OATdb Archive

2009 - 2010

Accounting MS

Goal
Functional Competencies For Entry Into The Accounting Profession
In July 1999, the AICPA Board endorsed The AICPA Core Competency Framework for Entry into the Accounting Profession (the Framework). The Framework emphasizes skills and competencies universally applicable to a diverse and growing array of accounting career options rather than a more traditional content approach (i.e., topics tested on the CPA exam).

 

The Framework breaks these needed competencies into three broad categories (functional, personal, and broad business perspective). Functional Competencies relate to the technical competencies most closely aligned with the value contributed by accounting professionals. As such the AICPA's Functional Competencies are the goal of the SHSU MS in Accounting. The AICPA has identified six Functional Competencies.

- Decision Modeling

- Risk Analysis

- Measurement

- Reporting

- Research

- Leverage Technology to Develop and Enhance Functional Competencies.

 

At the graduate level, the Department of Accounting has selected five of these six competencies as objectives. The five competencies that will be assessed at the graduate level are:

- Decision Modeling

- Risk Analysis

- Reporting

- Research

- Leverage Technology to Develop and Enhance Functional Competencies.


Objective
Decision Modeling Competency
Individuals preparing to enter the accounting profession must be able to use strategic and critical approaches to decision-making. They must objectively consider issues, identify alternatives, and choose and implement solution approaches in order to deliver services and provide value.

Elements (Sub-Objectives) include:

- Identifies problems and potential solution approaches

- Uses quantitative techniques to determine relative importance and likelihood of alternative scenarios

- Employs model-building to quantify problems or test solutions

- Evaluates the cost/benefit of alternative solutions

- Organizes and evaluates information, alternatives, cost/benefits, risks and rewards

- Links data, knowledge, and insights together for decision-making purposes

- Objectively identifies strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats associated with a specific scenario, case, or business activity 


Indicator
Course Embedded Measures Of Decision Modeling Competency
A mix of exam questions, projects, cases, and / or problem assignments, in multiple courses spread across the accounting curriculum, will be used to assess students' achievement on selected sub-objectives of the Decision Modeling competency. The mix depends on the course in which the assessment is being made and the instructor’s choice of instrument and selected sub-objectives.  The results from the various classes will be forwarded to the Departmental Assessment Committee.  This committee will compile the results and present the findings to the departmental faculty.  



Criterion
Level Of Success Standard For Decision Modeling Competency
In each course, the instructor will determine a minimal acceptable score for each indicator used for assessment in that class.  This minimal acceptable score may vary both across classes as well as inside a particular class.  This variability is necessary due to the different type of indicators (exam questions, projects, cases, and / or problem assignments) used to assess students' achievement on selected sub-objectives of the Decision Modeling competency.

Once the assessment of Decision Modeling is completed in the appropriate courses, the percentage of successful student attempts (number of students successfully completing the specific outcome predetermined success level divided by the total number of students attempting the specific outcome) will be reported for each class.   The Departmental Assessment Committee will then compile the reports into an aggregated report that will show the success percentage by classification (junior, senior, and graduate).  The Department of Accounting has set different target standards based on classification.  The standards are 60% for junior-level classes, 70% for senior-level classes, and 75% for graduate-level classes. 


Finding
Decision Modeling Competency Finding
                   Junior   Seniors   Combined

Successes      373       96          469

Attempts        630       132        762

Success Ratio 59.2%    72.7%    61.5%

Minimum
Acceptable
Rate             60%       70%




Action
Decision Modeling Competency Action
At the junior level, the success ratio falls below the minimum acceptable level of 60% by less than one percentage point. While one sub-objective (link data, knowledge, and insights together for decision-making purposes) was assessed at 68.1%, the assessed levels of two other sub-objectives were not as strong.  The sub-objective related to using quantitative techniques to determine relative importance and likelihood of alternative scenarios was below the minimum acceptable level at 56.3%.  The other sub-objective related to employing model-building to quantify problems or test solutions was below the minimum acceptable level at 53.7%.  The faculty teaching courses at the junior level should consider additional problem and case assignments, as well as increased class discussions where appropriate in the curriculum, that address these two sub-objectives.

At the senior level, the success ratio exceeds the minimum acceptable level of 70% by almost three percentage points.  While one sub-objective (identify problems and potential solution approaches) was assessed at 77.3%, the other sub-objective assessed (link data, knowledge, and insights together for decision-making purposes) was slightly below the minimum acceptable level at 68.2%.  The department should consider additional problem and case assignment, as well as increased class discussions where appropriate in the curriculum, that address this sub-objective.


