coefficient = 0.554, p = 0.000). Thisresult indicates that a student’s performance in advanced management account-ing is significantly associated with their performance in the introductory sub-ject. This finding is consistent with Auyeung and Sands (1991) and indicatesthat students’ results in introductory management accounting are a significantindicator of their results in advanced management accounting. Thus, there issupport for proposition 1.

5.2. Impact of language on performance in management accounting

5.2.1. Impact of language on performance in introductory management accounting

The correlation matrix (Table 2) indicates that English as a student’s first orsubsequent language is not associated with differential performance in theintroductory subject (Point-biserial correlation coefficient = −0.047, p = 0.420).Unfortunately predicting no difference and finding no difference does notpermit the conclusion that there is no difference6. The findings of this study,however, are consistent with Jackling et al., (1994), who also found no associ-ation between language and performance at introductory levels of accountingstudy.

5.2.2. Impact of language on performance in advanced management accounting

The correlation matrix (Table 2) indicates that English as a student’s first orsubsequent language is significantly negatively associated with differential

6 This arises from the problems with testing a no effects hypothesis.

Table 2Point-biserial Correlation coefficients (level of significance)

AdvResult Language

Language −0.244 1(0.000)

n = 367Exempt −0.186 0.418**

(0.000) (0.000)n = 367 n = 367

IntroResult 0.554* −0.047(0.000) (0.420)

n = 303 n = 303

*Pearson Correlation Coefficient**Phi Coefficient


© AAANZ, 2002

performance in advanced management accounting (Point-biserial correlationcoefficient = −0.244, p = 0.000). This result indicates that students whose firstlanguage was English performed significantly better in advanced managementaccounting than those whose first language was not English. Thus the null formof proposition three can be rejected.

5.3. Effect of granting exemption from the prerequisite subject

The correlation matrix (Table 2) indicates that whether or not a student hasbeen granted an exemption from the prerequisite is significantly and negativelyassociated with differential performance in advanced management account-ing (Point-biserial correlation coefficient = −0.186, p = 0.000). This result in-dicates that students who completed the prerequisite at the current institutionperformed significantly better than those students who were granted an exemp-tion for the prerequisite subject. Thus the null form of proposition four can berejected.

5.4. Combined effect of language and exemption on performance in advanced management accounting

The model tested includes a dichotomous variable for the student’s entry status(exempt or not), and a dichotomous variable for English as first or subsequentlanguage. Recall from Sections 5.2.2 and 5.3 that both these variables weresignificantly correlated with a student’s subsequent performance in advancedmanagement accounting. The two variables for language and exemption statusare also significantly correlated (Phi = coefficient 0.418, p = 0.000) (Table 2),indicating that students who did not have English as their first language weremore likely to have received an exemption. Because of the potentially far-reachingpolicy implications of a double disadvantage for the recruitment and success ofoverseas students, further investigation in a multivariate manner needs to beconsidered.

Table 3, Panel A, reports the results of the ANOVA7 between the two vari-ables with Figure 1 showing a plot of the mean results (Table 3, Panel B) of thefour groups of students. Table 3, Panel A, indicates that when examining thecombined effects of exemption and language the results in advanced management

7 An ANCOVA (with GPA as a covariate) was considered, however, for the following rea-sons an ANOVA was performed as opposed to performing an ANCOVA with a problematiccovariate. The covariate was considered problematic because it may include subjects anddegree studies totally unrelated to the current degree (for students who have been here forsome time), and second, upon investigation, we observed that almost 70 per cent of theexempted students had an entering GPA based on as few as 0–4 subjects. (This comparedwith other students who may have had up to 20 subjects in Commerce, or more if previousstudies had been undertaken).


© AAANZ, 2002

accounting are still significantly affected by the exemption status ( p = 0.021)and are not significantly affected ( p = 0.105) by language. The interactionbetween the two variables is marginally significant ( p = 0.067)8.

From Figure 1 and Table 3 Panel B, both groups of students exempted from theprerequisite subject under performed relative to their non-exempted colleagues,but in the case of the non-English group the difference is very small. Within thenon-exempted group language has a clear differential impact, consistent withthe results described above. Clearly, the group of students who performed bestare those with English as their first language and who complete introductory man-agement accounting at the University of Queensland before undertaking advancedmanagement accounting.

8 Due to the possibility that the results may be affected by the over-representation of English-speaking students in the data pool, five randomly selected samples with more equal numbersin each cell was tested. For four of the five samples there is no change to the interpretation ofresults. In the remaining sample the results were all non-significant.

