This article was downloaded by: [University of Strathclyde]On: 18 November 2014, At: 10:19Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Accounting Education: An InternationalJournalPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/raed20

You Want me to Teach What?Dawn W. Massey a & Dr Joan Van Hise aa Fairfield University , USAPublished online: 09 Mar 2011.

To cite this article: Dawn W. Massey & Dr Joan Van Hise (2009) You Want me to Teach What? ,Accounting Education: An International Journal, 18:1, 109-112, DOI: 10.1080/09639280802568012

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09639280802568012

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

You Want me to Teach What?

DAWN W. MASSEY and JOAN VAN HISE

Fairfield University, USA

Received: April 2008

Revised: August 2008

Accepted: October 2008

Introduction

After receiving input from recruiters and members of our department’s Advisory Council

during the 2002-03 academic year, our department—part of an Association to Advance

Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB)-accredited, private, Master’s-granting univer-

sity located in the USA—began developing a Master of Science in Accounting (MSA)

program. One of the seven required three-credit courses the faculty agreed we needed

to include in the year long, full-time program was a graduate accounting ethics course.

It all sounded good . . . that is, until we were asked to teach that graduate accounting

ethics course—in the autumn of 2006.

The Challenge

Sure, we had covered ethics in our accounting classes by integrating discussion of ethics

whenever relevant. Yes, we had an interest in ethics and even devoted a portion of our

respective research agendas to ethics research. But, teach a standalone accounting

ethics course? We had never done that before.

Since the mere thought scared the ‘bejeebies’ out of us, we did next what we figure most

academics would do: research and then research some more. To our comfort, we found

that our fear of teaching outside an established area of expertise was not at all unusual

(c.f., Gunz and McCutcheon, 1988). In fact, even though about 81% of respondents to

surveys conducted in the USA and the UK report including ethics in the accounting

curriculum (for the USA, see Blanthorne, Kovar and Fisher, 2007; for the UK, see

Ghafari, Kyriacou and Brennan, 2008), fear of teaching ethics has been listed as the

third greatest challenge that deters accounting educators from teaching the course (c.f.,

Blanthorne et al., 2007; Mintz, 1990).1 Unfortunately, however, our research uncovered

no roadmap to help us navigate our way out of the discomfort zone.

Accounting Education: an international journal

Vol. 18, No. 1, 109–112, February 2009

Correspondence Address: Dr Joan Van Hise, Associate Professor of Accounting, Charles F. Dolan School of

Business, Fairfield University, 1073 North Benson Road, Fairfield, CT 06824-7524, USA. Email:

jvanhise@mail.fairfield.edu

0963-9284 Print/1468-4489 Online/09/010109–4 # 2009 Taylor & FrancisDOI: 10.1080/09639280802568012

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

rath

clyd

e] a

t 10:

19 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

Plan A

Therefore, we drew upon our (former) training as auditors, and took a page out of the audit

playbook. As auditors (and, we believe, as faculty members), we have a duty to perform

our work with ‘due professional care.’ Moreover, in the audit environment, auditors are

admonished that they must have ‘adequate technical training and proficiency’ to

perform the audit.2 Taken together, these standards would require us to either obtain the

knowledge and skills we needed to adequately do the job, or bring in a competent

expert. Since the approval processes at our school and in our state are lengthy for new

programs such as our MSA program,3 we had the time available to initially choose Plan

A—obtain the knowledge and skills we needed.

Like many other accounting educators, each of us had earned both terminal degrees in

accounting and professional accounting certification; we were about to add technical

knowledge in the field of ethics. In public practice, one obtains technical competence in

a new field by a combination of training—namely, continuing professional education

(CPE) and on-the-job experiences. We developed our own version of CPE and on-the-

job training. Over the course of the next one to two years, we committed ourselves to

becoming familiar with the literature and the language of the field of ethics (c.f., Loeb

and Ostas, 2000, pp. 235–236). This required us to read ethics journals on a regular

basis, attend campus lectures and outside symposia on ethics4 and observe other col-

leagues (e.g. those in law and philosophy) teach ethics—the academic equivalent of

CPE. Naturally, such a substantial investment of time and energy may not work in

every situation. Nonetheless, for the committed faculty member, it is doable.

