Using Cooperative Small Groups in Introductory ...

Journal of Education for Business

ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20

Using Cooperative Small Groups in Introductory Accounting Classes: A Practical Approach Cynthia Miglietti To cite this article: Cynthia Miglietti (2002) Using Cooperative Small Groups in Introductory Accounting Classes: A Practical Approach, Journal of Education for Business, 78:2, 111-115, DOI: 10.1080/08832320209599707 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832320209599707

Published online: 31 Mar 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 26

View related articles

Citing articles: 6 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20 Download by: [Shanghai Jiaotong University]

Date: 14 January 2016, At: 14:38

Downloaded by [Shanghai Jiaotong University] at 14:38 14 January 2016

Using Cooperative Small Groups in Introductory Accounting Classes: A Practical Approach CYNTHIA MlGLlElTl Bowling Green State University Huron, Ohio

T

he design and delivery of accounting course material have been changing. One change has been the integration of cooperative learning into the accounting curriculum. The Accounting Education Change Commission (AECC) has argued that changes in the workplace have brought about the need for new approaches to teaching introductory accounting. Many social, governmental, and business organizations have been using a team or participative management system in which teams of employees, rather than individuals, are responsible for achieving the organization’s goals. In Position Statement No. One: Objectives of Education f o r Accountants, the AECC recommended that accounting education should integrate the use of teams or cooperative small groups. According to the AECC (1990), Students must be active participants in the learning process, not passive recipients of information. They should identify and solve unstructured problems that require the use of multiple information sources. Learning by doing should be emphasized. Working in groups should be encouraged. (p. 5 )

Working in groups facilitates the development of communication and interpersonal skills and increases student involvement in the learning process. The AECC reinforced the importance of the use of small groups in the introductory

ABSTRACT. Because groups or teams are commonly used in the workplace, organizations need employees who can be effective team members. In this article, the author discusses her use of cooperative small groups in an introductory accounting class and provides guidelines for their formation, orientation, and evaluation. Statistical analysis showed that the groups enhanced student achievement in the accounting class.

accounting courses in Position Statement No. Two: The First Course in Accounting. This statement emphasized that there should be a priority placed on faculty-student interaction and on interaction among students. The AECC stated that “students’ involvement should be promoted by methods such as cases, simulations, and group projects” (AECC, 1992, p. 4). Business faculty members can enrich the classroom experience through the integration of cooperative small-group learning techniques in the first accounting courses. Through this approach, students learn by interacting with others and drawing from a wider pool of resources while working on complex cases or projects. Cooperative learning is “a method that uses cooperation as a learning mode to involve all students, increase interactions among students, and promote collaboration in the solution of assigned tasks” (Odafe, 1994, p. 28). Research on

the effectiveness of cooperative smallgroup learning techniques indicates that they can foster critical thinking skills, improve interpersonal skills, increase active participation in learning, and enhance student achievement (Holt & Swanson, 1995; Odafe, 1994). When students work together on a project, they experience improved productivity, a shared workload, varied perspectives and experiences, and greater empowerment and satisfaction in the outcome. The use of cooperative small groups allows students to learn by helping each other and valuing each person’s contribution to the case or project.

Group Formation Group formation is the responsibility of the instructor, not the student. Research has indicated that students report a positive learning experience when groups are formed by the instructor (Berry, Rinehart, & Troutman, 1998). Students report the most negative experiences when they form their own groups because there are many students who are not selected by any of their classmates to join a group (Johnson & Johnson, 1997). The formation of groups by the instructor in the beginning accounting course will help to ensure that no one is left out, thus eliminating a student’s fear that he or she will not be invited to join a group. NovemberYDecember 2002

