International Conference on Quality Of Teaching & Learning (ICQTL 2012)

Predicting Accounting Students Intention to Continue using Problem Based Learning

Azwadi Ali1,*, Mohd Shaari Abd Rahman2 and Akmalia Mohamad Ariff3 1,2,3 Faculty of Management and economics, UMT *Corresponding email: azwadi@umt.edu.my

Abstract Guided by the Theory of Planned Behavior and Technology Acceptance Model, we examined 114 undergraduate accounting students intention to further use an active learning method in their future course enrolments. The research model validated using the Partial Least Squares revealed that continuance intention to use Problem Based Learning in their future course undertakings, after being exposed to applying it for the first time can be predicted by attitudes towards it, perceived behavioral control and subjective norm. In addition, moderation effect of risk propensity was not significant to suggest risk-tolerant students exhibiting stronger intention to use PBL than risk-averse students. Therefore, understanding student composition based on their risk preference should not be a major concern for subject instructors to decide to use pure PBL or a mixed teaching approach as compared to motivating students positive feelings about it, making PBL easy to use and encouraging peer-coaching. Keywords: Active learning, problem based learning, student centered learning, continuance intention, accounting.

International Conference on Quality Of Teaching & Learning (ICQTL 2012)

1. I TRODUCTIO Active learning or student centered learning (SCL) has been propagated to be used in classrooms of undergraduate studies across many fields. Many proponents of SCL argue that active learning should supersede traditional teaching methods since students are expected to learn quickly and understand a subject satisfactorily when they are active in learning rather than being thought most of the time by lecturers. For SCL to be a success, students need to set their own goals for learning and determine resources and activities that will help them meet those goals [1]. In this context, problem based learning (PBL) fits beneath the umbrella of SCL [2]. Since its inception in medical education, PBL has received wide reception among other fields due to its provision of meaningful and concrete way to apply the essential principles of the constructivist theory [3]. In principle, PBL is an instructional approach that exemplifies authentic learning and emphasizes solving problems in rich contexts [4]. In preparing students to be ready with real-world situations after their graduation, PBL and other related active learning methods are deemed effective and useful. 2. PROBLEM BASED LEAR I G I ACCOU TI G Accounting profession revolves around solving queries and problems that are complex and evolve over time. Although accounting tasks become rather standardized when one is familiar with the basic principles and legal requirements, they are definitely a challenge to fresh graduates. Adopting PBL approach in accounting curricula is deemed beneficial to the knowledge development and performance of accountants through integrating technical accounting information with practical experience and promoting life-long learning [5]. In contrast, more traditional teaching methods tend to view learning accounting as consisting of rote memorization, which is confirmed by traditional teaching methods and heavy content-oriented workloads, easily leads to learning habits that are inconsistent with the development of generic skills expected by future employers [6,7]. In appreciating the expected role of PBL in grooming well-educated accountants, PBL or similar active learning methods have been adopted and researched across different accounting subjects including Accounting Information Systems [8], Management Accounting [9] and audit [10]. 3. RESEARCH MODEL A D HYPOTHESES This research model of this study draws from behavioral models by synthesizing Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) into Theory of Planned

Behavior (TPB). This approach of using a hybrid model has been adopted in many previous studies including electronic service [11], electronic commerce [12] and IT usage [13]. One main argument for combining TAM and TPB is to provide more explanatory power in their studies [14]; thus, the same motivation adopted for the present study in developing the research model as depicted in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1 Research model

Our research model postulates that intention to continue using PBL can be explained by subjective norm, perceived behavioral control and attitude towards it, whereas the relationship between perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness on intention is mediated by attitude. In addition, the risk preference character of students is hypothesized to moderate the relationship between attitude, as well as perceived behavioral control and intention. In the context of the study, attitude can be defined as the predisposition to respond favorably or unfavorably towards PBL as a result of being exposed to it. Furthermore, it is the result of how users or students perceive their experience in terms of ease of use and usefulness. Our hypotheses related to attitude are formed consistent with similar studies utilizing hybrid models of TAM and TPB including Karahanna et al. [15] and Venkatesh and Morris [16]; these are stated as follows: H1: Perceived ease of use is positively related to attitude towards PBL H2: Perceived usefulness is positively related to attitude towards PBL H3: Attitude towards PBL is positively related to intention to continue using PBL Subjective norm relates to individuals perception of social pressure to perform or not to perform the particular behavior in question [17]. In our context,