Objective
Risk Analysis Competency
Risk analysis and control is fundamental to professional service delivery. The identification and management of audit risk (that is, the risk that the auditor will fail to detect a misstatement, caused by inadvertent error or fraud, that is material to financial statements) is the basis for the conduct of a GAAS audit. The understanding of business risk (that is, the risk that an entity - either a client or the prospective accounting professionals employer - will fail to achieve its objectives) affects how business strategy is created and implemented.

Elements (Sub-Objectives) include:

- Identifies risks of negative outcomes (including fraud)

- Evaluates controls that mitigate risk of negative outcomes through prevention or detection and correction

- Assesses and controls unmitigated risks through, for example, designing and applying tests

- Communicates the impact of identified risks and recommends corrective action 

Indicator
Course Embedded Measures Of Risk Analysis Competency
A mix of exam questions, projects, cases, and / or problem assignments, in multiple courses spread across the accounting curriculum, will be used to assess students' achievement on selected sub-objectives of the Risk Analysis competency. The mix depends on the course in which the assessment is being made and the instructor’s choice of instrument and selected sub-objectives.  The results from the various classes will be forwarded to the Departmental Assessment Committee.  This committee will compile the results and present the findings to the departmental faculty.  



Criterion
Level Of Success Standard For Risk Analysis Competency
In each course, the instructor will determine a minimal acceptable score for each indicator used for assessment in that class.  This minimal acceptable score may vary both across classes as well as inside a particular class.  This variability is necessary due to the different type of indicators (exam questions, projects, cases, and / or problem assignments) used to assess students' achievement on selected sub-objectives of the Risk Analysis competency.

Once the assessment of Risk Analysis is completed in the appropriate courses, the percentage of successful student attempts (number of students successfully completing the specific outcome predetermined success level divided by the total number of students attempting the specific outcome) will be reported for each class.   The Departmental Assessment Committee will then compile the reports into an aggregated report that will show the success percentage by classification (junior, senior, and graduate).  The Department of Accounting has set different target standards based on classification.  The standards are 60% for junior-level classes, 70% for senior-level classes, and 75% for graduate-level classes. 



Finding
Risk Analysis Competency Finding
                       Junior     Graduate     Combined

Successes         115         157            272

Attempts           153         201            354

Success Ratio    75.2%      78.1%        76.8%

Minimum
Acceptable
Rate                 60%         75%


Action
Risk Analysis Competency Action
At the junior level, the success ratio exceeds the minimum acceptable level of 60% by over 15 percentage points.  While this is a highly acceptable result, faculty teaching courses at the junior level in which this objective is to be assessed may wish to consider adding, where possible given course content, additional sub-objectives to their assessment strategies that may serve to cross validate this finding.  The graduate success ratio exceeds the minimum acceptable level of 75% by approximately 3 percentage points.  Although two of the sub-objectives in this content area (identify risk of negative outcomes; communicate the impact of identified risks and recommend corrective action) were each assessed at over 90% success ratios, the assessed levels of the two other sub-objectives were not as strong.   The sub-objective related to evaluating controls that mitigate risks of negative outcomes through prevention or detection or correction was only slightly above the minimum acceptable level at 79.3%.  The other sub-objective involving assessing and controlling unmitigated risks through designing and applying tests was significantly below the acceptable level at 58.9%.  The department should consider additional problem and case assignments as well as increased class discussions, where appropriate in the curriculum, that address these two sub-objectives. 

Objective
Reporting Competency
Communicating the scope of work and findings or recommendations is an integral part of a professional service. An accounting professional in public practice might issue an audit or attestation report, recommendations for improved services, or tax or financial planning advice. An accounting professional in business, industry, or government might analyze operations or provide communications to the board of directors. Communicating clearly and objectively the work done and the resulting findings is critical to the value of the professional service. Some forms of communication are governed by professional standards (such as the form and content of the standard auditor's report or the required communications to audit committees) or law. Others are based on the service applied and the needs of those to whom the accounting professional reports.

Elements (Sub-Objectives) include:

- Prepares reports with objectivity, conciseness and clarity

- Describes work performed and conclusions reached in a manner that enhances the reports' usefulness

- Employs appropriate media in report preparation and presentation 


Indicator
Course Embedded Measures Of Reporting Competency
A mix of exam questions, projects, cases, and / or problem assignments, in multiple courses spread across the accounting curriculum, will be used to assess students' achievement on selected sub-objectives of the Reporting competency. The mix depends on the course in which the assessment is being made and the instructor’s choice of instrument and selected sub-objectives.  The results from the various classes will be forwarded to the Departmental Assessment Committee.  This committee will compile the results and present the findings to the departmental faculty.  