111

Downloaded by [Shanghai Jiaotong University] at 14:38 14 January 2016

The first decision to be made addresses the following question: How large will the groups be? The groups should be large enough to handle assigned tasks effectively, but not so large that their members become bogged down by scheduling difficulties. Research has shown that students report the most positive results when working in groups of between three and six members; this size provides each group member with an opportunity to participate actively (Odafe, 1994). Four students per group is an ideal size because it allows for an equitable sharing of the workload and tends to increase productivity (Johnson & Johnson, 1997). The second decision to be made concerns how groups will be chosen. The formation of the groups can be a good learning experience for students. It will give them a chance to think about the advantages of working together and the essential ingredients of teamwork. In the first semester of an accounting course, however, “students are generally not savvy enough to do a good job at group formation” (Pincus, 1996, p. 13 in chapter 5), so group composition should be determined by the instructor. The instructor can put together groups based on geography, work or class schedules, diversity, or knowledge and skill levels of students (Butterfield & Bailey, 1996). The third decision is whether the groups should remain intact over the semester. Research has shown that students learn more when their group remains intact over the semester (Pincus, 1996) and that the group develops interdependence and trust over time (Berry et al., 1998). However, when groups do not work well together, the semester can be very long for both the group and the instructor. Thus, it may be necessary for the instructor to intervene before the problems escalate beyond repair. I have been using cooperative small groups in my classes for many years and have had to intervene only once. In that case, the members met with me individually and then as a group to find ways to handle the discord. Although the group members did not work as well together as I had hoped, they did complete all of the assignments and learned some valuable lessons about handling different person112

Journal of Education for Business

alities in a work group. Conversely, over the years, many groups in my classes have worked well together and have told me, at the end of the semester, that they wished the class did not have to end and thus cause their group’s disbanding. The final decision to be made concerns the number of group assignments that should be planned. This issue is significant because (a) if group work does not count for at least one third of a student’s grade, the group will not be motivated to complete the work (Pincus, 1996), and (b) if the groups receive only one or two group assignments, they will not deal with group problems such as freeloaders or dominating individuals (Berry et al., 1998). I have found that three out-of-class and three in-class graded assignments that make up approximately 35% of the course grade have worked very well at a nonresidential campus.

Group Orientation Once the decisions about group formation have been made, the class should be given an orientation session on working together in cooperative small groups. In my experience, presenting the orientation as an in-class group exercise during the first week of the semester helps students get to know each other and see the importance of group work. The first two questions to be discussed in the group exercise are (a) What are the advantages of teams? and (b) What are the essential ingredients for good teamwork? Each group compiles a list and shares it with the class. I prepare a handout based on that discussion (see Table l), distribute it to the class, and encourage the students to refer to this list every time they work with their group. A second issue that needs to be addressed during the group orientation concerns selecting the responsibilities of individual group members. Each group member’s role must be clearly communicated before group work begins. During the first week of class, students can be given a handout specifying the rules for the graded assignments, their obligations, and their responsibility to do their fair share of the work (Pincus, 1996). The rules handout should include the following:

The administrative matters. These include length of the assignments, type font and size, number of pages, margins, number of copies to be turned in, and a cover page indicating the names and signatures of each group member and how they helped to complete the assignment. The policy on late assignments should be stipulated. The “leave of absence” option. This option is designed to help the student who has an extraordinary problem in meeting his or her group responsibility. For example, a student may have an out-of-town work obligation on the day the group is to meet. This option can be used only once without a penalty. If a student decides to take another leave of absence, a penalty of 10% of the available assessed credit would be imposed. The leave option helps those who are unable to attend one group meeting; it does not allow members to complete all of the group assignments as individuals. The “fired” option. Though most group problems can be worked out, there may be extreme cases in which nothing seems to help the group work together. Ultimately, the group has the option to fire a group member, as an TABLE 1. Accounting 221: Working in Teams (10:30 A.M. MWF)

Advantages of teams 1. Improved productivity 2. Work is divided among many; shared workload 3. Student empowerment; ownership and satisfaction 4. Different perspectivedlife experiences 5. Improved communication 6. Better than a large group Teamwork Essential ingredients 1. Strive to achieve same goals 2. Willing collaboration 3. Monitoring one another’s performance 4. Providing feedback to and accepting it from other team members 5. Effective communication among team members 6. Success of team depends on group interaction 7. Fosters cohesiveness among team members

