COVID-19: The Continuing Challenges of Professional Accreditation in University Accounting & Finance Departments
Sarah Jones, Secretary, British Accounting & Finance Association, CDAF; Professor Joan Ballantine, Chair, British Accounting & Finance Association, CDAF; Vice-Chair, Accounting Education Special Interest Group.
Background
As we progress through the 2021–2022 academic year in the UK University sector, still facing some restrictions due to Covid-19, the planning cycle in order to deliver robust, fair and appropriate assessment materials is gathering pace. As in previous years, those in the professional subject areas, such as medicine, nursing, law and accounting and finance, need to consider the accreditation requirements of their professional bodies as a key part of this process.
A significant number of UK universities who deliver accounting and finance degree programmes target the accreditation opportunities which are bestowed by the major accountancy bodies (e.g. ICAEW, ICAS, CAI, ACCA, CIMA CIPFA). In an earlier blog published in May 2020, we reported on the early experiences of accounting and finance academics on a number of accreditation issues. These experiences suggested that accounting and finance academics had had little time to respond to and innovate in the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic in terms of the accreditation piece within their respective departments. Rather, the key focus in the early days of the pandemic was on dealing with the demands of moving from face to face to online teaching.
In a second blog, published in November 2020, we reported on updated insights concerning accounting and finance accreditation, drawing on in-depth discussions with UK professional accountancy bodies and accounting and finance academics. These discussions identified five key issues that accounting and finance academics needed to consider in planning for accreditation: the length of time permitted for online examinations; invigilation of online examinations; the question style to adopt for online examinations; dealing with plagiarism and collusion; and moderation processes and the potential for grade inflation.
An Update: Regulatory Influence
In mid-2020, a few months after the initial UK lockdown, the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) who regulate the auditing, accounting and actuarial professions and set the UK’s Corporate Governance and Stewardship Codes, granted the accounting professional bodies a temporary concession allowing for a range of alternative assessments to be used. Just over one year later in April 2021, the FRC announced that the temporary concession for alternative assessments was being withdrawn, effective from 31 December 2021. As a result, UK universities seeking professional accreditation from the various accounting bodies will be required to ensure that examinations are invigilated from January 2022 onwards. To add further clarity, the accounting professional bodies have indicated that remote invigilation will be an accepted method of exam delivery.
Remote invigilation of examinations, also referred to as proctored exams, are “a type of assessment where students sit an examination on a computer while they are monitored through a range of technologies such as their webcam and microphone.” (Dawson, 2021, p21). Given the Covid-19 restrictions in place since March 2020, remote invigilation became a necessity for the accounting professional bodies to continue to examine their students and allow a ‘business as normal’ approach. However, in order to facilitate proctoring, the accounting professional bodies have had to invest heavily in the software and technological infrastructure required to support remote delivery of examinations.
Accounting Academics’ Experiences: UK Universities
Having ‘delivered’ a full academic year (2020–2021) under ‘remote’ conditions and given the challenges outlined above, this blog reports on the findings of a survey undertaken by the Committee for Departments of Accounting and Finance (CDAF) to understand more about accounting and finance academics’ experience of alternative types of assessment and their views on invigilation moving forward. Twenty-three universities, located across Scotland, Wales, England and Northern Ireland, responded to the survey.
Do Accounting Departments still use Technical Assessments?
Reflecting on the 2020–2021 academic year, just over half of the respondents to the survey indicated that their accounting and finance departments had moved some way from technical assessments and examinations to more applied assessments and examinations. To that end, respondents noted greater use of case studies, scenario based questions and practice-led questions, with more marks being awarded for the application of knowledge than previously. Respondents indicated that the move to applied assessment and examinations largely reflected the need to recognise the open book nature of assessment and in order to discourage collusion and plagiarism. However, some of the respondents also indicated that they continued to use traditional knowledge based assessment and examinations during the 2020–2021 academic year, while others suggested that the use of scenario-based questions was not possible in all subject areas.
How successful was the move to Applied Assessment/Examinations?
When asked how successful the move from technical assessment and examinations had been, the respondents indicated a mixed picture. While many respondents were generally positive about the move in terms of the process, they identified problems in terms of collusion among students, plagiarism and grade inflation. While the issue of academic integrity in an online environment was a particular concern, there were some subject areas where the move was deemed particularly successful, most notably in tax. Additionally, the move to more applied assessment and examinations was viewed as particularly challenging for international students.
Will Applied Assessment/Examinations continue to be used?
When asked if applied assessment and examinations are likely to continue to be used into the 2021–2022 academic year, just under half of the respondents indicated that they will. However, some 30% of the respondents indicated that they did not plan to continue to use applied assessment and examinations, rather they will revert back to the previously used traditional closed book examinations. The remaining respondents had not at the time of the survey decided on their assessment strategy.
Invigilation: Proctoring vs Face-to-Face Issues
The survey also sought to understand the position of UK accounting departments with respect to proctoring versus face-to-face invigilation. With respect to the former, respondents indicated that they had not used remote proctoring/invigilation software within their accounting and finance departments during the 2020–2021 academic year. This is not surprising, given the financial investment required to purchase and operate proctoring software. Given the lack of proctoring in UK accounting and finance departments, 45% of the respondents indicated that they intended to undertake in-person or face-to-face invigilation from January 2022 onwards. A large number of the respondents (45%) also indicated that it had not yet been decided at the university level if face-to-face invigilation would take place from January 2022 onwards. Interestingly, only one respondent indicated that their accounting and finance department already had access to proctoring software, with the remainder indicating they would have to invest in the technology.
The survey also aimed to identify barriers to the use of proctoring software. A number of barriers, including those related to departmental, university or student centric issues were identified. From the perspective of the accounting and finance department and university, the overwhelming concern was the cost implications (74%) of proctoring. “Too great an investment at this time” was articulated by several respondents and this sentiment was reinforced by approximately a third of the respondents, who stated that their university did not have funding available to procure remote proctoring invigilation software. Perhaps more telling was the number of respondents who did not know whether funding would be available to procure remote proctoring given current financial constraints. Putting the uncertainties surrounding the financial position to one side, there were also fears about a lack of staff experience with proctoring (48%), possible student resistance to proctoring (44%) and increased workloads (44%).
Influence of the Financial Reporting Council (FRC)
The influence of the FRC in how UK accounting and finance departments will approach their assessment strategy from January 2022 is relatively clear. Reflecting this, there was an overwhelming consensus that accounting and finance departments would not be prepared to forfeit accounting exemptions from January 2022, irrespective of whether proctored or face-to-face invigilation is adopted. However, the positivity around retaining exemptions reported in the survey is tempered by the positions being taken by several UK accounting and finance departments who do not wish to return to the traditional on-campus exam hall, so familiar in pre Covid-19 times. Irrespective of the real motives behind this thinking, which might include cost cutting or diversity and equality issues, it appears that accounting and finance departments find themselves ‘between a rock and a hard place’! In the unenviable position of working to maintain accounting exemptions for their students, accounting and finance academics are also faced with financial and potentially technological constraints largely outside of their sphere of control, whilst also being fully cognizant of the mounting pedagogic evidence questioning traditional closed book examinations as an effective form of assessment.
