Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 15

Journal

of Accountrng

Educarton

Vol. 3, No. 2 Fall 1985

AN ASSESSMENT OF THE COGNITIVE DEMANDS OF THE UNIFORM CPA EXAMINATION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR CPA REVIEW/PREPARATION COURSES
Richard E. Baker
NORTHERN ILLINOIS and UNIVERSITY

John R. Simon
NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY

Abswacr: Recent research in learmng theories and the accounting curriculum permit the evaluation of the cognitive demands of the CPA exam. Two recent CPA exams are analyzed using the Piagetian model of cognitive levels and the results show that an overwhelming number of the questtons and problems on the exam demand only a lower, concrete-operational level of reasoning as opposed to the higher, formal-operational reasoning ability. The teachers role in the cognittve learning model is also examined and a number of recommendations are offered to instructors of CPA review/preparation courses.

The Uniform CPA Examination is a critical three-day event for over 130,000 accountants each year, and it is often viewed as the major rite of passage into the auditing portion of the accounting profession. The exam has had a pervasive influence on accounting curriculums of many colleges and universities. In fact, a recent study by Lentilhon and Krzystofik [ 19831 presented evidence that about 58% (85/ 146) of the AACSB-accredited institutions offer a course specifically to prepare students for the exam. The CPA exam has been analyzed in a number of ways. Most CPA review manuals present the following breakdown: by topic, by type of question, by area of study, and by recency to current promulgations. No study, however, has evaluated the exam by the level of reasoning ability necessary for answering each question. Research in cognitive styles and abilities of accouniing students now make it possible to assess the cognitive demands of accounting exams and to relate this to the development of college-aged students. A study by Amernic and Enns [ 19791 related students levels of cognitive complexity and the design of accounting curriculums. They concluded that accounting
This paper Accountmg rewewers benefltcd from the comments DetaIled of attendees comments at the presentation from John made at the 1984 Midwest thecdttor, American

Assoclatmn

meetmg

I-I. Engstrom,

and theanonymous

were also much appreciated

educators must match the learning environment with the students level of cognitive development in order to optimize the learning teaching effort. The purposes of this paper are to: (1) review the two major schools of learning theories, (2) analyze two recent CPA exams to determine the cognitive level required to successfully complete each portion of the exam, and (3) to present some implications for CPA review preparation courses. The CPA review/preparation course has a very specific objective: to prepare students for success on the CPA examination. Other accounting courses may have different objectives and the implications presented in this study for the CPA review/preparation course may not extend to those courses. Learning Theories The process of how humans learn has fascinated researchers who attempt to understand this unique element of humankind. Unfortunately, the present abundance of theories reflect the ongoing nature of this area of scientific investigation. Most contemporary learning research is based on the concept that empiricism, i.e., experience, is the source of knowledge: the individual learns by associating new events or ideas with those already experienced. This view is segmented into the following two schools of thought: (1) stimulusresponse, which argues that the learner acquires habits of sequences of behavior responses to stimuli, and that trial and error is used for novel problemsolving; and (2) cognitive structuring, which argues that an individual acquires factual knowledge which the individual stores and relates to other knowledge in some form of associational, cognitive structure [Reilly and Lewis, 1983, pp. 9 l-941. These cognitive structures allow for insight into novel problem-solving through the contemporary structuring of a problem. Although the concept of reinforcement has been most closely related to the stimulus-response school, many cognitive theorists also accept the importance of reinforcement in the learning process. The stimulus-response school is often represented by Pavlovs work in classical conditioning and Skinners work in operant conditioning. The ability of some individuals to control pain by biofeedback suggests that it is possible to be conditioned to control ones physical environment. Skinners operant conditioning focuses on reinforcement approaches to learning. Correct responses to a problem are rewarded which, indirectly, discourages incorrect responses to a problem. This learning model emphasizes repetition and rote .memorization. The multitude of Skinnerian studies on lab animals indicates that specified tasks can be achieved through the use of food as a reward. A parallel in the classroom situation would be the rewarding of grades or some other positive feedback. Much of the recent learning research has carried forward the arguments offered by the cognitive theorists, generally known as the Gestaltists. These theories focus on the intellectual processes of the human animal. Although not completely negating the role of rewards, followers of the cognitive school of learning recognize that individuals have goals and objectives which play a