Downloaded by [Shanghai Jiaotong University] at 14:38 14 January 2016

employer would fire an employee who does not perform. A firing requires advance written notification to the fired group member and the instructor, along with the signatures of all other group members. This option must be approved by the instructor and is final; there is no rehiring. The fired student must then complete all remaining group assignments as an individual and, in addition, is penalized 10% of the points for the remaining group assignments. Peer evaluations. Group members should evaluate their peers at the end of the semester. Five to ten percent of the total course points are awarded based on these evaluations; this would be enough to make a half-a-grade letter difference. The instructor may be tempted to override the evaluations, particularly if a group awards the maximum points to its members. However, the instructor should not do this because most students give very thoughtful feedback on the evaluations and end up awarding maximum points to each group member infrequently. Once the group members’ responsibilities are clearly communicated, the group members understand what is expected of them and are ready to begin working cooperatively.To help the groups as they work together on their assignments, I distribute the form “Team Member Roles and Responsibilities” (see Table 2), which must be completed and attached to each graded group assignment. Additionally, group member responsibilities must be rotated for every group project so that each member has the opportunity to take a different role.

Avoiding Group Problems To avoid problems with groups, the class should spend some time discussing teamwork skills, organizing the teams, and working on a team project under the watchful eye of the instructor. The inclass group project should take about 30 minutes to complete, be a relatively simple case, and involve every student. For the first accounting class, Pincus (1995) developed an excellent group project called “Early Accounting Systems” (p. 1-1-7). In this project, students use Play Doh to develop an accounting system based on barter. The project touches on

aspects of inventory control, recording transactions, and theft of assets, all without using journals, money, or computers. The project causes the students to work together to come up with solutions to an accounting-based problem when they do not have any accounting knowledge. The use of Play Doh may seem silly, but at the end of class most students, including the nontraditional ones, tell me that they really enjoyed the project and found it a very good way to get to know their group members and begin a working relationship with them. Many also find the group project a nonthreatening introduction to accounting, a subject that scares some students. After the project has been completed and each group has shared its solution with the class, the instructor can use the experience to teach about working in cooperative small groups. Even with the best preparation, however, some groups just cannot or will not work well together. One of the most common problems associated with cooperative small groups is freeloading, the unequal distribution of individual effort devoted to completing assignments (Berry et al., 1998). When working in a group, some students may exert less energy on the project, with the expectation that someone else in the

group will take responsibility for making sure that the project is completed and has been done well enough to gain sufficient credit for a good performance. The instructor can encourage greater group participation with a well-crafted evaluation tool.

Performance Evaluation Instructors must have evaluation tools in place for measuring a student’s individual effort on the group projects. This will help to discourage students who tend to shirk their responsibilities in group projects. It is important that the grading system provide incentives for effective group interaction and problem solving. One of the best approaches for measuring individual input on group projects is the use of peer evaluations. However, to make sure that the evaluation process does not become a popularity contest, the instructor must maintain majority control over the allocation of the grades. To accomplish both objectives, the instructor can have a group grade (G) that accounts for approximately 30% to 40% of the total grade, with 5% to 10% of that total based on the peer evaluation (P). The rest of the student’s grade would consist of individual work, including graded assign-

TABLE 2. Accounting 221 :Team Member Roles and Responsibilities (Fall 2001) (Groups to Fill in Names)

Roles and responsibilities

Exer 4-4

Assignment Prob 6-2

Prob 8-8

Team leader Keeps the team on task Ensures that everyone has a chance to speak Substitutes for reporter Reporter Keeps team record updated Completes “team role and responsibilities” Substitutes for missing team members Serves as team spokesman Solution recorder Writes down team’s ideadanswers to in-class exercises If asked, presents team’s solution to the class Reader Summarizes homework requirements to team Offers initial solution to homework

