Professional Accreditation in University Accounting & Finance Departments in a COVID-19 Context: Ongoing Challenges
Written by
and , 30th November 2020COVID-19 continues to disrupt the delivery of higher education globally. In response, academics have had to embrace online teaching and assessment. To that end, many UK universities now offer a blended learning experience to their students, comprising both synchronous (i.e. when the teacher is present at the same time as the learners) and asynchronous teaching (learners work their way through teaching materials which are posted online). In addition, the majority of UK universities are offering some limited face to face teaching, albeit in the context of allegations that junior staff are being subject to bullying and that such delivery is unnecessary.
Efforts to ensure a good student experience have, however, been further compounded by the ‘second wave’ of COVID-19 in the UK (and indeed across the globe), with significant increases in the numbers testing positive and the death rate. The UK’s ‘second wave’ has led to additional complications in terms of the introduction of the National COVID Tier System in England, with its variants in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, a two week Welsh firebreak and a month long national lockdown in England. The second COVID-19 wave has undoubtedly impacted on the university experience, with students now required to form a protective bubble within their ‘household’ and some universities abandoning face to face teaching in the interests of safety.
Whilst the transition to online learning has happened in various guises, there is still considerable concern throughout academia regarding the delivery of robust, fair and appropriate online assessment materials. This is a particular concern for professional subjects such as medicine, nursing, law, and accounting and finance where professional accreditation continues to be of paramount importance to students and universities alike. The challenge for academics teaching professionally accredited subjects is therefore one of delivering a positive online experience in this new COVID-19 world while balancing the needs of professional body accreditation.
Accounting and finance academics are particularly acute to the issue of accreditation given that the vast majority of UK universities deliver accounting degree programmes which are accredited by the major accountancy bodies (e.g. ICAEW, ICAS, CAI, ACCA, CIMA, CIPFA). As we approach the end of the first semester of the 2020–2021 UK academic year, the accreditation issues falling out of COVID-19 for accounting and finance academics have not gone away. In a previous blog (published 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 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 in terms of moving from face to face to online teaching.
In this follow up blog, we report on new and updated insights around accounting and finance accreditation. We do this by drawing on discussions with the UK professional accountancy bodies and accounting and finance academics to understand more fully the key accreditation issues that need to be addressed to preserve the process in the context of a sector which has effectively moved from ‘traditional’ to ‘online’ assessments. Our discussions emanate from an invitation from the British Accounting and Finance Association (BAFA), Committee of Departments of Accounting and Finance (CDAF) to the professional accountancy bodies and the accounting and finance community to come together to debate the accreditation challenge and identify a way forward (full debate here). The resulting discussions identified five key issues that accounting and finance academics need 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.
1. Length of time permitted for online examinations within Accounting and Finance Departments to address the needs of accreditation.
Feedback from our earlier blog and follow up discussions with accounting and finance academics point to significant variation across UK Accounting and Finance Departments in the time permitted for students to complete online examinations. Discussions suggest a continuum of experience: at one end, Accounting and Finance Departments largely adhered to the time periods they would have used had traditional face to face examinations taken place. At the other end of the continuum, Accounting and Finance Departments significantly extended the time frame for completion of online examinations, from anywhere between 24 hours to several weeks. This latter practice was significantly at variance with long-established practices before COVID-19, both from an Accounting and Finance Department and university perspective. However, the longer time frames were justified in terms of the need to cater for international cohorts and the potential for technological problems to exist (including digital poverty). With hindsight, however, accounting and finance academics recognised flaws in the variation reported, most notably concerns around the potential for plagiarism and collusion to occur, in addition to the potential for grade inflation.
Recommendation: As a result of our most recent discussions with the professional accountancy bodies, it has been recommended that future online examinations (i.e. those required for professional accreditation purposes) be undertaken within conventional time frames where possible, plus some allowance for uploading/downloading. This recommendation should result in the vast majority of accounting and finance online examinations being undertaken in 2 or 3 hours plus some allowance for submission. While conventional time frames have been suggested as appropriate, the professional accountancy bodies have indicated that the time permitted for online examinations should where possible not exceed 24 hours. As a result of this recommendation, many UK Accounting and Finance Departments may need to revisit their strategy for online examinations. In particular, the recommended time limit for accounting accreditation purposes is potentially at odds with time constraints imposed at university level, where the latter are likely to be more generous. Thus, accounting and finance academics with responsibility for accounting accreditation may find themselves having to navigate and negotiate this thorny issue with senior university management in the face of opposition.