17

very important role in the learning process. The cognitive school finds its roots in Gestalt psychology which focuses on patterning behavior. It stresses the learning of concepts, generalization from the specific to the general, synthesization, and problem solving. The research by Jean Piaget fits into this latter group of cognitive theories. The Piagetian theory of cognitive development had previously been considered to be of limited usefulness to persons above an intellectual age of about 17 years, It is now evident, however, that the Piagetian theory does apply to persons of all ages [Renner, et al., 1976; and Shute, 19791. Piaget stressed that the driving force behind intellectual growth is the concept of equilibration. Equilibration is defined as [Hergenhahn, 1976, p. 2711. . the innate tendency to organwe ones experience so as to assure maximal
adaptation. equihbrium Roughly, equihbration or balance. can be defined as the continuous drwe toward

For optimal learning to take place, new information must be presented that can be assimilated or accommodated into the present cognitive structure, but at the same time, be sufficiently different to require a change in those structures. One aspect of the cognitive theorists approach, however, would not be feasible in todays universities: they favor a one-to-one relationship between the student and teacher during the learning experience. It is obvious the early learning theorists did not foresee large lectures with two-hundred or more students. The role of memory in the cognitive learning model is to capture the general ideas or concepts and fill in the details later. The student may then use the traces of ideas as the vehicle for recall. The key is to establish the proper pattern into which additional information can be classified. Measuring Cognitive Levek of Reasoning

The measurement of individuals levels of cognitive reasoning typically assumes that people may be ordered along a continuum of reasoning abilities from a lower level, labeled congrete, to a higher level, labeled abstract reasoning. Early work by Harvey, Hunt, and Schroeder [1961] stated that those persons operating at a concrete level have a low tolerance for ambiguity and prefer structured, directed methods of inquiry. Those operating at the higher, abstract levels of reasoning possess higher levels of tolerance for ambiguity and are able to handle complex and unstructured tasks. In order to validly measure conceptual levels using a continuum as suggested by Harvey, Hunt, and Schroeder, the researcher must define the two extreme points on either end of the continuum, as well as the individual gradations of the continuum. While such measures have been prepared for overall measures of an individuals cognitive level, such measures do not exist for specific concepts. An alternative measurement vehicle is provided by Piaget. He presented a four-step continuum of cognitive development, as follows [Shute, 1979, p. 41: Learning through sensory Stage 1: Sensory-motor. observations. Form constructs of physical objects. Stage 2: Pre-operational.

18

Organization of immediately given data. Stage 4: Formal-operational. Abstract reasoning including the ability to explore possibilities in totally hypothetical situations. Infants begin their existence at the sensory-motor level and then progress through the four stages. A 1969 study found that about 50 percent of incoming college freshmen had not yet achieved the fundamentals of the formaloperational stage of cognitive ability [Renner. et. al., 1976, p. 1Ill. A recent study on college-aged accounting students indicated that approximately onethird of college seniors were at the concrete-operational stage, one-third at the formal-operational stage, and one-third were in transition between the two stages [Shute, 19791. These results might indicate little progress in raising the level of cognitive ability of entering college freshmen in the last fifteen years. The statistics on college seniors are particularly relevant to the CPA exam since many students sit for the exam immediately after completing the baccalaureate (four-year) degree. Some practicing accountants have argued for years that good accounting judgment skills are absolutely necessary for continued success in the business world. These types of skills are most identified with the higher levels of cognitive ability. However, the objective of our study is nor to assess skill levels necessary for a successful auditor; the objective is to determine the cognitive demand level of the CPA exam. We will not enter the fray of whether or not the exam is a good indicator of the type of skills needed by an auditor. For purposes of this study, we accept the exam as a given commodity, not something to address from a normative perspective. The Teacher and Cognitive Learning Models

Stage 3: Concrete-operational.