November/December 2002

113

ments (I) and tests (T). Research has shown that this should result in student satisfaction with cooperative small groups (Berry et al., 1998). The peer evaluation component of the group grade should be delineated in the syllabus and mentioned periodically throughout the semester. The evaluation form should be distributed near the end of the semester and completed after the last

group assignment. The instructor should explain the importance of the evaluation and stress that it should be completed by students individually, not in groups. Additionally, the instructor should assure students of the confidentiality of the process. In Table 3, I present the “Team Evaluation,” which I distribute about 3 weeks before the end of the semester. The students are required to provide

TABLE 3. Accounting 221:Team Evaluation

Downloaded by [Shanghai Jiaotong University] at 14:38 14 January 2016

Team members are typically much more aware of the level and effectiveness of the contributions of fellow team members than the course instructor is. Please evaluate yourself and your teammates by using the following scale: Very good (VG) Good (G) Average (A) Marginal (M) Weak (W)

Exceptional participation in team activities; homework completed for each class period; attends every class; leads the team activities. Participates well in team activities; homework completed on a regular basis; attends every class. Acceptable preparation and participation in team learning activities; attends every class. Poor preparation and participation in team learning activities; some effort was made but accomplishments were noticeably below average; has missed several classes. Little effort appears to have been made to prepare and/or participate in team learning activities; poor class attendance.

NOTE: Please include comments documenting the contributions of the person you are evaluating. Your name Comments and analysis:

VG

G

A

M

W

Team member #2 Comments and analysis:

VG

G

A

M

W

Team member #3 Comments and analysis:

VG

G

A

M

W

Team member #4 Comments and analysis:

VG

G

A

M

W

Assume that you had $100 that was to be split among your group members according to each member’s contributions to your group’s activities (both in class and out of class). How would you split the $loo? Please list the group members’ names and how much you would award as a performance bonus to each person. Your name

Amount

Team member #2

Amount

Team member #3

Amount

Team member #4

Amount Total

114

Journal of Educationfor Business

$100.00

comments about each group member’s performance to justify their evaluation. Most students take the evaluation very seriously and spend time considering how they will grade their work with the group as well as each group member. After spending the semester facilitating and observing several in-class group projects, I have found that most evaluations confirm what I have already observed. On occasion, the evaluations are so positive and the group has worked so well together that I give the group some additional or bonus points.

Student Achievement To determine whether the use of cooperative small groups had an effect on student achievement, I compiled grades in the introductory accounting course from fall 1998 through fall 2001. The sample consisted of 246 students from a 2-year branch campus of a large 4-year regional midwestern institution.As noted in Table 4, I found a high degree of correlation, dominated by the test scores, between the test and group (TG); test, group, and individual (TGI); and test, group, individual, and peer (TGIP). Because of the large study size, these were highly significant findings. The individual scores alone were not highly correlated with the test scores or test and group scores (TG). Through statistical analysis based on frequency testing, I found that using cooperative small groups in introductory accounting classes did enhance student achievement.This finding confirms previous research by Ciccotello, D’Amico, and Grant (1997) on achievement in an accounting principles course. Those researchers found that “students graded on both individual and group basis outperformed students graded only on an individual basis” (p. 2) and that students working in groups were able to succeed by helping and encouraging one another’s efforts to learn. In Table 5 , I report the student grades for coursework by frequency. I found that the group grade was higher than the individual and test grades and that the peer evaluation, which was part of the group grade, was also higher than the individual and test grades. This is not surprising, given the fact that students were grading themselves and each group member.

Interestingly, I found that 92% of students received a grade of A or B on their group assignments and 91% received a grade of B or higher on the peer evaluation. On the individual assignments, only 72% of the students received a grade of B or higher. However, only 44%of the students received an A or B on test scores. I present the percentage data in Table 6. It should be noted that students who did not complete the course and students com-

pleting the course with a failing grade were eliminated from the sample. The number of students with failing grades was small and had an insignificant effect on the sample results.