International Conference on Quality Of Teaching & Learning (ICQTL 2012)

social pressure on students may come from their fellow peer course mates, as well as lecturers who are familiar to them such as those teaching them in other subjects. Essentially, the more social pressure asserted on them, the more likely they will or intend to adopt PBL in their learning activities. Hence, we hypothesize: H4: Subjective norm is positively related to intention to continue using PBL The relationship between perceived behavioral control and intention has always been hypothesized to be positive. Due to its normally employed meaning being perceived ease or difficulty of performing the behavior and reflects past experience as well as anticipated impediments and obstacles [17], we hypothesize that the easier PBL is perceived by students, the more likely they will continue using it in their future course undertakings. Thus, our next hypothesis is: H5: Perceived behavioral control is positively related to intention to continue using PBL The research model also conceptualizes risk preference of students as a moderator in the relationships between attitude and intention. In this context, students who are more willing to take risk in something new to them will be more likely to further use PBL in the future in contrast with more risk-averse students. This is consistent with the findings on entrepreneurs who believe they are very competent at decision making see more opportunities in a risky choice, whereas those who are led to believe they are not very competent see more threats [18]. Hence, our final hypothesis is stated as: H6: Risk preference moderates the effect of attitude on intention to continue using PBL 4. RESEARCH METHODS A D DESIG 4.1 Data and Unit of Analysis The unit of analysis in the present study is students having been exposed to PBL teaching and learning. For the purpose of this research, 136 third year accounting students at a public university in Terengganu, Malaysia had been identified as the sample frame. Majority of the students were exposed to the PBL techniques for the first time at the university. In addition, most lecturers in the accounting department of the university are also new to the PBL teaching method. The specific course that the students underwent using the PBL method used in this research is corporate finance. Since there are several approaches to the PBL method, we admitted that complete steps of PBL were not taken in delivering the course.

An online survey method was employed to collect students answers right after they have completed learning sessions of the corporate finance course. Online surveys are regarded as advantageous since they can overcome place and time constraints and students of the recent times are very much comfortable with Internet technology. We had chosen Google online form to carry out the survey, and as such the students answered it in their preferred time during oneweek span. As a result, 114 usable responses were gathered and used in the data analysis. We also believe that the students were highly involved when completing the survey because they have just completed the course and hence their experiences were rather recent. 4.2 Measurement and Questionnaire Attempts to use existing measurement related to each construct were taken, however measures of some constructs especially those of the subjective norm and risk preference were modified to suit the context of the study. Most of the measures were based on 5-point Likert scales (1 denoting strongly disagree and 5 as strongly agree), whereas the remaining items were measured using 5-point bipolar semantic differential scales. The full measures are provided in Table 1.
Table 1: Measures of latent constructs
Constructsa Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) PEOU1 I find it very easy to use PBL in my learning activities. PEOU2 Understanding the objectives to be met trough PBL is easy for me . PEOU3 I do not have to work hard to apply the PBL learning methods. PEOU4 I can also use the PBL method in other courses which are not using it. Perceived Usefulness (PU) PU1 PBL helps me a lot in understanding a particular course better than if I am using other common methods. PU2 PBL is very effective to my learning. PU3 Understanding a course is quick through PBL. PU4 PBL also helps me understand other courses which are not using it. Attitude towards PBL (AT) AT1 Dissatisfied Satisfiedb AT2 Sad Happy AT3 Negative Positive AT4 Regretful Content I find that using PBL technique in my learning is _______________: AT5 a good technique. AT6 very useful. AT7 very beneficial. AT8 very effective. Subjective orm (S ) SN1 PBL is very much welcomed by my college friends. SN2 My college friends receive many benefits when using PBL. SN3 My college friends do not complain about PBL method. SN4 Those who are influential to my actions (e.g. parents and lecturers) support me to use PBL. SN5 Those whom I normally seek advice from (e.g. parents and lecturers) agree with me using the PBL. SN6 Those whose opinions I normally listen to (e.g. parents and lecturers) are happy about me using the PBL. Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC) PBC1 To use PBL is very easy for me. PBC2 To use or not to use PBL is within my control.