In a 1974 paper, Bentz [I9741 established a relationship between an understanding of learning theories and the selection of the educational objectives for accounting classes. Knowledge and understanding of learning theories assists accounting educators to: (I) set specific instructional objectives for their courses, (2) establish direction in the selection of alternative methods of instruction to achieve those objectives, (3) select appropriate student performance measurement devices, (4) select instructional materials, and (5) experiment with alternative teaching strategies. One of the contributions of the teacher in the cognitive learning models is to stress the meaningfulness of each part to a whole. The teacher focuses on patterns and provides students with the correct schematic or cognitive model to incorporate new bits of related information. The teacher-supplied pattern can then provide the foundation for further learning by the student. As new knowledge comes into a students cognitive structure, the student will then reform the present structure to accommodate the new knowledge. A teacher who subscribes to the cognitive learning model does not necessarily exclude memory exercises from his or her teaching strategy. Indeed, new

19

information passes through short-term memory before it can be synthesized into long-term memory. Again, the role of the teacher must be to assist the student in identifying the appropriate logical patterns which exist in the new information and how they relate to patterns which have already been incorporated into the students long-term memory structures. A wealth of longstanding psychological literature suggests a limit on the channel capacity of short-term, active, working memory of seven plus or minus two units of information [Miller, 19561. This suggests that most people can discriminate among approximately seven units of information at any one time. A teacher presenting more than this will find that students have suffered information overload and discard the additional units. All too often, many faculty teaching a CPA exam preparation course consider much of the material to be review and use the lecture approach to dump as much information on the students as possible in order to cover all the possible subject areas on the exam. The cognitive theorist would suggest this teaching approach may be self-defeating. The students need the time and opportunity to order and assimilate the material covered. In fact, the teacher should assist the student in chunking the new information into identifiable patterns. The student then transfers the new information to long-term memory by a process labeled consolidation. The primary method of consolidation appears to be coding the new information in accordance with the pre-existing structures already in long-term memory. The teacher can aid this process by organizing the new information bits in a manner that is consistent with an overall structure which the students have already learned. The teacher can also provide mnemonic devices that will make students learning of even complex material more efficient. Research Design The second objective of this study was to determine the cognitive demands of the uniform CPA examination, The measurement vehicle used was a classification system developed by Shute in his study of the cognitive ability levels of accounting students [Shute, 19791. Shute derived the classification system from a study of the normal types of reasoning skills associated with the cognitive levels as specified by Piaget. Specific definitions and examples of each of the reasoning skills presented below are shown in Appendix C of Shutes research report [Shute, p. 54-561. These skills are as follows: Formal-Operational Concrete-Operational Proportional Reasoning Definition Combinatorial Reasoning Fact Memorization Probabilistic Reasoning Format Memorization Hypothetico-deductive Reasoning Concept Memorization Correlational Reasoning Classification Serial Ordering Simple Algorithm, direct application Simple Algorithm, new application Complex Algorithm Algorithm Derived, generalized and applied

Concrete-operational includes memorization as well as algorithmic reasoning. Algorithms are procedures for solving mathematical problems. Most accounting computational procedures are algorithms. For example, the basic accounting equation-Assets = Liabilities + Owners Equity-is a simple algorithm covered in every introductory course. Many accounting algorithms are presented throughout the accounting curriculum which provide students with routinized problem-solving skills. Formal-operational includes proportional, combinatorial, and correlational reasoning. Each requires the evaluation of alternative outcomes based on relationships with other variables. An example of correlational reasoning is to compare and contrast two different concepts. Hypothetico-deductive questions require the student to hold all variables constant while manipulating just a single variable, and then evaluating the results. These types of questions are common in economics courses. Probabilistic reasoning is often required in auditing judgments. The classification system developed by Shute was then applied to two recent CPA exams by five different raters. Some subjectivity is always evident in the application of a non-quantitative classification system. In order to minimize the degree of subjectivity, only raters who were experienced in CPA review instruction were used. The examples and definitions from Shutes research were exhaustively analyzed by each rater. Each rater then independently assessed both of the recent CPA exams. Less than eleven percent disagreement was initially found in categorizing the questions and problems. Most of these disagreements were among specific skills within a level of reasoning ability. For example, one rater specified a question as requiring Concept Memorization while another specified the question as requiring a Simple Algorithm. Only rarely did the raters disagree as to the stage of reasoning required to answer a question-Concrete-Operational versus Formal-Operational. Any disputed questions were then reevaluated and a consensus was obtained. We had no priors when we evaluated the questions from the exams. We had no argument, and still do not, that the exam should include more. or less, of one type of question over another. Our objectives were to determine the level of reasoning required by each question, report the findings, and then relate the findings to the alternative educational objectives and teaching approaches available for a CPA examination/ review course. -Each question appearing on the exam was assigned the lowest level of cognitive demand deemed necessary to obtain the correct response. This may have introduced some downward bias in the study since some questions may be answered at the concrete-operational level if the student memorized the concept being tested; but, on the other hand. some students who had not reviewed the specific concept before the exam may be able to derive the correct answer by applying hypothetico-deductive reasoning which is a higher level of reasoning. The field of accounting has many parallel constructs which are derived from a common conceptual framework. The focus of our study was in