Table 3ANOVA between exemption status and language statusPanel AMain model

Panel BMean grade in advanced management accounting (standard deviation), by exemption and language status

Source R2 df Mean Squares F Value Pr > F

Model 0.069 3 15.916 10.057 0.000Error 363 1.583Language 1 4.190 2.648 0.105Exempt 1 8.457 5.344 0.021Interaction 1 5.328 3.367 0.067

Language – whether English was first language (0) or not first language (1)Exempt – whether students were not exempted from prerequisite (0) or exempted from it (1)

English Non English Overall

Exempt 3.75 3.79 3.78(1.00) (1.34) (1.25)n = 16 n = 48 n = 64

Non Exempt 4.58 3.89 4.42(1.17) (1.52) (1.29)n = 232 n = 71 n = 303

Overall 4.53 3.85 4.31(1.17) (1.44) (1.30)n = 248 n = 119 n = 367


© AAANZ, 2002

Initial findings indicated that language is not associated with differential per-formance at introductory level, but is associated with poorer performance onaverage at advanced level, implying the presence of some attribute of theadvanced subject that makes it more difficult for students whose first languageis not English. Ascertaining the source of this difference was beyond the scopeof the present study. Concentrating, however, on the possible differences arisingfrom language will only solve some of the problems. The performance, on aver-age, of the students whose first language was not English (whether they wereexempt or not) was approximately equal to the performance, on average, of thosestudents whose first language was English and had been granted an exemption.This finding indicates that the difference being reported by the language variablemay not actually be due to language and that language may simply be proxyingfor something else such as a different learning style. The relatively low amountof variance explained by our model (r 2 = 0.069) indicates that there are otherfactors that affect performance in advanced management accounting.

5.5. A post hoc test of performance in another interpretive-type subject

To ensure that students from non-English speaking backgrounds were not system-atically biased by the assessment or other subject specific factors found inadvanced management accounting, further analysis was performed. The perform-ance of the students who had completed introductory management accounting atthe University of Queensland was examined in relation to another subject alsoassessed as requiring both interpretive and quantitative skills. An appropriatesubject (with a similar combination of quantitative, analytic, and interpretive

Figure 1 Plot of mean results in advanced management accounting for four categories of students.


© AAANZ, 2002

performance criteria) was identified as Business Finance A, an introductoryfinance subject usually undertaken in the second or third year, after completingprerequisites in statistics and financial accounting. Of the 303 students in thegroup, only 283 had completed Business Finance A. The results are consistentwith the results obtained for the advanced management accounting subject. Thisfinding further supports the notion that some attribute of the content/processnature of the subject makes it difficult.

6. Discussion, conclusions and future research directions

This exploratory research identified and explored factors associated with differ-ential performance in advanced management accounting. Specifically, the studyexamines the impact of English as a second language and the granting ofexemptions from the prerequisite subject. The findings indicate that both factorsare separately associated with lower performance in the advanced manage-ment accounting subject, but that there is no evidence of the presence of adouble disadvantage for students who have both these factors. Its findingshave raised a number of issues, which have important implications for Australia’stertiary education collaboration with other countries. The ever-increasingenrolments of overseas students to Australian universities demands that weunderstand the educational environment and likely outcomes for this group ofstudents. As both international and Australian students study along side eachother, we must also understand the educational environment of Australianstudents.

Consistent with previous research, English as a first or subsequent language wasshown not to be associated with differential performance in introductory studies.However, where performance criteria include an emphasis on interpretation andapplication in unfamiliar contexts, there is evidence of lower performance bystudents whose first language is not English. In attempting to understand thefactors influencing performance, we draw on the work of Ballard and Clanchy(1991, p. 20), who warn that blaming language for the observed differences may be‘too convenient’ an answer. Bearing in mind that correlation does not necessarilyestablish causation, we surmise that the language variable we were able to identifyin the archival data available for this researchmay proxy for another variablesuch as students’ cultural backgrounds, and different learning styles traditionallyassociated with them.

Although we were unable retrospectively to identify cultural background asa variable in this study, examination of the languages spoken at the homes ofthose in the group with English as their subsequent language revealed that manywere from Asian-speaking backgrounds. The presumption that these studentshad also been educated for at least some years in a non-Western classroomenvironment is a reasonable, if imperfect, one. Ballard and Clanchy (1991)argue that the dominant tendency in formal education in the East and SoutheastAsian tradition is to discourage questioning either the teacher or the text.


© AAANZ, 2002

Advanced management accounting is a subject where there are high demandsfor unstructured interpretation and application of constructs in unfamiliar situ-ations. In particular, within management accounting, it is customary to developand analyse data specifically for the purpose of challenging a business’ statusquo. We speculate that the unstructured problem-solving approach of these subjectsis unfamiliar to students from Asian backgrounds. If this were correct, it wouldhelp to explain why the exemption condition poses no incremental problem forthese students over and above the apparent language-related (or culture-relatedif our speculation is correct) disadvantage. These students are unaccustomed tothe ‘learn by discovery’ approach, having been used to being first shown, andthen encouraged to learn and repeat, solutions.