International Conference on Quality Of Teaching & Learning (ICQTL 2012)

PBC3 It is easy for me to provide time and efforts when using PBL. PBC4 If I want, I can always apply the PBL in other courses which are not using PBL even without helps from the lecturers. Risk Preference (RP) RP1 I think I am a risk-taker. RP2 I like taking risks. RP3 I am fond to new things. RP4 I believe that high gains are achievable after taking high risks. Intention to Continue using PBL (I T) INT1 I have the intention to continue using PBL in the future. INT2 It is in intention to enroll in future courses which are applying the PBL INT3 I hope that my future courses will use PBL. INT4 When asked, I will talk positively about PBL to friends and lecturers. INT5 If given an opportunity, I will recommend my future lecturers to use PBL. a All constructs are in reflective and first order mode. b 5-point bipolar semantic differential items.

affective attitude (AFT) and cognitive attitude (COG), which are in accordance with [21]. The revised model is depicted in Fig. 2. As a result, the final PLS analysis on the revised model suggested that all constructs with reflective indicators were reliable with loadings all above the desired level of 0.70, except for AT6 which was retained to maintain variability in the cognitive attitude variable (see Table 2).
RP PEOU AFT

4.3 Analysis of Data Data analysis performed on the research model was based on partial least squares (PLS) path modeling to test hypotheses included in the research model. This method was chosen due to normality assumptions of the data distribution have not been totally met and small sample size of 114 responses. The specific PLS tool used in the present study is SmartPLS [19]. Prior to validating the research model, usable data collected from the respondents were first screened for reliability and validity of measures. Since most measures were adapted from existing studies, exploratory factor analysis was discarded, while reliability of measures was checked through confirmatory factor analysis. The results of this analysis revealed that most items loaded in the expected factors, with reliable Cronbach alpha (minimum of 0.592 and maximum of 0.947, see Table 3). 5. FI DI GS 5.1 Measurement Model In utilizing a PLS path modeling technique, a similar two-step procedure normally conducted in structural equation modeling (SEM) was followed [20]. Through this technique, results of both confirmatory factor analysis of the model and path effect were obtained. In completing this procedure, a model validation analysis was also performed. Preliminary analysis without moderating variable of the measurement model using a PLS algorithm (300 maximum iteration, standardized values and centroid weighting scheme) revealed several items had loadings less than accepted threshold of 0.7. Specifically, PU4, AT2, AT5, SN1, PBC2, INT1, INT4 and RP4 were all removed from the final model. Despite of reduced items, the research model was still viable with each variable having at least three items. However, the follow on analysis also indicated another concern that of the attitude variable should be represented by two distinct variables. We have named these variables as

PU

COG INT SN

PBC

Fig. 2 Revised model Table 2: Item means and loadings

Mean PEOU PEOU1 PEOU2 PEOU3 PEOU4 PU PU1 PU2 PU3 AFT AT1 AT3 AT4 COG AT6 AT7 AT8 2.4561 2.6053 2.1228 2.6228 Loading S 0.9428 0.9078 0.7370 0.8500 SN2 SN3 SN4 SN5 SN6 PBC PBC1 PBC3 PBC4 I T INT2 INT3 INT5 RP RP1 RP2 RP3 2.6140 2.2105 2.8860 2.9035 2.9211 2.4298 2.5133 2.4298 2.5351 2.5175 2.6491 2.6667 2.5263 2.9912 0.8905 0.7810 0.9431 0.9452 0.9339 0.9479 0.9352 0.8764 0.9590 0.9708 0.9218 0.9253 0.9294 0.8876 Mean Loading