21

lowest possible reasoning level required to correctly answer a question, not the analysis of all possible alternative reasoning paths which might lead to the correct solution. The following point is critical when evaluating the specific design selected for this study. The raters assessment of the reasoning level required by each question was based on perceptions of the typical subject matter of a curriculum encompassing 30 semester hours of accounting and business law in preparation for the exam. This includes the following courses: Courses Elementary financial and managerial accounting Intermediate accounting Cost accounting Introductory tax accounting Advanced financial accounting (consolidations, etc.) Auditing Business Law Semester Hours

3 3 6

An estimate of the typical coverage in each of these courses was obtained by a review of the contents of the major textbooks available for use in these courses. Textbooks are, of course, only one part of the content coverage in any course; however, texts do provide a foundation for the assessment of a common curriculum. Not all students master all concepts covered in their accounting courses. One of the purposes of a comprehensive CPA exam preparation course is to provide an opportunity for some students to gain a more complete understanding of concepts covered in earlier courses that they did not learn the first time the concepts were introduced. Also, additional accounting courses reduce the level of the cognitive demand required by specific questions on the exam because the student would have more extensive exposure to the topics and more questions could be answered at the concrete-operational level of reasoning. This aspect is one of the counseling factors used by many instructors who encourage students to take additional accounting courses before sitting for the exam. Two recent exams were analyzed to determine if a November/ May difference exists and to obtain a large sample of exam questions. This should also average out many of the potential errors from misclassification. The CPA exam, at any one point in time, does not represent a radical departure from the exams of the recent past or from the exams of the immediate future. The exam changes over extended periods of time; however, these changes are, for the most part, evolutionary, not revolutionary. Thus, the analysis of the two exams should provide sufficient evidence as to the cognitive demands of the CPA exam at the present time. The specific exams selected were the November 1982 and May 1983 exams [AICPA].

The last step of the research design evaluated the results of the cognitive demand analysis and related these results to teaching and learning objectives and methods in a CPA review: preparation course. A range of teaching styles is available to any instructor: lecture, self-paced mediated environment. teacher-structured presentation, independent problem-solving, etc. The choice of teaching style is dependent on the objectives of the course: for example, the lecture mode is best for rapid recital of numerous facts and concepts that can then be memorized by the student. However, as one educator points out, it is important for the teacher to recognize that the lecture mode is a highly complex mode of transmitting and receiving information [Davis, 1979, p. 571. An instructor also has many alternative teaching methods available to enhance specific learning objectives. For example, repetition and associations (mnemonics) have been shown to be an effective teaching tool to enhance memorization. On the other hand, iterations of short exercises are most effective for presentation of algorithms. The ideal CPA review/preparation course should optimally prepare the students for success on the exam. This specific course is at least one course in an accounting curriculum which should be influenced significantly by the nature of the CPA exam. Results The November 1982 and May 1983 CPA exams were analyzed using the cognitive demand rating system presented in Shutes study. Each question in all five parts-Practice I, Practice II, Auditing, Law, and Theory-was analyzed for the cognitive level required to successfully determine the answer. Multiple Choice Questions

Table 1 presents the results of the analysis of the cognitive demand required to answer the multiple choice questions on the two exams. The most striking observation is the extremely high percentage of concrete-operational questions. For example, in the November 1982 exam, 97% of the Practice I and II multiple choice questions were at the concrete-operational level. The May 1983 exam had an equivalent percentage, 95%, at the concrete-operational level. Interestingly, the questions on each exam were almost equally split between memorization and the use of algorithms. This does not mitigate the difficulty of the questions. Many of the memorization and algorithmic questions required a thorough understanding of the material covered. The particular question, however, could be prepared for by a comprehensive study of the subject matter. Table 1 illustrates the often-argued point that the Auditing section of the exam does require a different approach. For the November 1982 exam. fully 28% of the multiple choice questions required candidates to reason at the formal-operational level. For example, 23% of the 60 multiple choice questions required the evaluation of the application of a standard or concept to a range of alternatives. These hypothetico-deductive and probabilistic questions are indeed the basis of audit judgment. The May 1983 exam evidenced