Plan B

Once we gained a baseline familiarity with the literature and the language of the field, we

turned to on-the-job training. We were not yet comfortable enough actually to teach a stan-

dalone accounting ethics course. We felt we needed additional help with our delivery.

Now was the time for Plan B—bringing in an expert. Indeed, Loeb (1988) recommends

a simple solution: team-teach an accounting ethics class with a colleague who has

formal training as an ethicist. However, for us (and, we suspect many others), it was

not that simple. While theoretically a sound strategy, budget constraints at our school

limit the opportunities for team-teaching (c.f., Hastings Center, 1980). We were able to

obtain first-hand classroom experience by team-teaching with a professor of business

ethics whose Ph.D. is in social ethics for only one semester.

Team teaching was invaluable to our delivery. It assisted us in identifying various active

learning teaching methods that the experts (i.e. ethics faculty) routinely and successfully

use in their courses. These included student-led classes; reflective writing assignments;

case analysis; and an interview assignment—all of which we incorporated and used for

student assessment in our course. In addition, team teaching served as a transitional

plan to help ease us into teaching the course on our own.

The Payoff

Following the team-teaching stint, we were ready to assemble our course materials.5 By

the time our MSA program was approved in the late spring of 2005, the networks we

developed by team-teaching, researching and attending ethics symposia proved invalu-

able. We found our faculty colleagues eager to discuss our ideas answer our questions

and suggest sources and assignments for our course.6 Even after we began running the

110 D. W. Massey and J. Van Hise

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

rath

clyd

e] a

t 10:

19 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

course, these same colleagues were willing not only to provide occasional guest lectures,

but also to occasionally observe the class (at our request) and provide us with feedback.

As a final note, we recognize that the lengthy time commitment inherent in the approach

we describe is a potential deterrent for faculty who desire to follow our roadmap in pre-

paring to teach a standalone accounting ethics course (or any course, for that matter).

However, we feel it is important to note that there also have been welcome benefits.

We have developed good working relationships with colleagues across the globe and in

other parts of the university (e.g. the philosophy department) with whom we otherwise

would not likely have had contact. Some of them we met in the planning phase of the

course, still others have solicited our advice for starting their own standalone accounting

ethics courses. As a result, one of us now regularly reviews accounting ethics manuscripts

for a number of different journals (e.g. Journal of Business Ethics, Research on Pro-

fessional Responsibility in Ethics and Accounting, and Behavioral Research in Account-

ing) and one of us now serves on the advisory board for our university’s Applied Ethics

Program.7 Furthermore, we have created a required ethics course within the accounting

program that has been very well received by the students. For instance, in their evaluations

of the course, students often make comments such as the following:

Loved the seminar format—only active discussion provided format for thought.

Discussion during class really helped me learn more and have a greater concern for the topic

and

Especially, the reflective paper is a good exercise.

Likewise, 96% of the students who have taken the course agree or strongly agree that

the instructor challenged them. Thus, to us, the rewards have made the investment

worthwhile.

Notes

1The first two are, respectively, a lack of space in the curriculum and a lack of adequate instructional

resources.2Technical competence and due professional care are required by the First and Third General Standards of

what was formerly known in the USA as Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS). GAAS was

adopted, on an interim basis, by the Public Companies Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB, 2001); see

AU Section 150. Subsequent to that, the US SEC (2004) ruled that GAAS and the standards of the

PCAOB are the same since the PCAOB adopted GAAS. Thus, the General Standards continue under the

auspices of the PCAOB. The same concepts are applied on an international basis to reliance on the internal

audit function by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB, 2007); see http://www.ifac.org/Members/DownLoads/2007_IAASB_Handbook.pdf.