2.7368 2.5526 2.5965 2.6842 2.9386 2.9737 2.9912 2.8053 2.6283

0.9572 0.9330 0.9420 0.9277 0.9416 0.9213 0.4386 0.8940 0.8940

5.2 Model Validity In SEM, a research model is said to be valid when both convergent and dicriminant validity have been achieved. Table 3 and Table 4 provide the results of these validity tests without the moderator variable. The research model demonstrates a strong convergent validity as the latent constructs with reflective items have high composite reliability (CR) and Cronbach alpha.

International Conference on Quality Of Teaching & Learning (ICQTL 2012)

Table 3: Convergent validity

o. of items PEOU PU AFT COG S PBC I T 4 3 3 3 5 3 3 CR 0.920383 0.960965 0.950674 0.803951 0.955433 0.943173 0.965788 AVE 0.744498 0.891386 0.865320 0.596979 0.811610 0.847065 0.903980 Alpha 0.884816 0.939036 0.922199 0.592393 0.940551 0.909236 0.946653

effect size of only 0.06. In addition, its moderating effect using mean-centered interaction terms was insignificant leading to the rejection of hypothesis 6. In summary, only H6 was not supported and all other hypotheses were well supported. Note however that the mean values of almost every item including those of the intention variables are low in the range between 2 and 3 of the 5-point Likert scale. Hence, we can conclude here that majority of respondents were not interested in continuing using PBL in their future course enrolments.

Table 4: Discriminant validity

PEOU PEOU PU AFT COG S PBC .863* .909 .845 -.055 .876 .910 .944 .854 -.066 .857 .824 .930 -.104 .870 .781 .773 -.079 -.050 .901 .830 .827 .920 .789 .951 PU AFT COG S PBC I T

.859 .831 .812 -.061 I T * Diagonal elements are square roots of AVE

As can be seen in Table 4, the square roots of all average variance extracted (AVE) were mostly greater than inter-construct correlations except for the construct of PEOU, which correlates highly with other constructs. Although not achieving a satisfactory discriminant validity related to PEOU construct, we are in the position to stress that PEOU is a distinct variable as in accordance with many existing TAM studies. Apart from that only concern, we are content with the discriminant validity of our measures. 5.3 Structural Model Using a bootstrapping technique (300 re-samples), a test on the structural model was performed to assess the effect of each causal path, thus testing the stipulated hypotheses. As can be seen in Fig. 3A for the research model without moderating effect of risk propensity, the variances of endogenous variables of affective attitude, cognitive attitude and intention are 0.76, 0.01 and 0.74 respectively. It also shows that three paths related to cognitive attitude are not significant, whereas all other paths are significant. In other words, if cognitive attitude is omitted from the model, all other exogenous variables would play significant role in predicting intention to further use PBL. One explanation to this could be that perceived usefulness has already captured the elements of cognitive attitude and as such its inclusion may actually become redundant. When risk preference is included in the model as a moderator, we found negligible increment in the variance explained of the intention construct with an

Fig. 3A Results of structural model without moderator

* The direct effect of RP on INT is -0.0077 which is non-significant. The effect size calculated using (R2 with moderator R2 without moderator) / (1 R2 with moderator) is only 0.06.