  

Criterion
Level Of Success Standard For Reporting Competency
In each course, the instructor will determine a minimal acceptable score for each indicator used for assessment in that class.  This minimal acceptable score may vary both across classes as well as inside a particular class.  This variability is necessary due to the different type of indicators (exam questions, projects, cases, and / or problem assignments) used to assess students' achievement on selected sub-objectives of the Reporting competency.

Once the assessment of Reporting is completed in the appropriate courses, the percentage of successful student attempts (number of students successfully completing the specific outcome predetermined success level divided by the total number of students attempting the specific outcome) will be reported for each class.   The Departmental Assessment Committee will then compile the reports into an aggregated report that will show the success percentage by classification (junior, senior, and graduate).  The Department of Accounting has set different target standards based on classification.  The standards are 60% for junior-level classes, 70% for senior-level classes, and 75% for graduate-level classes. 


Finding
Reporting Competency Finding
                     Junior     Senior     Graduate     Combined

Successes       381         217        88               686

Attempts         585         334       91                1,010

Success
Ratio               65.1%     65.0%   96.7%           67.9%


Action
Reporting Competency Action
At the junior level, the success ratio exceeds the minimum acceptable level of 60%. While this is an acceptable result, faculty teaching courses at the junior level in which this objective is to be assessed may wish to consider adding, where appropriate given course content, additional sub-objectives to their assessment strategies that may serve to cross-validate this finding.

The senior level success ratio is five percentage points below the minimum acceptable level of 70%.  This is due to the results of two sub-objectives:

(1) Prepare reports with objectivity, conciseness and clarity.

(2)Describe work performed and conclusions reached in a manner that enhances the reports’ usefulness.

The department should consider additional assignments and increased class discussions, where appropriate in the curriculum, that address the sub-objectives related to preparing reports with objectivity, conciseness and clarity and describing work performed and conclusions reached in a manner that enhances the reports’ usefulness.

The graduate success ratio was well above the minimum acceptable level of 75%. While this is a highly acceptable result, faculty teaching graduate courses in which this objective is to be assessed may wish to consider adding, where appropriate given course content, additional sub-objectives to their assessment strategies that may serve to cross-validate this finding.


Objective
Research Competency
Although accounting professionals need a foundation in standards and other relevant rules, such guidance is constantly evolving. Many accounting profession functions depend on obtaining information from within and outside of an entity. Accordingly, the individual preparing to enter the accounting profession needs to have strong research skills to access relevant guidance or other information, understand it, and apply it.

Elements (Sub-Objectives) include:               

- Employs relevant research skills

- Accesses relevant standards, rules, and other information

- Evaluates different sources of information and reconciles conflicting or ambiguous data

- Analogizes from existing rules to problems not explicitly described

- Identifies relevant information such as industry trends, internal performance history, benchmarks, and best practices


Indicator
Course Embedded Measures Of Research Competency
A mix of exam questions, projects, cases, and / or problem assignments, in multiple courses spread across the accounting curriculum, will be used to assess students' achievement on selected sub-objectives of the Research competency. The mix depends on the course in which the assessment is being made and the instructor’s choice of instrument and selected sub-objectives.  The results from the various classes will be forwarded to the Departmental Assessment Committee.  This committee will compile the results and present the findings to the departmental faculty.  



Criterion
Level Of Success Standard For Research Competency
In each course, the instructor will determine a minimal acceptable score for each indicator used for assessment in that class.  This minimal acceptable score may vary both across classes as well as inside a particular class.  This variability is necessary due to the different type of indicators (exam questions, projects, cases, and / or problem assignments) used to assess students' achievement on selected sub-objectives of the Research competency.

Once the assessment of Research is completed in the appropriate courses, the percentage of successful student attempts (number of students successfully completing the specific outcome predetermined success level divided by the total number of students attempting the specific outcome) will be reported for each class.   The Departmental Assessment Committee will then compile the reports into an aggregated report that will show the success percentage by classification (junior, senior, and graduate).  The Department of Accounting has set different target standards based on classification.  The standards are 60% for junior-level classes, 70% for senior-level classes, and 75% for graduate-level classes. 