23

TABLE 1
Classification Exams of Cogmtwe Choice Demand and Subject on November, 1982 and May. 1983 CPA MultIpie Exam Questions Type of Cognitive Demand

No 1982

May 1963

NO ,982

May ,963

No 1982

My 1983

NW 1982

May ,963

NW

May

NW

196219831982 --

May NW 1963 1992 --

MBY ,983

No ,982

May
,983

12 2 12 ---? 21 47 39% == Audmng Profeor,onal Internal Auda Aud,t Audmng Evldencc Reponr Samplmg EOP Number -!4 43 Elhtc. Control

24 4 0 36 65 54%

2 0 5

0 0 0 0

26 15 2 15 59 49%

31 14 0 4 49 4,%

40 17 19 59 116 97%

55 19 0 40 114 95% _116

0 2 0

4 2

40 19 20 40 120

59 20 0 40 120

1
0 0

0 1
1 2 2%

1 0
0 3 3%

2 1
, 4 3%

0,00,01,000000,l

0
0 6

10

2 2%

3 3%

6% 0% =====__======0 0 0 0 0 LL_R 0 , 0 0 0

5%100%100%

9
9 10 13 13

10 ,o 10 16

0 0 0 0 0 oo-2

0 0 0 0 0

9 S 10 13 13 1

10 1, 10 16 -.L54 90%

1 0 1 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

1 5 5 1 2 0 14 23%

0 2 2 0 2 0 6 10%

2 5 6 1 2 _o-.L4 1 17 29%

0 2 2 0 2

1, 14 16 14 3

10 13 12 16 5

Statsc~cal

Section

53

0 0%

1 2%

0 0%

0 0%

43 72%

3 5%

0 0%

60

60

% IOf 60)

72% 88% ~~~=~==~===~===24 9 4 10 33 6 4 7 10 60 00

lO%lW%lC0%

Commerosl

Transactwns and Employment

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 o-

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

24 9 4 12 00 59

33 6 4 7 00 60

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 00

0 1 0 0

0 0 0 0 00

0 1 0 0

0 0 0 0

24 10 4 12 10

33 6 4 7 10 60 100%

Bus~nsssOrgan,~at~onr Agency Propert Secnon Number

Government

Ragulatmn 12
59

0 0%

0 0%

0 0%

0 0%

0 0%

0 0%

1 02%

0 0%

1 2%

0 0%

60 100%

% lof 601 Theory Fmanc,al Cost auantttatwe Nonprpfn Sectmn Accountmg Methods Accountmg Number

.SB% 100% ===============31 36

SB%lOO%

37

45

40

45

Accountmg

6200107210,22294

1100001100000011
L-!!? 44 49 -Lo 2 3% 12 4% 5 6% 6 2% -?--_o 9 15% 6B 23% 0 4 7% 53 16% 10 55 92% 273 91% 58 97% 286 95% o3 5% B 3% 0 0 0% 3 2% -0 0 2 3% 19 6% -----2 3% 11 4% 00 5 6% 27 9% 2 3% 14 5% -- 10 60 100% 300 100% 10 60 100% 3M, 100% 73% 82% ====~==z=====~=~

% lof 601 Exam Total Number

193 64% ----------

227 76%

% IOf 3001

24

a lower of 1Omc the multiple questions at higher reasoning still the of the sections at level. The Law multiple questions were straightforward of basic concepts typically in a business law Virtually each the Law choice questions candidates to a basic concept with application of concept. Some choice questions the concept the question the proper in the section, while included the cation in question and proper concept the answer After consulting several instructors Business Law at various and universities, concluded that problem identification association the teaching used in Business Law The Theory multiple choice also required memorization of or concepts. types of are classified the concrete-operational that again be prepared prior to exam. The summary of multiple choice shows that of the choice questions the November exam, and of the choice questions the May exam tested of facts, and concepts. these questions be prepared in a exam preparation Another 23% the 300 choice questions November 1982, 18% for 1983 required learning of algorithms that be developed to the by extended of the algorithms used accounting. Only of the block of choice questions November 1982, 5% for 1983 required formal-operational level reasoning. of the at this were in auditing section the exam. the results the assessment the cognitive of the CPA exam that the choice questions essentially a of pre-learned that is covered in comprehensive accountcurriculum. Problem and Essay Questions Table 2 presents the results of the analysis of the cognitive levels required for the problems and essays appearing on the two exams. Note that fractional values are used because most of the problems and essays had multiple parts often requiring different reasoning abilities. For example, the first part of a problem may have required a computation while a later part may have required the candidate to analyze or compare several alternative conceptual treatments of various examples of the specific topic. Therefore, these types of problems/essays were disaggegated into discrete parts based on the number of individual requirements the problem or essay included. Evaluation of problems and essays is more difficult than multiple choice because the candidate must also organize and communicate his/ her response. Some academics may argue that writing ability involves the highest level of