Fig. 3B Results of structural model with moderator

5.4 Model Fit The research model without the moderator variable explains 74% variance in the intention to continue using PBL. This is considered as high with all hypotheses except that of the moderating effect of risk propensity were all supported. Additional model fit was assessed through obtaining cv-communality (H2) and cv-redundancy (Q2) by running a blindfolding

International Conference on Quality Of Teaching & Learning (ICQTL 2012)

procedure. The results in Table 5 show the research model having better a measurement model (H2 = 0.80975) than the structural model (Q2 = 0.63202). As indicated by Chin [22], a Q2 value of greater than zero has predictive relevance, so Q2 of 0.63 is considered far greater than this heuristic. In addition, the goodness of fit measure is high at 0.63732 which can be interpreted as the research model exhibiting acceptable fit and high predictive relevance. Furthermore, if cognitive attitude is omitted from the model, all fit statistics can be expected to be larger.
Table 5: Model fit statistics
Construct PEOU PU AFT COG SN PBC INT Average GoF
d

Structural Model variance comm. redundancy (0.74445) (0.89139) 0.75594 (0.86532) 0.44018 0.01448 (0.59698) -0.00132 (0.81161) (0.84706) 0.37261 0.27049

Model Quality (H2) (Q2) 0.74405a (0.73815)b 0.89147 0.86537 0.60492 0.81169 0.84685 0.90390 (0.86958) (0.64472) (-0.09906) (0.76888) (0.84060) (0.66128)

0.74107 (0.90340) 0.50383 0.80618c 0.63732

0.80975 (0.63202)

a = cv-communality, b = cv-redundancy, c = computed as a weighted average of the different communalities with the weights being the number of manifest variables per construct, d = GoF equals [(average communality) x (average R2)].

The test on risk preference as a moderator variable failed to support the related hypothesis. This indicates that intention to use PBL is dependent on attitude towards it regardless of the students levels of being tolerant towards taking risk. Therefore, approaches by accounting or finance course instructors to split students into groups based on their level risk tolerance to use different teaching strategies are not suitable. In other words, if PBL is to be adopted, it should be applied to all students. Note that majority of students of this study are rather averse towards risk and this explains their low intention to continue using PBL. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of PBL cannot be ascertained through this type of study, but rather students performance evaluation after the course completion is more appropriate measure. For pragmatic considerations, accounting course instructors are advised to utilize PBL in ways that motivate students in liking it and encourage common acceptance amongst students so that students disliking it can be peer-coached by fellow course mates as well as mentally supported by all other course instructors. In addition, techniques to encourage student independence in completing an accounting course using the PBL should be employed to enhance their confidence in applying PBL techniques on their own. 6.2 Limitations of Study The research setting for the study was an educational institution and respondents were limited to undergraduates enrolled in the corporate finance course at a university in Terengganu, Malaysia. As such, the studys findings are limited due to the extent to which similar behaviours can be generalized to other undergraduate accounting students completing other accounting courses or those in other universities. In addition, the research has been conducted prior to the release of final results of the course enrolment which may deflate students intention to further use PBL. This in effect explains partially the rather low level of positive intention to use PBL in the future. On another note, complete PBL may not be suitable to all courses and since corporate finance involves technical development in students to be able to perform many types of calculations including risks, returns and intrinsic values of financial securities. As such, a hybrid PBL approach can serve the purpose of promoting effective learning in the subject better [5]. Since the research model used in this study relied upon perceptual measures through the use of a selfreported survey, the study findings may, to some degree have been tainted with response biases. The present study did not perform the relevant tests to assess common method bias should any of them exists. Finally, the studys findings are based on a modest

6. DISCUSSIO OF FI DI GS Based on robust theory of TAM and TPB, the present study has shown that intention to continue using PBL among the selected students can be predicted by all exogenous variables embedded in the two theories. As such, all hypotheses except that related to the risk preference as a moderator were supported. 6.1 Implications of Findings Overall, the research model has satisfactorily explained the ultimate dependent variable, intention to continue using PBL with more than 70% variance being explained. For hypothesized perceptual antecedents of attitude, perceived usefulness is found to be slightly superior to perceived ease of use with beta of 0.4961 against 0.3935. Their effects on intention are also mediated through attitude, whereas two other exogenous constructs of subjective norm and perceived behavioral control are all significant in predicting the students intention to further use PBL. This result affirms that TAM and TPB can be used in explaining behavioral intention of using innovative learning techniques despite them being commonly used in predicting uses of new technologies and applications.

