This is a first year accounting course with an enrolment of 670 students. ... Cost
Accounting, 12th edition, 2007, Horngren et al. Course: Accounting and ...
Aalto University, Finland Submitted by: Jouko Karjalainen, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management
Course:
Textbook in use:
Accounting and Profitability
Cost Accounting, 12th edition, 2007, Horngren et al.
Type of data collected: Results and student feedback During which period: 2009–10
MyAccountingLab course structure Course design This is a first year accounting course with an enrolment of 670 students. There are two lectures per week during a seven week period; the second weekly lecture focuses on techniques needed in exercises. Eight homework problems are issued each week in MyAccountingLab, a minimum score of 50% is required to pass. There is a voluntary test in MyAccountingLab and a conventional final exam. There are three part-time teaching assistants. We adopted MyAccountingLab to motivate students to solve a solid amount of problems independently, learning by practising. It offers the opportunity to practise throughout the academic year, 24/7. Assessment Assessment is mainly summative (formative only in special cases). Points earned in MyAccountingLab weigh two thirds in the overall course grade. The final exam is one third. Implementation The MyAccountingLab resource is compulsory. Homework and Tests are used to create exercises with 2–3 levels of challenge. At the first level, I use no limitations (aids, time, or number of attempts). Due dates are used to remind students of the forthcoming final examinations. I change the due date after each final exam (five per year) or use the password. At the highest level, time per problem is limited and only one attempt
permitted, system aids are not available and no printing is allowed. Succeeding at the highest level requires working through the lower levels.
MyAccountingLab course results Anecdotal evidence Many students liked the system (see the statistics below). However, there were around 30 opposing anecdotes, including language problems for some students, and the amount of work. Only a few reported problems in using the system. Surprisingly many were annoyed that they couldn’t resist using the ‘Help me solve this’ feature. Therefore, next year I’ll add a challenge level where this option is not available. Statistical evidence Participation • 670 enrolled. • 510 completed the minimum amount of exercises (270 successfully completed virtually all homework). • 130 have not started or have only tried homework (= dropouts). • The hours-worked data supported the message that the working hours for exercises were slightly underestimated. Performance/results achieved (% passed) • 400 students have passed the course so far (the last final exam in September). • Results of the last two final exams were positive. The number of low-performers was lower than in the corresponding exams a year ago. The exam questions were comparable. There could be other reasons for this success, e.g. there is
Aalto University, Finland a deadline for students to graduate and this motivates preparation for the final exam. Time saved (assistants’ feedback) • Previously, significantly less-assessed homework. Now there is much more homework but no resources are required to assess it. Student enjoyment/feedback obtained • 70% (172 respondents) considered the exercises useful. 27% called for more, apparently formative, feedback.
30
• 84% clearly felt that a course that emphasises exercises and supports their learning is better than a course emphasising the final exam.
Conclusions I would recommend this technology to a fellow lecturer who was planning to teach this course because it can motivate students and enable richer assessment. Teaching resources can be used for more non-routine assessment tasks.