TABLE 2
Classiflcatlon Exams of Cognltlve Chotce Demand and Subject on November, 1982 and May. 1983 CPA MultIpie Exam QuestIons Type of Cognitwe Demand

Concrete-OperatIonal

Formal-Operattonal Propor.tl.Zal. pothe,comblna- *co-d&W-

Memorlza~ classdl,lOa
FX,S Formats Subfec, Concepts _____ No 1962 Pracrlce May 1963 Nw May NO May ,963 or Catlo Serial Drdermg & Afgornhms ,Slm*le Complex) or Sub Total ~-Nov 1962 MBV 1983

tonal. ,lDal

,ove Bd Probabll,S,lC Sub Total -~ Total

Correla-

Nov

May

Nov

May 1983

No 1962

May ,983

No 1962

1962l9631982 --

196219831962 --~~

May ,983

I &II
116 50 164 100 50 300 I50 50 50 50 50 50 300 200 1 00

FllYIllCl~l ACCOll,lng Cost Accountmg auan,I,a,te hlC,hcdS Nonprof,, Accountmg Tax Accountmg Sectmn Number 50 50 50 25 100 75 25 25 loo loo

L~.zLZ~-_~L~_.=~L-_ 166 42% --== -150 50 50 100 25% 00 0% 00 0% 234 175 400 100% 275 00 00 0% 00 0% 125 31% 00 0% 125 31% --400 100% 400 100%

% (Of 4 01 Adt,lg Professlonaf Internal Aud,, Aud,, E,hlCS

58% 44% ===z=z -

69% 0% -----_-_-~=---5o275 1 00 25 -

275 loo -

150 50 50 -

25 50 -

25 -

50 50 50 -

-2200 25 -

Control

Evidence Reports Sampling EDP Number % (Of 4 0)

100 100 -

3W 1W -

S,at,st,cal Audmng Sectmn

LL~LIZZZ.L~LL~Z~~ 250 63% ==__== 375 94% 00 -- 0% 00 0% 00 0% 00 0% -250 63% 375 94% 75 19% =_ 00 0% 75 19% __==_-25 6% 150 36% 25 --- 6% 400 100% 400 100%

6sless

Law

Commerckal TranSaCtIOn 175 75 175 75 50-------75 -50 25 75 -50 25 250 -,w _ -

Business orgamza,t0n6
Agency and Employment Government Aegula,lon Property Sectmn Number % IOf 4 01 Theory FlllaClSl Accourrnng Cost Accountmg auarm,a,we Methods NonprofIt Accouotmg Sectnon Number

100

50------

100

125

50

100

175

50

25

50

25

150

2 00

-LL~~z.~~-_l~Z~~~-_ 275 69% 250 63% -------00 2 00 0% 00 50 275 69% 300 75% 00 0% 00 96 _-=== 125 31% 100 25% 125 31% 100 25% =-400 100% __ 400 100%

0% -- 12%

233 100 -

234 90 -----

33 -

33 -

267 100 -

267 90 ----_--

33 -

33 -

10

33 -

33 10

300 loo _

300 loo -

_.z~~LL~~~~~ZZZ~Z~ 333 -- 63% --=zz 324 61% 00 0% 33 8% == 33 6% 00 0% 367 357 00 0% 33 9% 33 6% 10 3% 33 6% 43 11% 4w 100% 400 100%

% (Of 4 0) Exam Total Number %lof160)