Finding
Research Competency Finding
                     Graduate

 Successes        667

 Attempts         741

 Success 
 Ratio              90.0%

Minimum
Acceptable
Rate                75%


Action
Research Competency Action
The success ratio was well above the minimum acceptable level of 75%. However, one sub-objective (analogize from existing rules to problems not explicitly described) was below the minimum acceptable level.  Where appropriate, the department should consider additional problem and case assignments requiring students to apply knowledge gained to situations not explicitly described.  These additional assignments and increased class discussions could include, for example, more “real world” problems, cases and related examples. 


Objective
Leveraging Technology To Develop And Enhance Functional Competencies
Technology is pervasive in the accounting profession. Individuals entering the accounting profession must acquire the necessary skills to use technology tools effectively and efficiently. These technology tools can be used both to develop and apply other functional competencies.

Elements (Sub-Objectives) include:

- Accesses appropriate electronic databases to obtain decision-supporting information

- Assesses the risk of technology and automated business processes

- Uses technology assisted tools to assess and control risk and document work performed

- Builds appropriate models and simulations using electronic spreadsheets and other software 


Indicator
Course Embedded Measures Of Leveraging Technology To Develop And Enhance Functional Competencies
A mix of exam questions, projects, cases, and / or problem assignments, in multiple courses spread across the accounting curriculum, will be used to assess students' achievement on selected sub-objectives of the Leveraging Technology competency. The mix depends on the course in which the assessment is being made and the instructor’s choice of instrument and selected sub-objectives.  The results from the various classes will be forwarded to the Departmental Assessment Committee.  This committee will compile the results and present the findings to the departmental faculty.  


Criterion
Level Of Success Standard For Leveraging Technology To Develop And Enhance Functional Competencies
In each course, the instructor will determine a minimal acceptable score for each indicator used for assessment in that class.  This minimal acceptable score may vary both across classes as well as inside a particular class.  This variability is necessary due to the different type of indicators (exam questions, projects, cases, and / or problem assignments) used to assess students' achievement on selected sub-objectives of the Leveraging Technology competency.

Once the assessment of Leveraging Technoloy is completed in the appropriate courses, the percentage of successful student attempts (number of students successfully completing the specific outcome predetermined success level divided by the total number of students attempting the specific outcome) will be reported for each class.   The Departmental Assessment Committee will then compile the reports into an aggregated report that will show the success percentage by classification (junior, senior, and graduate).  The Department of Accounting has set different target standards based on classification.  The standards are 60% for junior-level classes, 70% for senior-level classes, and 75% for graduate-level classes. 




Finding
Leveraging Technology To Develop And Enhance Functional Competencies Finding
                    Junior       Senior      Graduate      Combined

Successes      355           24           151              530

Attempts        375           41          166               582

Success
Ratio             94.7%        58.5%     91.0%          91.1%


Action
Leveraging Technology To Develop And Enhance Functional Competencies Action
Although the success ratio at the junior level exceeds the minimum of 60% by over 24 percentage points, faculty teaching the courses in which this objective was assessed may consider, given the content of the courses involved, adding additional sub-objectives to their assessment strategies to cross validate this finding.  The senior level ratio is over 11 percentage points below the acceptable threshold due to the effect of the one sub-objective assessed:   building appropriate models and simulations using electronic spreadsheets and other software.  Although there was a comparatively small number of measurements for this sub-objective that may have affected this outcome, the department should address the possible need of placing greater emphasis on the use of electronic spreadsheets and other software in model building through additional problem and/or case assignments as well as greater emphasis in class discussions, where appropriate given course content and structure.  The graduate success ratio exceeds the minimum threshold by over 16 percentage points.  While this is a most acceptable result, faculty in the graduate courses where leveraging technology is assessed may consider  adding additional sub-objectives, if possible due to course content, to their assessment criteria in order to cross validate this finding.



Update to previous cycle's plan for continuous improvement

Plan for continuous improvement Overall, student performance on the AICPA's Core Competencies was generally, but not universally, above the departmental determined minimum values of performance. Even so, there was room for improvement.  The faculty of the department will continue to moniter the progress in each individual course and adjustments to the curricula will be made as specified above, including increased class discussions and activities related to preparing reports with objectivity, conciseness and clarity and describing work performed and conclusions reached in a manner that enhances the reports’ usefulness.  While the AICPA's Core (Functional) Competencies are specific enough to cover the requirements for success in the accounting profession, the Competencies are also general enough to not require updating each year.  However, the topics that may be used to determine success on these competencies may change from time-to-time.  For instance, the movement from US GAAP to International Accounting Standards will result in new emphasis in some accounting classes.  Consequently, the faculty of the department will continue to assess the students' success on the Core Competencies, but the curriculum inside each class will be adjusted to meet the most up-to-date accounting standards.