Differences between the traditional learning approaches of Asian and Westernclassrooms are now recognised (Biggs, 1997). It is possible that the traditionallearning environment in Asian settings does not adequately prepare students for asubject which deliberately requires them to apply basic concepts in unfamiliar andcomplex organisational settings. We argue that the difficulties experienced by thesestudents may derive from the learning habits of their earlier education within theEast and Southeast Asian tradition rather than from language per se. Further re-search is required to separate these two variables and their impact on performance.Until this is done, language cannot be fully discounted as the source of thedifferential performance, either alone or in combination with the cultural variable.

It is apparent from the findings reported in this study that the disadvantage ofexemption applies to students from Australian universities as well as to overseasstudents. The explanation for differential performances by Australian studentstransferring between universities and obtaining an exemption from the introduc-tory subject is more difficult to explain. As Perera and Harrison (1995) describe,some Australian universities continue to present management accounting as a seriesof structured textbook techniques, but the University of Queensland is not one ofthese. Students who enter the advanced management accounting subject withouthaving the introductory year to become acquainted with the problem-solvingapproach may find they struggle with unfamiliar learning processes.

Our findings suggest that the apparent language disadvantage is actually adisadvantage derived from learning styles that are mismatched with the requiredproblem-solving approach. If this were the case, the disadvantage would thenapply to both overseas (mainly Asian) students, and to Australian studentstransferring from universities where the textbook approach still prevails. Thedata are consistent with this interpretation, but since we were unable to isolateseparate variables for language and culturally-mandated learning styles, this mustremain an issue for further research. One suggestion for further research wouldbe to establish if Australian students originating in the textbook environmentsto which Perera and Harrison (1995) refer, are the ones who experience difficultieswhen shifting into a problem-solving advanced management accounting subject.

This study should now be replicated using data from other universities. Itsfindings, although potentially important, have limited external validity by virtue


© AAANZ, 2002

of the population being a single group of students within one university.Furthermore, the low variance explained by our ANOVA model indicates thereare other omitted variables affecting the performance of students in advancedmanagement accounting. The findings suggest a number of areas calling for furtherresearch, including a method for separately identifying and testing the effectsof language and learning style as well as controlling for students’ inherent abilities.Another extension would involve a longitudinal study of a group of students as theyprogress through their degrees. Comparison between disciplines rated as requiringdifferent linguistic and problem-solving capabilities also has the potential toextend our understanding of the issues raised in this study.

Although different students may typically approach learning from differentperspectives, they ultimately must develop the same analytical processes to succeed(Biggs, 1997). The challenge is to identify appropriate classroom strategies tomake this goal achievable by all.

References

Auyeung, P. K., 1991, Secondary school accounting and student subsequent performance inthe initial university accounting course: an Australian study, Paper presented at ThirdAnnual Conference of Accounting Academics, March 26–27, Hong Kong.

Auyeung, P. K. and D. F. Sands, 1991, The relationship of secondary school studies and theinitial university accounting course to subsequent performance in an accounting major pro-gram: An Australian study, Working paper (Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland).

Auyeung, P. K. and D. F. Sands, 1992, Relationship of secondary school performance tostudent performance in the first and second university accounting courses: a gender-basedstudy, Unpublished working paper (Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland).

Ballard, B. and J. Clanchy, 1991, Assessment by misconception: Cultural influences andintellectual traditions. In: L. Hamp-Lyons, ed., Assessing Second Language Writing inAcademic Contexts, (Ablex, Norwood).

Biggs, J., 1997, Teaching across and within cultures: the issue of international studentslearning and teaching in higher education: advancing international perspectives, Paperpresented at Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia Confer-ence. Adelaide, South Australia, July 1997, pp. 1–22.

Doran, B. M., M. L. Bouillon, and C. G. Smith, 1991, Determinants of student performancein Accounting Principles I and II, Issues in Accounting Education 6, No. 1, January, 74–84.

Jackling, B., G. Russell, and A. Anderson, 1994, Student background and performance inmanagement accounting, Presented at Accounting Association of Australia and NewZealand Conference, July 3–6, Wollongong.

Keef, S. P., 1992, The effect of prior accounting education: some evidence from New Zealand,Accounting Education 1, No. 1, 63–68.

Loveday, P. M., 1993, Exemptions from first semester accounting and performance in thesecond semester course: an empirical study, Accounting Education 2, 143–150.

Perera, S. and G. Harrison, 1995, Management accounting education in Australia: a review ofthe current state, Australian Accounting Review 5, No. 1, June, 64–72.

Rohde, F. H. and M. Kavanagh, 1996a, Performance in first year university accounting:quantifying the advantage of secondary school accounting, Accounting and Finance 36,No. 2, 275–285.

Rohde, F. H. and M. Kavanagh, 1996b, Academic determinants of performance in first yearmanagement accounting, Accounting Research Journal 9, No. 2, 63–69.

determinants of performance in advanced undergraduate management accounting: an empirical...

Documents