92% 69% --zaz======_

1024 ----64%

,049 66%

00 0%

33

267

225

1292 6,s

,307 62%

75 5%

33 2%

233 15%

260 16%

306 19%

293 19%

1600 100%

,600 100%

2% --_----_-___ 17% 14%

26

reasoning ability because an individual must select from virtually thousands of words with each choice. In this study, the position is taken that written communication skills also operate on a continuum of reasoning ability and that concrete-operationalists can effectively communicate in written form at a sufficient level to successfully complete the CPA exam. Thus. the analysis assesses the specific accounting topic being presented, not the requirement that the response required a level of communication different from that required on the multiple choice section of the exam. Table 2 displays the greater percentage of formal-operational questions on the problem and essay portions of the exam. Practice I and II, Auditing, and Business Law each included significantly higher reasoning requirements on the written versus the multiple choice portions. A large difference between November and May exams was found in the level of formal-operational reasoning required to answer the problems and essays. The Practice 1 and II parts of the May 1983 exam required more formal-operational reasoning than their counterparts in the November 1982 exam. This is the opposite of the Auditing sections. The May 1983 exam required less formal-operational reasoning for its auditing essay questions than the November 1982 exam. It is interesting to note that the essays on the Theory portion of the exam tested predominately memorization of concepts, not extensions of current concepts to new or unusual situations which is normally covered in a graduate theory course. Although there were some changes within individual sections from the November 1982 to May 1983 exams, approximately 20 percent of the problem and essay questions on each exam required the use of formal-operational reasoning. Therefore, it appears that a difference in reasoning abilities exists for multiple choice versus problems and essays on the exam. The major November/ May difference noted was the change in the reasoning level required for the problems/ essays in Auditing and Practice I and II. It is significant, however, to note that these changes do balance each other out when considering all four parts of the exam as a whole. Therefore, when counseling first-time takers on which exam to take, the students cognitive reasoning level should not be a critical variable affecting the timingNovember versus May-of the sitting. Implications for Teachers and Students in CPA Review Courses

It is important to recognize that any classroom learning experience is extremely complex. Instructors have a myriad of teaching styles and techniques available to them. Any group of students will include a wide range of learning styles and levels of previous experiences, Different courses require different teaching strategies because of the differences in the objectives of the courses. Yet, the art of teaching requires the professor to prepare a teaching program culminating in students understanding of the concepts covered in the course. The focus of this study is specifically on the CPA exam review/ preparation course.

27

Most CPA exam review/preparation courses include analysis of prior exams and predictions for the upcoming exam. In addition, students receive ample practice working both multiple choice and problem/essay questions. Many instructors also cover the mechanics of the exam: when and where, the order of the parts, how the exam is graded, and so on. It is not the purpose of this study to comment on those aspects of a CPA review/ preparation course. The most direct implication of this study for participants in a CPA review/ preparation program is the understanding of the varying reasoning levels of the cognitive learning model and the recognition that the majority of the CPA exam requires reasoning skills at the lower concrete-operational level. The key to the cognitive learning model is the structuring of knowledge which the instructor can aid by presenting schema and general models that students can then fill in as additional material is presented. As to the CPA exam itself, students should be made aware that most of the concepts are tested at only the concrete level, a level which can be prepared for prior to the exam with a comprehensive study program. Within the cognitive learning model, the instructor of a CPA review/ preparation course can aid students by providing a structure for the materials covered during the course. Many accounting educators do include some discussion of a general model in the introductory session(s) of the course. Knowledge of learning theories and the cognitive demands of the CPA exam, however, point out the necessity for continual integration and reinforcement of the general model, utilization of algorithms, and use of mnemonics during each and every class period. Furthermore, the topics covered in each class period should be structured as subsets of a larger framework and the topical structure should be presented at the beginning of the class period so students understand how the discussions during that days class are related to the topical structure. The point is that instructors must select both their overall and daily teaching strategies on the basis of student learning models and the objectives of the CPA review/ preparation course. It is a question of degree, not just partial application of some of the significant elements of the cognitive learning models. The instructor must carefully select which topics will be covered in class and the extent of their coverage. Most importantly, knowledge of learning theories shows that a teachers propensity to cover everything may be selfdefeating. The selection should include consideration of the generalizability of the material to other situations as well as expected coverage on the exam. The instructor should select those areas that are most general and leave the many minor items for the students individual review programs. Terms introduced in class should be placed in an accounting context in order to increase the probability of reaching the studentslong-term memory. Mnemonics may be supplied for those terms or groups of terms that students must know. By providing a structure, the instructor can ensure that students obtain the maximum benefit from the knowledge they memorize. Problemsolving algorithms must be stressed. The students must have the necessary