2. Should online examinations be invigilated within Accounting and Finance Departments to address the needs of accreditation?
Consistent with the majority of other professional subjects, examinations undertaken within the accounting and finance subject area have a history of formal invigilation. As a result, accounting and finance students have for decades been required to write examinations in invigilated examination halls, with an ‘army’ of invigilators watching over to ensure no foul play occurs! The practice of face to face invigilation is engrained in UK university practice and considered an essential element of quality assurance. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the very basis of invigilated examinations.
In discussions with accounting and finance academics, it is clear that online examinations undertaken in the last semester of the 2019–2020 academic year had to be done in the absence of formal invigilation. This was largely due to an absence within UK universities of the technology required to facilitate online remote invigilation, or what is referred to as ‘proctoring’. In contrast, the UK professional accountancy bodies which provide accreditation for UK Accounting and Finance Departments have invested, or outsourced, proctoring technology to facilitate widespread remote invigilation as part of their strategy in moving to online examinations.
Recommendation: While proctoring is clearly key to the professional accountancy bodies’ examination processes going forward, these bodies recognise that UK universities are not geared up at present to enable proctoring as a routine practice. As a result, the UK professional accountancy bodies have recommended that online proctoring is not required by Accounting and Finance Departments for the academic year 2020–2021. However, going forward this may become a requirement and is therefore something that those responsible for accounting and finance accreditation should be mindful of.
3. What question style should be adopted for online examinations within Accounting and Finance Departments to address the needs of accreditation?
Where examinations attract accreditation from professional accountancy bodies, these have traditionally been conducted on a closed book basis. In line with a closed book ethos, students are not permitted to take notes or other reference materials into the examination room. Reflecting the closed book nature of examinations, it would therefore not be uncommon to see widespread use of knowledge based questions at levels 4 and 5 in particular of an accounting and finance degree. Greater use of applied style questions in the form of scenario-based or case study questions in a closed book format would typically be used in the final year (i.e. level 6) of an accounting degree and/or at postgraduate level. By their very nature, closed book examinations are entirely appropriate in a traditional university invigilated context. However, COVID-19 has highlighted a particular challenge in this regard.
In our previous blog and follow up discussions with accounting and finance academics, we identified that there was significant variation in the style of questions comprising online examinations in the final semester of the 2019–2020 academic year. On the one hand, some Accounting and Finance Departments made the decision to continue to use the same question style they had used pre COVID-19. Thus, they did not rework their original examinations, even though these were now essentially being delivered as open book examinations with no formal means of invigilation. On the other hand, some Accounting and Finance Departments argued for the need to substantially alter the style of online examination questions, moving away from technical knowledge based questions to applied style questions. This therefore necessitated the reworking of previously prepared examinations. While the move to applied style questions was by no means universal, hindsight has suggested that the use of closed book questions in what is essentially an open book online environment is problematic in that it has the potential to result in higher levels of plagiarism (which are difficult to detect, particularly among large cohorts) and increased incidence of collusion between students.
Recommendation: Following discussions with the UK professional accountancy bodies, they have recommended that accounting and finance academics give greater thought to the style of question to be used in online examinations. This is particularly important at the more advanced stages of an accounting degree programme. For example, where knowledge based multiple choice questions are to be used, good practice would suggest that they are used at the lower levels of degree programmes and that randomized question banks are utilized to address potential collusion between students. This practice would very much align with the approach taken by the UK professional accountancy bodies. The professional accountancy bodies have also indicated that the question style to be adopted at the higher levels (i.e. some level 5, level 6 and 7) should, where possible, move away from knowledge based questions to applied style questions, primarily based on scenarios and case study materials. The move to applied style questions has potential implications for accounting and finance academics who will be required to invest considerable time in the development of applied online examinations. Indeed, this could potentially involve an element of moving beyond their comfort zone. Whilst this presents a challenge, it also represents a potential opportunity for a positive seismic shift to occur in the delivery of accounting and finance education, something that has been advocated for many years.
4. How should plagiarism and collusion be dealt with within Accounting and Finance Departments to address the needs of accreditation?
In our earlier blog, we recognised that the transition to online examinations, combined with both the lack of invigilation and the extended time frame permitted for completing online examinations, could significantly increase the opportunities for students to cheat (e.g. plagiarism and collusion). As suggested earlier, what were previously closed book examinations are now more akin to open book examinations, with students having access to their notes, the internet and their classmates. During the second semester of the 2019–2020 academic year, feedback suggests that students in many Accounting and Finance Departments were required to submit their online examination scripts via anti-plagiarism software, such as Turnitin.