International Conference on Quality Of Teaching & Learning (ICQTL 2012)

sample size of 114 responses. Although PLS path modeling adequately handles small sample sizes and generates valid results, it is not as robust as covariance-based structural equation modeling in testing relationships of multiple latent variables. Future research may verify the findings of this study by employing a larger sample that will permit the use of covariance-based SEM. REFERE CES [1] D. H. Jonassen, Revisiting activity theory as a framework for designing student-centered learning environment, in Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environment, D. H. Jonassen & S. M. Land, Eds. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000, pp. 89121. [2] S. Pedersen and M. Liu, Teachers beliefs about issues in the implementation of a student-centered learning environment, Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 5776, 2003. [3] J. R. Savery and T. M. Duffy, Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework, Educational Technology, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 31-38, 1995. [4] M. Liu, Examining the performance and attitudes of sixth graders during their use of a problem-based hypermedia learning environment, Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 357-379, 2004. [5] K. M. Johnstone and S. F. Biggs, Problem-based learning: Introduction, analysis, and accounting curricula implications, Journal of Accounting Education, vol. 18, no. 3/4, pp. 407-427, 1998. [6] G. Boyce, S. Williams, A. Kelly and H. Yee, Fostering deep and elaborative learning and generic (soft) skill development: The strategic use of case studies in accounting education, Accounting Education: An International Journal, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 37-60, 2001. [7] A. Eskola, Good Learning in Accounting: Phenomenographic Study on Experiencies of Finnish Higher Education Students, Jyvskyl: University of Jyvskyl, 2011, unpublished thesis. [8] L. R. Paquette, Problem Based Learning in the AIS Course, Review of Business Information Systems, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 19-32, 2011. [9] N. Crombie and B. Lord, Using the Case Study Method to Develop Generic Skills: An Analysis of Student and Tutor Perceptions, 32nd Annual Congress of the European Accounting Association, Tampere, Finland, 2009. [10] L. P. Steenkamp and R. J. Rudman, South African students' perceptions of the usefulness of an audit simulation, Meditari Accountancy Research, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 23-41, 2007.

[11] M. Hsu and C. Chiu, Internet self-efficacy and electronic service acceptance, Decision Support Systems, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 369-381, 2004. [12] P. A. Pavlou and M. Fygenson, Understanding and predicting electronic commerce adoption: An extension of the Theory of Planned Behavior, MIS Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 115-134, 2006. [13] V. Venkatesh, M. Morris, G. B. Davis and F. D. Davis, User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view, MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425-478, 2003. [14] Y. Ali and H. Qing, User Acceptance of ECommerce Technology: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Competing Models, European Conference on Information Systems, St. Gallen, Switzerland, 2007. [15] E. Karahanna, D. W. Straub and N. L. Chervany, Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs, MIS Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 183-213, 1999. [16] V. Venkatesh and M. G. Morris, Why dont men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior, MIS Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 115-139, 2000. [17] I. Ajzen, The theory of planned behavior, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 179-211, 1991. [18] N. Krueger and P. R. Dickson, How believing in ourselves increases risk taking: Perceived selfefficacy and opportunity recognition, Decision Sciences, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 385-400, 1994. [19] C. M. Ringle, S. Wende and S. Will, SmartPLS 2.0 Beta. Hamburg: University of Hamburg, 2005. [20] J. S. Anderson and D. W. Gerbing, "Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach," Psychological Bulletin, vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 411-423, 1988. [21] H. Lavine, C. J. Thomsen, M. P. Zanna, and E. Borgidda, On the primacy of affect in the determination of attitudes and behavior: the moderating role of affective-cognitive ambivalence, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 398-421, 1998. [22] W. W. Chin, "The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling," in Modern Methods for Business Research, G. A. Marcoulides, Ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Eribaum Associates, 1998, pp. 295-336, 1998.