3Gaining necessary approvals for our MSA program required affirmative votes at the School, University, and

State levels. Not surprisingly, the process took the entire 2004–05 academic year and meant that, realisti-

cally, we could not begin offering the program until the 2006–07 academic year.4Two examples include the Annual Symposium on Research in Accounting Ethics, which is sponsored by the

Professionalism and Ethics Committee of the American Accounting Association, and the Annual Meeting of

the Society for Business Ethics.5Although we have reviewed a large number of ethics texts, to date, none has met our needs. Pure business

ethics texts cover ethical principles but do not deal with the dilemmas that are unique to accounting. Those

that deal specifically with accounting tend to fall into one of two groups: (1) those that were written follow-

ing the ‘expectation gap’ period in the USA in the mid-1980s; and (2) those written following the more

recent scandals (e.g. Enron, Worldcom, Parmalat). While portions of some of the books are useful, it is dif-

ficult (if not impossible) to find a text that includes a principled approach to ethical theory and consideration

of ethical dilemmas both in public practice and outside public practice (e.g. accounting in industry). Many

You Want me to Teach What? 111

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

rath

clyd

e] a

t 10:

19 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

texts that focus only on public practice are largely code or case-driven and ignore ethical principles. There

are few, if any, accounting ethics texts devoted to ethical issues outside of public practice.6The course syllabus is available upon request from either author.7Our university’s Applied Ethics Program ‘integrates interdisciplinary courses, seminars, lectures, colloquia,

and workshops in the fields of professional ethics (i.e. business, healthcare, science, law, engineering,

education, and communication), ethics for the citizen (i.e. government, community, environmental con-

cerns, war and peace) and global studies (i.e. ethical dimensions of global health, environment, business

and humanitarian action).’ Students may complete courses as part of a minor in Applied Ethics or as

electives toward other majors/minors.

References

Blanthorne, C., Kovar, S. and Fisher, D. (2007) Accounting educators’ opinions about ethics in the curriculum:

An extensive view, Issues in Accounting Education, 22(3), pp. 355–390.

Ghaffari, F., Kyriacou, O. and Brennan, R. (2008) Exploring the implementation of ethics in UK accounting

programs, Issues in Accounting Education, 23(2), pp. 183–198.

Gunz, S. and McCutcheon, J. (1998) Are academics committed to accounting ethics education? Journal of

Business Ethics, 17(11), pp. 1145–1154.

Hastings Center. (1980) The Teaching of Ethics in Higher Education: A Report by the Hastings Center. (The

Teaching of Ethics I) (Hastings-on-Hudson, NY: The Hastings Center, Institute of Society, Ethics and

Life Sciences).

International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). (2007) Handbook of International Auditing,

Assurance, and Ethics Pronouncements. International Standard of Auditing 610: Considering the work of

Internal Audit, paragraph 13. (London: International Federation of Accountants).

Loeb, S. (1988) Teaching students accounting ethics: some crucial issues, Issues in Accounting Education, 3(2),

pp. 316–329.

Loeb, S. and Ostas, D. (2000) The team teaching of business ethics in a weekly semester long format, Teaching

Business Ethics, 4(3), pp. 225–238.

Mintz, S. (1990.) Ethics in the management accounting curriculum, Management Accounting (IMA), 71(12),

pp. 51–54.

Public Companies Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). (2001) AU Section 150 General Accepted Auditing

Standards. Available at http://www.pcaob.org/Standards/Interim_Standards/Auditing_Standards/

au_150.html (accessed 31 January 2008).

US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). (2004) PCAOB Rulemaking:Public Company Accounting

Oversight Board; Order Approving Proposed Auditing Standard No. 1, References in Auditors’ Reports

to the Standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (‘Auditing Standard No. 1’). Available

at http://www.sec.gov/rules/pcaob/34-49707.htm (accessed 31 January 2008).

112 D. W. Massey and J. Van Hise

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

rath

clyd

e] a

t 10:

19 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014