While the use of anti-plagiarism software for scrutinizing online examinations appears to have increased as a result of COVID-19, it is not without its limitations. For example, Turnitin cannot determine a similarity score where students submit hand-written online examinations. A further complication arises where students may be required to submit a standard ‘cover sheet’ with their online examination. This can increase the Turnitin similarity score, forcing accounting and finance academics to decide on an ‘acceptable’ base-line similarity score which includes the contents of the cover sheet. With respect to the potential problem of collusion, this is extremely difficult to detect except in cases where work of a similar nature is submitted. However, where hand-written online examinations are submitted, this presents the same problem as outlined for plagiarism above.
The potential for both plagiarism and collusion to exist in a non-invigilated online examination environment results in the need for accounting and finance academics to be extra vigilant. This further increases the time frame to complete marking. Additionally, where class sizes are relatively large (100+), the process of checking for plagiarism and collusion can be extremely ineffective. Even when plagiarism or collusion are suspected, the time required to follow up on such cases, together with already tight marking deadlines, adds further pressures on both accounting and finance academics and academic integrity teams.
Recommendation: With respect to plagiarism and collusion, the professional accountancy bodies are recommending that accounting and finance academics continue to use plagiarism software where appropriate (although this is only relevant where typed answers are submitted which in turn presents its own problems around potential collusion). Additionally, while the professional accountancy bodies are not at the time of writing insisting on the use of proctoring software, accounting and finance academics might want to consider its application going forward.
5. Moderation processes and the treatment of grade inflation within Accounting and Finance Departments to address the needs of accreditation:
Moderation activities within universities encompass a number of responsibilities, including internal and external moderation of examination papers and the scrutiny of examination pass marks, both across modules and accounting and finance degree programmes, in examination boards. Consistent with invigilation, the practices of moderation are embedded in UK university regulations and considered a cornerstone of quality assurance in aligning learning outcomes and assessment standards with comparable practices nationally.
Following our previous blog, feedback from accounting and finance academics indicates that the majority of Accounting and Finance Departments had previously internally and externally moderated the original versions of their examinations prior to the Covid-19 lockdown. However, these examinations had been written in the belief that students would undertake them in ‘normal’ face to face, fully invigilated examination conditions. With respect to subsequent internal or external moderation being applied to reworked online examinations (as noted in point 3 above), it is clear from feedback that variation in practice was the order of the day. As a result, while many reworked online examinations were subject to additional internal ‘light’ moderation processes, substantially less external moderation was undertaken largely due to time pressures brought about by the initial COVID-19 lock down.
The other essential component of the moderation process is concerned with scrutiny of examination pass marks and the potential to recognise and address grade inflation. As a result of discussions with accounting and finance academics following our earlier blog, grade inflation was identified as a potential issue. However, in the absence of sector wide statistics, not enough is known about grade inflation at the time of writing, either at a university level or at a subject level to comment further.
Recommendation: While the professional accountancy bodies recognise that accounting and finance academics have internal and external moderation in place and examination board scrutiny (reflecting robust university regulations), their recommendations are twofold. First, they are recommending that already established internal and external moderation processes are adhered to where possible. For accounting and finance academics this is a return to ‘business as usual’ and should not have any specific implications beyond balancing the demands of delivering online teaching and ensuring that online examination papers are written in sufficient time to permit internal and external moderation. Our discussions with the UK professional accountancy bodies suggest that they are more concerned with how grade inflation, if identified, will be dealt with. In this regard, the professional accountancy bodies are making a second recommendation that should grade inflation be identified at either a module or subject level, then Accounting and Finance Departments need to address it in a robust and consistent manner. This is clearly an issue that accounting and finance academics should address as a matter of urgency. Grade inflation has the potential to disadvantage students as they progress (or not) through their degree programme and subsequent professional accountancy examinations. This in turn has the potential to impact on the accreditation granted to Accounting and Finance Departments.
The overall message coming from the UK professional accountancy bodies is to consider the above five points in working towards and seeking accreditation. The professional accountancy bodies have also emphasized that they are keen to work with their university partners in delivering robust accreditation, while also recognizing that ‘one size does not fit all’. As accounting and finance academics continue to modify their approaches to the COVID-19 challenges posed by online examinations, it will be interesting to see whether the issues outlined above will continue to challenge, or whether new challenges will emerge as important for the future.