Putting Cooperative Small Groups Into Practice The use of groups or teams is becoming more common in the workplace.

TABLE 4. Pearson Correlation Coefficients ( N = 246)

Downloaded by [Shanghai Jiaotong University] at 14:38 14 January 2016

Test Individual Test

TG

0.45547

0.46246

0.68629

0.69133

(< .0001)

(< .0001)

(< .0001)

0.98897

0.98897

0.95 106

0.94722

(< .0001) 1

(< .0001)

(< .0001)

0.96225

(< .0001)

TGI

0.95 106 (< .0001) 0.94722 (< .0001)

TGIP

TGIP

(< .0001)

1

TG

TGI

0.9591

(< .owl)

0.96225 (< .0001) 0.9591 (< .0001)

(< .0001)

0.9989 (< .0001) 1

1

0.99897 (< .0001)

Note. All p values = Prob > I r I under H,: correlation = 0. Key. TG = test and group; TGI = test, group, and individual; TGIP = test, group, individual, and peer.

TABLE 5. Student Grades for Coursework, by Frequency Grade A

B C D

Group

Peer

Individual

Test

TG

TGI

TGIP

45 182 18 1

139 86 20 1

52 126 33 35

35 74 68 69

34 93 88 31

31 96 88 31

31 108 79 28

Key. TG = test and group; TGI = test, group, and individual; TGIP = test, group, individual, and peer.

TABLE 6. Student Grades for Coursework, in Percentages Grade A

B C D

Group

Peer

Individual

Test

TG

TGI

TGIP

18 74 7

56 35 8

1

1

21 51 14 14

14 30 28 28

14 38 36 12

13 39 36 12

13 44 32 11

Given the increasing need for employees who can be effective team members and evidence of enhanced student achievement, instructors should incorporate the use of cooperative small groups in their introductory accounting classes. A number of guidelines exist, supported by empirical data, concerning group formation, orientation, and evaluation. The instructor should form groups consisting of four members, keep the group intact over the semester, and provide enough graded group assignments to account for 30% to 40% of the course grade. The roles and responsibilities of individual group members and the group problem-solving methods must be clearly communicated. Finally, evaluation tools must be delineated that recognize and measure individual effort on the group projects. REFERENCES Accounting Education Change Commission (AECC). (1 990, September). Position Statement No. One: Objectives of education for accountants. Torrence, CA: Author. Accounting Education Change Commission (AECC). (1992, June). Position Statement No. Two: The jirst course in accounting. Torrence, CA: Author. Berry, K., Rinehart, S., & Troutman, C. (1998). Integrating groups into the accounting classroom. Accounting Instructors’ Report, 21, 4-6. Butterfield, J., & Bailey, J. J. (1996). Socially engineered groups in business curricula: An investigation of the effects of team composition on group output. Journal of Education for Business, 72(2), 103-106. Ciccotello, C. S., D’Amico, R. J., & Grant, C. T. (1997). An empirical examination of cooperative learning and student performance in managerial accounting. Accounting Education, 2( l), 1-7. Holt, D. L., & Swanson, J. G. (1995). Use of AECC directives and cooperative learning theory in introductory accounting classes. Journal of Education for Business, 70(6), 348-350. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. (1997). Joining together: Group theory and group skills (6th ed.). New York: AIlyn & Bacon. Odafe, V. (1994,). Implementing change in the mathematics classroom through the use of the cooperative small group instructional technique (C.S.G.I.T.). Connecticut Mathematics Journal, Fall, 28-36. Pincus, K. (1995). Core concepts of accounting information: Instructor’s notes for theme I (1995-1996 ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Pincus, K. (1996). Core concepts of accounting information: Planning guide. (19961997 ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Key. TG = test and group; TGI = test, group, and individual; TGIP = test, group, individual, and peer.

NovembedDecember 2002

115