28

tools to approach novel situations they may face on the exam. The instructor should derive a general problem-solving paradigm to approach problems rather than focus on specific solution techniques for specific problem types. Student performance evaluation procedures, such as course exams and quizzes, should include many selections at the concrete operational level. Many students will not be able to operate at the formal operational level,and may become discouraged by lower performance when the CPA exam itself is predominantly at the concrete operational level. Students must be made aware of the many questions on the exam requiring memorization of facts, formats, or concepts. Although many instructors are aware that some memorization is an important part of the exam preparation, the results of the cognitive demand classification surprisingly shows that approximately two-thirds of the questions and problems may be answered from memorization. The instructor can assist students in their memorization efforts by providing lists of terms or concepts the students should know upon completion of their review of each of the main topics covered in class. These lists will also help the students relate the individual terms to the structure presented by the instructor. Students should also be informed of the higer-level of reasoning required for the problems and essays and in some of the Auditing multiple choice. Students should be encouraged to think through the entire solution, considering alternative approaches as well as parallel approaches to a problem. The instructor should provide a general model for providing answers to essays and problems. The student may then modify this general model for specific applications.
Conclusions

The analysis of two recent CPA exams evidences the high percentage of exam questions requiring concrete-operational reasoning skills. This finding suggests two approaches for instructors of CPA review/ preparation courses. First, the instructor must help exam candidates identify the patterns in the units of information covered in the class. The students will then fill in the pieces of the patterns during their individual study programs. Second, specific concepts should be presented within a structured framework so students will be able to assimilate the concepts. It is more important for an instructor to provide the structure than it is to go as fast as possible to cover as much as possible. We now know that this cover everything teaching approach is not effective for consolidating the units of information into the students longterm memory. It is each instructors wish that his, her students perform well on the CPA exam. A consideration of the cognitive demands of the exam and knowledge of the students learning approaches should aid in a higher level of achievement for the students.

29

REFERENCES
Amertcan lnstttute of Certtfted Pubhc Accountants. Certtfied Public Accountants Exam. Board of Examtners. (AICPA. New Yorh. N Y ). November 1982. and May 1983 Amermc. H and Robtn J Enns.Levels of Cogmttve Complexttyand the Design of Accountmg Currtculum. The Auounring Reweld. Vol LIV. No. 1 (January, 1979): 133-145. Bentz. Wtlliam F..Ustng Learntng Theory to Teach Accountmg More Effictently.tn Acrounr,ng Edu~~orron. Prohlemsand Prospecrs. edtted by J D. Edwards, (American Accountmg Assoctatton. Sarasota. FL.. 1974): 2 13-220. Davts. James R.. Teac,htng Srrategws for rhe College Classroom, (Westvtew Press, Boulder, CO., 1976). Harvey, J D. Hunt. and H. Schroeder. Conceprual Svsrems and Personalir), Organzzarlon. (Wtley Publ.. New York. N.Y., 1961). Hergenthan. B. R.. An Inrroductlon IO Th~orres o/Learnrng. (Prentrce-Hall. Englewood Chffs, N.J . 1976). Professional Examination Preparatton in Lenttlhon. Robert W and Anthony T Krzystofik. AACSB Accredtted and Member Schools. Issues rn Accountrng Educafron. 1983. (Amertcan Accountmg Assoctation. Sarasota, FL.. 1983). 3849 Mtller. G A., The Magtcal Number Seven. Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits On Our Capacity for Processtng Information, fs~rhologrcal Revrew. (March, 1956): 81-97. Reilly. R. R., and E. L. Lewts, Educatronal Psycholog?: Applications For Classroom Learnmg and fnsrrucrion. (Macmtllan Publishtng. New York. N.Y., 1983). Renner. J W.. D Stafford, A. Lawson, J. McKinnon. F. Frtot. and D. Kellog, Research. Tearhrng. and LParnrng \c,rth rhe Auger Model, (Umversity of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK.. 1976) Shute, George E.. Accounrrng Studenrs and Absrracr Reasomngs: An Exploratory Study. (Amertcan Accountmg Association. Sarasota, FL., 1979).

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi