Manajemen | Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji joeb.83.3.123-134
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Technologies Used in Accounting Education: A
Study of Frequency of Use Among Faculty
Nas Ahadiat
To cite this article: Nas Ahadiat (2008) Technologies Used in Accounting Education: A Study
of Frequency of Use Among Faculty, Journal of Education for Business, 83:3, 123-134, DOI:
10.3200/JOEB.83.3.123-134
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.83.3.123-134
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 66
View related articles
Citing articles: 3 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 11 January 2016, At: 23:05
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
TechnologiesUsedinAccounting
Education:AStudyofFrequency
ofUseAmongFaculty
NASAHADIAT
CALIFORNIASTATEPOLYTECHNICUNIVERSITY
POMONA,CALIFORNIA
ABSTRACT.Giventhewiderangeof
technologiesavailableforuseineducation,
theauthortriedtodeterminewhichtechnologieshavewidespreadapplicationsfor
accountingeducators.Thisinformationcan
provideabasisonwhichfacultycandeterminewhichmediaaremoreappropriateor
havepracticalapplicationsinaccounting
curricula.Inaddition,theauthorinvestigatedwhetherdifferencesexistamongeducatorsintheirchoicesoftechnologyandthe
extenttowhichtechnologyisused.
Keywords:accounting,collegeeducation,
computers,informationtechnology
Copyright©2008HeldrefPublications
T
he Association to Advance Collegiate School of Business International (AACSB; 2007) demands that
business students’ learning experiences
include the use of appropriate instructionaltechnologiesbecausetheyinfluence
the operations of organizations and their
management.Also,theAmericanInstitute
ofCertifiedPublicAccountants(AICPA;
2006)suggests,“Individualsenteringthe
accounting profession must acquire the
necessary skills to use technology tools
effectivelyandefficiently”(p.3).
Although in their recent pronouncementsAACSBandAICPAusetheterm
technology in a fairly general sense,
other professional organizations have
been more specific in their recommendations. For example, the Bedford
CommitteeoftheAmericanAccounting
Association (AAA; 1986), in a report
totheuniversityfaculty,suggestedthat
accounting educators should be prepared to use computer-assisted instruction. Also, the Accounting Education
ChangeCommission(AECC;1990),in
itsPositionStatementNo.One,pointed
out that because technology has had
major impacts on how organizations
operate, accounting professionals must
betrainedtouseinformationtechnology
fortheirwork.Likewise,theInstituteof
ManagementAccountants(IMA;1996),
initspracticeanalysisproject,identified
familiaritywithcomputersoftwareas1
ofthetop-10highestsubjectsrequiring
knowledge,skills,andabilitiesforboth
workandentry-levelcompetence.
The terms instructional technology
andtechnologywithrelevancetoinstructionincludeawiderangeofmedia,hardware, and software such as audio and
videoequipment,graphics,images,animation,datatransmissionequipmentfor
thedeliveryofcontent,andapplications
of knowledge to students in and out of
classroom and for other applications of
computer technology. Although a few
studieshaveaddressedtheeffectiveness
of technology in teaching (Hale, 2005;
Murray,2002),thereismuchmorethat
researchersandeducatorsneedtoknow
aboutwhichtechnologiesareappropriate
for a variety of educational disciplines
andwhetherdifferencesexistamongfacultyintheirchoicesoftechnology.
Because of the wide range of technologies with possible applications in
education, I designed this study primarilytodeterminewhichtechnologies
had widespread applications among
accountingeducatorsacrossthecountry.
Suchinformationcanprovideabasisby
which faculty can decide what media
are most appropriate for a particular
program.Inaddition,Iexamineddifferences in use of technology among facultybyseveraldemographicattributes.
ReviewofLiterature
Some evidence has suggested that
differences exist in the use of technolJanuary/February2008
123
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
ogyamongmenandwomen,olderand
youngerpeople,andpeoplewithdifferentlevelsofeducation(AmericanAssociation of UniversityWomen [AAUW]
Educational Foundation, 1998; Hale,
2005;Qureshi&Hoppel,1995;Robichaux, 1994; Shelley, Thrane, & Shulman,2007;Starr,2003;Whitley,1997).
Women,olderpersons,andlesseducatedindividualsseemtohavealessfavorable attitude toward technology and
thus use it less than do men, younger
people,andmoreeducatedindividuals,
respectively (Hale; Morris, 1992; Ono
& Zavodny, 2004; Shelly et al.; Williams,Winkle,&Matile,1993).Several
studies have revealed that men tend to
be more interested in computers than
arewomenandthatmenusecomputers
more than do women at a younger age
(Hale;Meunier,1994;Robinson,Levin,
&Hak,1998).
According to these studies, family,
school,media,androlemodelsarefactors that have significant impact on
gender differences in technology use.
Addressing gender issues in education,
the AAUW Educational Foundation
(1998)concludedthatalthoughwomen
have made serious gains in enrollment
andtestscoresinscienceandmathover
the past several years, female students
seem to demonstrate less interest and
moreanxietytowardtheuseofcomputersthandomalestudents.
Researchers have suggested that differences in use of technology between
genders, ages, and levels of education
maystemfromsocioeconomicandculturalissues.Forexample,earlyresearchers observed that parents bought computers and video games for their sons
more so than they did for their daughters (Levin & Gordon, 1989). Some
researchers have argued that, perhaps
becauseofthenotionthatmenhavetraditionally enjoyed more buying power
than have women, computer software
and games designed for children are
essentially targeted to a male audience
(Meunier,1994).
A study of 377 students (154 male,
223female)revealedthatmalestudents
were more likely than female students
to own a computer and to play with
computergamesandthatmalestudents
tookmorecomputercoursesincollege.
Inaddition,malestudentsdemonstrated
124
JournalofEducationforBusiness
greater competence in computer technology than did female students. Furthermore,bothmaleandfemalestudents
withworkexperienceweremorelikely
tousetechnologyandexhibitapositive
attitudetowardcomputersthanstudents
with no work experience (Williams et
al.,1993).Sievert,Albritton,Roper,and
Clayton (1988) consistently found that
participants’attitudestowardcomputers
weredirectlyinfluencedbythenumber
ofyearsthattheyhadworked.
Whitley (1997) found that although
gender differences in computer use
exist, they are based on a variety of
attitudinal components. Men see computers as more appropriate for them
than for women, demonstrate greater
competence,anddisplayanoverallpositiveattitudetowardcomputers(Sexton,
King,Albridge,&Goodstadt,1999).
QureshiandHoppel(1995)surveyed
310 undergraduate students to measure
theirattitudestowardcomputers.Those
authors concluded that gender and
gradesignificantlyinfluencedstudents’
attitudestowardcomputers.Theresults
showedthatmalestudentsdemonstrated
a more positive attitude toward computer use than did female students and
that students’ attitudes were directly
correlatedwithgradelevel.
More recently, Hale (2005) studied
eighth-grade 13–14-year-old students
for their technology achievement.
Teachers assigned students a series of
self-directed activities in their computer class. Then they were randomly
paired and given identical instructions.
The results from pretest and posttest
revealed differences between male and
femalestudentsincomputertechnology
achievement(Hale).However,theauthor
conceded that today’s students may be
differentfromtheirearliercounterparts
and that although male students may
perform better with technical aspects
oftechnology,femalestudentsperform
betterwithapplicationaspects.
Yet, in a gender study of accountingstudents,DaigleandMorris(1999)
examined whether computer-related
attitudinal differences exist among students taking accounting courses. In a
nonrandomsample,642studentsinfour
accountinginformationsystemscourses
wereselectedtoparticipateinthestudy.
Thecoursesrangedfromfreshmanlevel
to graduate level. Daigle and Morris
found that gender differences in attitudes toward computers were stronger
among students in freshman courses
than among students in graduate-level
courses.Theresearchersconcludedthat
differencesinattitudesdiminishasindividualsgainmoreexperience.
Researchersalsobelievethat,inadditiontotheeffectsofgenderontheuse
of computers, individuals’ age, education,orothercharacteristicsaresignificant factors. Morris (1989) randomly
selectedandsurveyed380individualsto
investigate relations between computer
use and age, education, and other factors.Theparticipants’agesrangedfrom
17to90years.Morrisrevealedthatage
andyearsofexperiencestronglycorrelated with computer use. Furthermore,
he found that education played a significantroleinformingusers’attitudes
towardcomputers.
Someresearchershavesuggestedthat
computer-relatedattitudesaremultifacetedandmayincludecomponentsrelatedtoculturaldifferences,anxiety,selfconfidence,andattitudesaboutsociety.
Inastudyofattitudestowardcomputers
anddifferencesamongmenandwomen
intheUnitedStatesandJapan,Onoand
Zavodny (2004) compared data from
several surveys during 1997–2001 to
findtrendsintheuseofcomputersand
the Internet in the two countries. The
results revealed that although gender
differences existed in both countries in
the 1990s, in later years these differencessubsidedintheUnitedStates,but
remained in Japan. The authors attributed this finding to social and cultural
differencesbetweenthetwocountries.
As applications of technology continue to revolutionize business operations,itisimperativethateducatorsand
college administrators remain diligent
in evaluating the latest technology, its
relevance to education, and how it can
be integrated into the curriculum, recognizing the complexities of the U.S.
educationalsystems.
METHOD
StudyDesign
Thisstudy’sprimarypurposewasto
investigatetechnologiespopularamong
accounting faculty. Popularity was
measuredbyusingasurveyinstrument
for capturing information concerning
the extent to which faculty use each
technology in accounting education.
In addition, I compared the survey
responsesbyusingtteststoseewhether
differences exist among faculty by (a)
teaching area, (b) academic rank, (c)
course level, (d)AACSB accreditation,
(e)yearsofteachingexperience,(f)age,
and(g)gender.
I collected the data for this study
during the academic year 2004–2005
by using a questionnaire containing
two general sections. The first section
includedabriefdescriptionofthegeneral-purposeinstructionaltechnology.It
alsocontainedquestionsconcerningthe
extenttowhichtheparticipantwasusing
each technology, including its various
applications, in the participant’s teaching.Participantswereaskedtoindicate
the level of use by choosing one of
the three responses: never, sometimes,
or frequently. The second section containedquestionssolicitingdemographic
information.
To ensure validity and reliability of
thequestionnaire,Ipretestedtheinstrumentbyusingasmallgroupofaccounting faculty in Southern California.
Using a focus group and interviews, I
discovered no major problems. As the
result of this pretesting, several questions were added or modified prior to
massmailing.
RESULTS
BackgroundInformation
The first mailing produced 209
responses, and the second mailing
produced 79 responses. The two mailings resulted in a total of 288 usable
responses,producingaresponserateof
36%.Themajority(38%)oftherespondentsindicatedthattheirprimaryteachingareawasfinancialaccounting,20%
indicatedthattheytaughtcostormanagerialaccounting,13%indicatedtaxes,
12% indicated auditing, 7% indicated
not-for-profit accounting, and 7% indicated accounting information systems
(seeFigure1).
Academic ranks of participants
included assistant professors (26%),
associate professors (38%), and full
UseofInstructionalTechnology
Table 1 contains the top 10 applications of technology in accounting
3%
7%
7%
No
ac t-for
co -p
un rofi
tin t
g
38%
12%
Sampling
The sampling frame contained the
university faculty in the 2004–2005
Accounting Faculty Directory (Hasselback, 2004). Using systematic random
design,Idrewasampleof800participants.Thesampleincludedparticipants
fromall50statesoftheUnitedStates.
I mailed the questionnaire to each
participantthroughtheU.S.postalservice. A stamped return envelope was
enclosed with each questionnaire to
encourage greater participation. To
increaseresponserate,asecondmailing
was made soon after the first mailing.
To measure the probability of noneresponse bias, statistical tests were
professors (31%). Only 5% of the
respondents were lecturers. More than
half (56%) of the respondents were
from schools accredited by AACSB.
At the time of this research, among
the AACSB-accredited schools, nearly
64%wereaccreditedfortheirbusiness
programsonly.Theremaining36%held
accreditation for both accounting and
businessprograms.
Of all participants, 97% reported
using a computer at home. Desktop
computerswerethemostpopularcomputers,usedbymorethantwothirdsof
thefaculty.Theremainingonethirdof
thefacultyusedlaptopcomputers.
To capture their experience, I asked
participants to report their number of
yearsofteachinginhighereducation.As
showninFigure2,only9%ofrespondents had less than 5 years of experience.Theremaining91%reported6or
moreyearsofteachingexperience.
Other
g
ntin
cou ion
Ac rmat s
o
inf ystem
s
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
DataCollection
conducted on early and late responses.
The results showed no significant differencesbetweenthetwogroups,leading to the conclusion that the chance
of none-response bias was statistically
nonexistent,p=.05.
Financial
accounting
Auditing
Tax
13%
Cost/managerial
accounting
20%
FIGURE1.Respondents’areasofteaching.
January/February2008
125
9
1–5
6–10
18
22
Years
11–15
20
16–20
17
21–25
9
26–30
31–over
5
Percentage
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
FIGURE2.Respondents’yearsofexperience.
education. The most frequently used
application of technology was e-mail,
which faculty used with a frequency
of 90.2% for communication with colleagues. The Internet was the second
preferredapplication,chosenbynearly
90% of faculty. The third most popular application was word processing,
requiredbymorethan88%ofaccountingfacultyforstudentassignments.The
nexttwopreferredapplicationsinvolved
computerspreadsheets,bothforfaculty
to record grades (86% of the respondents)andforstudentstodohomework
(84% of the respondents).Also, e-mail
for faculty’s individual contacts with
studentshadwidespreadappeal,witha
frequencyof84%.
Other technologies that accounting
facultyhighlyfavoredwerepresentation
software (e.g., PowerPoint) and video.
Nearlytwothirds(71%)ofparticipants
indicated that they used presentation
software for class presentations, and
others (62%) used video for teaching.
Thelasttwoapplicationsonthetop10
listoffacultychoiceswere(a)thecomputer lab for class meetings with studentsand(b)dataanalysissoftwarefor
faculty’s personal use, which 54% and
53%ofparticipantschose,respectively.
Table 1 demonstrates not only the
frequencywithwhichinformationtechnologieswereappliedintheaccounting
curriculum, but also that some faculty
did not use those technologies. Nearly
10% of the accounting faculty never
used e-mail for communication with
colleagues or the Internet for information retrieval. The percentages of non-
usage of other applications of technologywerehigher.
In addition to the top 10 choices, I
also identified technologies and appli-
cations that were least favored by the
accountingfaculty.Table2showsthese
technologiesandapplications.
The technology with little or no
applicationinaccountingeducationwas
audio.Only16%ofeducatorsusedthat
medium for teaching. Distance education devices and teleconferencing representedthenexttwotechnologieswith
low usage, preferred by only 19% and
24% of the accounting faculty, respectively.Another unpopular medium was
data analysis software for students’
course assignments, chosen by 19.5%
oftherespondents.
Only one quarter of all accounting
educators used film in their teaching.
Multimedia was not highly popular as
a learning tool that faculty assigned to
students; only one third of the faculty
chosethatmedium.Thelasttwomedia
among least favored applications were
electronic lists for discussion with colleagues and multimedia for class presentations.Electroniclistswerefavored
by 39%, and multimedia for class presentationswasusedby48%.
Analyses
Although the aforementioned results
provide a basis on which researchers
can determine what technologies are
mostpopularamongaccountingeducators,analysisoftheresponsesbydemographics (by using an analysis of variance[ANOVA])candiscloseadditional
TABLE1.InstructionalTechnologiesMostPopularinAccountingEducation,RankedbyFrequencyofUse
Howoftenused(%)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
126
Technology
Never
Sometimes
(lessthan
50%oftime)
Frequently
(morethan
50%oftime)
Totaluse
E-mailcommunicationswithcolleagues
InformationretrievalviatheInternet
Computerwordprocessingassignedtostudents
Computerspreadsheetstokeepgrades,records,etc.
Computerspreadsheetassignedtostudents
Individualcontactwithstudentsviae-mail
Presentationsoftware(e.g.,PowerPoint)toprepare
handouts,transparencies,orpresentationof
instructionalmaterials
Videousedinclassorassignedtostudents
Computerlabforclassmeeting
DataanalysissoftwaresuchasStatistix,SPSS,
LINPRO,SAS,orExcel
9.8
10.1
11.9
14.0
15.7
16.0
34.6
50.2
41.3
15.4
44.6
48.1
55.6
39.7
46.8
70.6
39.7
35.9
90.2
89.9
88.1
86.0
84.3
84.0
28.6
37.5
46.2
40.4
57.3
45.1
31.0
5.2
8.7
71.4
62.5
53.8
74.0
30.5
22.5
53.0
JournalofEducationforBusiness
TABLE2.TechnologiesLeastPopularinAccountingEducation,RankedbyInfrequencyofUse
Howoftenused(%)
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Technology
Never
Sometimes
(lessthan
50%oftime)
Frequently
(morethan
50%oftime)
Totaluse
Audioinclassorassignedtostudent
Distanceeducation
DataanalysissoftwaresuchasStatistix,SPSS,
LINPRO,SASassignedtostudents
Course-specificcomputerteleconferences
orbulletin
Filmusedinclassorassignedtostudents
Multimediaforstudents’individualized
learning
Electroniclistsfordiscussionswithcolleagues
Multimediaforin-classpresentations
83.6
80.6
15.7
14.6
0.7
4.8
16.4
19.4
80.5
15.0
4.5
19.5
76.3
75.6
17.4
23.0
6.3
1.4
23.7
24.4
67.0
60.6
52.1
25.6
28.9
33.9
7.4
10.5
14.0
33.0
39.4
47.9
information about whether significant
differencesexistamongfaculty’schoicesoftechnologyby(a)areaofteaching,
(b) academic rank, (c) course offering,(d)AACSBaccreditation,(e)work
experienceorage,and(f)gender.
AreaofTeaching
Analysis by teaching area showed
that applications of computer technology were fairly widespread and not
limited to accounting information systems (AIS; see Table 3). However, I
observed that business law professors
used significantly less e-mail for contacts with students, computer spreadsheets for students’ assignments, presentation software, and data analysis
softwarethandidallotherfaculty(p
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Technologies Used in Accounting Education: A
Study of Frequency of Use Among Faculty
Nas Ahadiat
To cite this article: Nas Ahadiat (2008) Technologies Used in Accounting Education: A Study
of Frequency of Use Among Faculty, Journal of Education for Business, 83:3, 123-134, DOI:
10.3200/JOEB.83.3.123-134
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.83.3.123-134
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 66
View related articles
Citing articles: 3 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 11 January 2016, At: 23:05
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
TechnologiesUsedinAccounting
Education:AStudyofFrequency
ofUseAmongFaculty
NASAHADIAT
CALIFORNIASTATEPOLYTECHNICUNIVERSITY
POMONA,CALIFORNIA
ABSTRACT.Giventhewiderangeof
technologiesavailableforuseineducation,
theauthortriedtodeterminewhichtechnologieshavewidespreadapplicationsfor
accountingeducators.Thisinformationcan
provideabasisonwhichfacultycandeterminewhichmediaaremoreappropriateor
havepracticalapplicationsinaccounting
curricula.Inaddition,theauthorinvestigatedwhetherdifferencesexistamongeducatorsintheirchoicesoftechnologyandthe
extenttowhichtechnologyisused.
Keywords:accounting,collegeeducation,
computers,informationtechnology
Copyright©2008HeldrefPublications
T
he Association to Advance Collegiate School of Business International (AACSB; 2007) demands that
business students’ learning experiences
include the use of appropriate instructionaltechnologiesbecausetheyinfluence
the operations of organizations and their
management.Also,theAmericanInstitute
ofCertifiedPublicAccountants(AICPA;
2006)suggests,“Individualsenteringthe
accounting profession must acquire the
necessary skills to use technology tools
effectivelyandefficiently”(p.3).
Although in their recent pronouncementsAACSBandAICPAusetheterm
technology in a fairly general sense,
other professional organizations have
been more specific in their recommendations. For example, the Bedford
CommitteeoftheAmericanAccounting
Association (AAA; 1986), in a report
totheuniversityfaculty,suggestedthat
accounting educators should be prepared to use computer-assisted instruction. Also, the Accounting Education
ChangeCommission(AECC;1990),in
itsPositionStatementNo.One,pointed
out that because technology has had
major impacts on how organizations
operate, accounting professionals must
betrainedtouseinformationtechnology
fortheirwork.Likewise,theInstituteof
ManagementAccountants(IMA;1996),
initspracticeanalysisproject,identified
familiaritywithcomputersoftwareas1
ofthetop-10highestsubjectsrequiring
knowledge,skills,andabilitiesforboth
workandentry-levelcompetence.
The terms instructional technology
andtechnologywithrelevancetoinstructionincludeawiderangeofmedia,hardware, and software such as audio and
videoequipment,graphics,images,animation,datatransmissionequipmentfor
thedeliveryofcontent,andapplications
of knowledge to students in and out of
classroom and for other applications of
computer technology. Although a few
studieshaveaddressedtheeffectiveness
of technology in teaching (Hale, 2005;
Murray,2002),thereismuchmorethat
researchersandeducatorsneedtoknow
aboutwhichtechnologiesareappropriate
for a variety of educational disciplines
andwhetherdifferencesexistamongfacultyintheirchoicesoftechnology.
Because of the wide range of technologies with possible applications in
education, I designed this study primarilytodeterminewhichtechnologies
had widespread applications among
accountingeducatorsacrossthecountry.
Suchinformationcanprovideabasisby
which faculty can decide what media
are most appropriate for a particular
program.Inaddition,Iexamineddifferences in use of technology among facultybyseveraldemographicattributes.
ReviewofLiterature
Some evidence has suggested that
differences exist in the use of technolJanuary/February2008
123
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
ogyamongmenandwomen,olderand
youngerpeople,andpeoplewithdifferentlevelsofeducation(AmericanAssociation of UniversityWomen [AAUW]
Educational Foundation, 1998; Hale,
2005;Qureshi&Hoppel,1995;Robichaux, 1994; Shelley, Thrane, & Shulman,2007;Starr,2003;Whitley,1997).
Women,olderpersons,andlesseducatedindividualsseemtohavealessfavorable attitude toward technology and
thus use it less than do men, younger
people,andmoreeducatedindividuals,
respectively (Hale; Morris, 1992; Ono
& Zavodny, 2004; Shelly et al.; Williams,Winkle,&Matile,1993).Several
studies have revealed that men tend to
be more interested in computers than
arewomenandthatmenusecomputers
more than do women at a younger age
(Hale;Meunier,1994;Robinson,Levin,
&Hak,1998).
According to these studies, family,
school,media,androlemodelsarefactors that have significant impact on
gender differences in technology use.
Addressing gender issues in education,
the AAUW Educational Foundation
(1998)concludedthatalthoughwomen
have made serious gains in enrollment
andtestscoresinscienceandmathover
the past several years, female students
seem to demonstrate less interest and
moreanxietytowardtheuseofcomputersthandomalestudents.
Researchers have suggested that differences in use of technology between
genders, ages, and levels of education
maystemfromsocioeconomicandculturalissues.Forexample,earlyresearchers observed that parents bought computers and video games for their sons
more so than they did for their daughters (Levin & Gordon, 1989). Some
researchers have argued that, perhaps
becauseofthenotionthatmenhavetraditionally enjoyed more buying power
than have women, computer software
and games designed for children are
essentially targeted to a male audience
(Meunier,1994).
A study of 377 students (154 male,
223female)revealedthatmalestudents
were more likely than female students
to own a computer and to play with
computergamesandthatmalestudents
tookmorecomputercoursesincollege.
Inaddition,malestudentsdemonstrated
124
JournalofEducationforBusiness
greater competence in computer technology than did female students. Furthermore,bothmaleandfemalestudents
withworkexperienceweremorelikely
tousetechnologyandexhibitapositive
attitudetowardcomputersthanstudents
with no work experience (Williams et
al.,1993).Sievert,Albritton,Roper,and
Clayton (1988) consistently found that
participants’attitudestowardcomputers
weredirectlyinfluencedbythenumber
ofyearsthattheyhadworked.
Whitley (1997) found that although
gender differences in computer use
exist, they are based on a variety of
attitudinal components. Men see computers as more appropriate for them
than for women, demonstrate greater
competence,anddisplayanoverallpositiveattitudetowardcomputers(Sexton,
King,Albridge,&Goodstadt,1999).
QureshiandHoppel(1995)surveyed
310 undergraduate students to measure
theirattitudestowardcomputers.Those
authors concluded that gender and
gradesignificantlyinfluencedstudents’
attitudestowardcomputers.Theresults
showedthatmalestudentsdemonstrated
a more positive attitude toward computer use than did female students and
that students’ attitudes were directly
correlatedwithgradelevel.
More recently, Hale (2005) studied
eighth-grade 13–14-year-old students
for their technology achievement.
Teachers assigned students a series of
self-directed activities in their computer class. Then they were randomly
paired and given identical instructions.
The results from pretest and posttest
revealed differences between male and
femalestudentsincomputertechnology
achievement(Hale).However,theauthor
conceded that today’s students may be
differentfromtheirearliercounterparts
and that although male students may
perform better with technical aspects
oftechnology,femalestudentsperform
betterwithapplicationaspects.
Yet, in a gender study of accountingstudents,DaigleandMorris(1999)
examined whether computer-related
attitudinal differences exist among students taking accounting courses. In a
nonrandomsample,642studentsinfour
accountinginformationsystemscourses
wereselectedtoparticipateinthestudy.
Thecoursesrangedfromfreshmanlevel
to graduate level. Daigle and Morris
found that gender differences in attitudes toward computers were stronger
among students in freshman courses
than among students in graduate-level
courses.Theresearchersconcludedthat
differencesinattitudesdiminishasindividualsgainmoreexperience.
Researchersalsobelievethat,inadditiontotheeffectsofgenderontheuse
of computers, individuals’ age, education,orothercharacteristicsaresignificant factors. Morris (1989) randomly
selectedandsurveyed380individualsto
investigate relations between computer
use and age, education, and other factors.Theparticipants’agesrangedfrom
17to90years.Morrisrevealedthatage
andyearsofexperiencestronglycorrelated with computer use. Furthermore,
he found that education played a significantroleinformingusers’attitudes
towardcomputers.
Someresearchershavesuggestedthat
computer-relatedattitudesaremultifacetedandmayincludecomponentsrelatedtoculturaldifferences,anxiety,selfconfidence,andattitudesaboutsociety.
Inastudyofattitudestowardcomputers
anddifferencesamongmenandwomen
intheUnitedStatesandJapan,Onoand
Zavodny (2004) compared data from
several surveys during 1997–2001 to
findtrendsintheuseofcomputersand
the Internet in the two countries. The
results revealed that although gender
differences existed in both countries in
the 1990s, in later years these differencessubsidedintheUnitedStates,but
remained in Japan. The authors attributed this finding to social and cultural
differencesbetweenthetwocountries.
As applications of technology continue to revolutionize business operations,itisimperativethateducatorsand
college administrators remain diligent
in evaluating the latest technology, its
relevance to education, and how it can
be integrated into the curriculum, recognizing the complexities of the U.S.
educationalsystems.
METHOD
StudyDesign
Thisstudy’sprimarypurposewasto
investigatetechnologiespopularamong
accounting faculty. Popularity was
measuredbyusingasurveyinstrument
for capturing information concerning
the extent to which faculty use each
technology in accounting education.
In addition, I compared the survey
responsesbyusingtteststoseewhether
differences exist among faculty by (a)
teaching area, (b) academic rank, (c)
course level, (d)AACSB accreditation,
(e)yearsofteachingexperience,(f)age,
and(g)gender.
I collected the data for this study
during the academic year 2004–2005
by using a questionnaire containing
two general sections. The first section
includedabriefdescriptionofthegeneral-purposeinstructionaltechnology.It
alsocontainedquestionsconcerningthe
extenttowhichtheparticipantwasusing
each technology, including its various
applications, in the participant’s teaching.Participantswereaskedtoindicate
the level of use by choosing one of
the three responses: never, sometimes,
or frequently. The second section containedquestionssolicitingdemographic
information.
To ensure validity and reliability of
thequestionnaire,Ipretestedtheinstrumentbyusingasmallgroupofaccounting faculty in Southern California.
Using a focus group and interviews, I
discovered no major problems. As the
result of this pretesting, several questions were added or modified prior to
massmailing.
RESULTS
BackgroundInformation
The first mailing produced 209
responses, and the second mailing
produced 79 responses. The two mailings resulted in a total of 288 usable
responses,producingaresponserateof
36%.Themajority(38%)oftherespondentsindicatedthattheirprimaryteachingareawasfinancialaccounting,20%
indicatedthattheytaughtcostormanagerialaccounting,13%indicatedtaxes,
12% indicated auditing, 7% indicated
not-for-profit accounting, and 7% indicated accounting information systems
(seeFigure1).
Academic ranks of participants
included assistant professors (26%),
associate professors (38%), and full
UseofInstructionalTechnology
Table 1 contains the top 10 applications of technology in accounting
3%
7%
7%
No
ac t-for
co -p
un rofi
tin t
g
38%
12%
Sampling
The sampling frame contained the
university faculty in the 2004–2005
Accounting Faculty Directory (Hasselback, 2004). Using systematic random
design,Idrewasampleof800participants.Thesampleincludedparticipants
fromall50statesoftheUnitedStates.
I mailed the questionnaire to each
participantthroughtheU.S.postalservice. A stamped return envelope was
enclosed with each questionnaire to
encourage greater participation. To
increaseresponserate,asecondmailing
was made soon after the first mailing.
To measure the probability of noneresponse bias, statistical tests were
professors (31%). Only 5% of the
respondents were lecturers. More than
half (56%) of the respondents were
from schools accredited by AACSB.
At the time of this research, among
the AACSB-accredited schools, nearly
64%wereaccreditedfortheirbusiness
programsonly.Theremaining36%held
accreditation for both accounting and
businessprograms.
Of all participants, 97% reported
using a computer at home. Desktop
computerswerethemostpopularcomputers,usedbymorethantwothirdsof
thefaculty.Theremainingonethirdof
thefacultyusedlaptopcomputers.
To capture their experience, I asked
participants to report their number of
yearsofteachinginhighereducation.As
showninFigure2,only9%ofrespondents had less than 5 years of experience.Theremaining91%reported6or
moreyearsofteachingexperience.
Other
g
ntin
cou ion
Ac rmat s
o
inf ystem
s
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
DataCollection
conducted on early and late responses.
The results showed no significant differencesbetweenthetwogroups,leading to the conclusion that the chance
of none-response bias was statistically
nonexistent,p=.05.
Financial
accounting
Auditing
Tax
13%
Cost/managerial
accounting
20%
FIGURE1.Respondents’areasofteaching.
January/February2008
125
9
1–5
6–10
18
22
Years
11–15
20
16–20
17
21–25
9
26–30
31–over
5
Percentage
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
FIGURE2.Respondents’yearsofexperience.
education. The most frequently used
application of technology was e-mail,
which faculty used with a frequency
of 90.2% for communication with colleagues. The Internet was the second
preferredapplication,chosenbynearly
90% of faculty. The third most popular application was word processing,
requiredbymorethan88%ofaccountingfacultyforstudentassignments.The
nexttwopreferredapplicationsinvolved
computerspreadsheets,bothforfaculty
to record grades (86% of the respondents)andforstudentstodohomework
(84% of the respondents).Also, e-mail
for faculty’s individual contacts with
studentshadwidespreadappeal,witha
frequencyof84%.
Other technologies that accounting
facultyhighlyfavoredwerepresentation
software (e.g., PowerPoint) and video.
Nearlytwothirds(71%)ofparticipants
indicated that they used presentation
software for class presentations, and
others (62%) used video for teaching.
Thelasttwoapplicationsonthetop10
listoffacultychoiceswere(a)thecomputer lab for class meetings with studentsand(b)dataanalysissoftwarefor
faculty’s personal use, which 54% and
53%ofparticipantschose,respectively.
Table 1 demonstrates not only the
frequencywithwhichinformationtechnologieswereappliedintheaccounting
curriculum, but also that some faculty
did not use those technologies. Nearly
10% of the accounting faculty never
used e-mail for communication with
colleagues or the Internet for information retrieval. The percentages of non-
usage of other applications of technologywerehigher.
In addition to the top 10 choices, I
also identified technologies and appli-
cations that were least favored by the
accountingfaculty.Table2showsthese
technologiesandapplications.
The technology with little or no
applicationinaccountingeducationwas
audio.Only16%ofeducatorsusedthat
medium for teaching. Distance education devices and teleconferencing representedthenexttwotechnologieswith
low usage, preferred by only 19% and
24% of the accounting faculty, respectively.Another unpopular medium was
data analysis software for students’
course assignments, chosen by 19.5%
oftherespondents.
Only one quarter of all accounting
educators used film in their teaching.
Multimedia was not highly popular as
a learning tool that faculty assigned to
students; only one third of the faculty
chosethatmedium.Thelasttwomedia
among least favored applications were
electronic lists for discussion with colleagues and multimedia for class presentations.Electroniclistswerefavored
by 39%, and multimedia for class presentationswasusedby48%.
Analyses
Although the aforementioned results
provide a basis on which researchers
can determine what technologies are
mostpopularamongaccountingeducators,analysisoftheresponsesbydemographics (by using an analysis of variance[ANOVA])candiscloseadditional
TABLE1.InstructionalTechnologiesMostPopularinAccountingEducation,RankedbyFrequencyofUse
Howoftenused(%)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
126
Technology
Never
Sometimes
(lessthan
50%oftime)
Frequently
(morethan
50%oftime)
Totaluse
E-mailcommunicationswithcolleagues
InformationretrievalviatheInternet
Computerwordprocessingassignedtostudents
Computerspreadsheetstokeepgrades,records,etc.
Computerspreadsheetassignedtostudents
Individualcontactwithstudentsviae-mail
Presentationsoftware(e.g.,PowerPoint)toprepare
handouts,transparencies,orpresentationof
instructionalmaterials
Videousedinclassorassignedtostudents
Computerlabforclassmeeting
DataanalysissoftwaresuchasStatistix,SPSS,
LINPRO,SAS,orExcel
9.8
10.1
11.9
14.0
15.7
16.0
34.6
50.2
41.3
15.4
44.6
48.1
55.6
39.7
46.8
70.6
39.7
35.9
90.2
89.9
88.1
86.0
84.3
84.0
28.6
37.5
46.2
40.4
57.3
45.1
31.0
5.2
8.7
71.4
62.5
53.8
74.0
30.5
22.5
53.0
JournalofEducationforBusiness
TABLE2.TechnologiesLeastPopularinAccountingEducation,RankedbyInfrequencyofUse
Howoftenused(%)
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Technology
Never
Sometimes
(lessthan
50%oftime)
Frequently
(morethan
50%oftime)
Totaluse
Audioinclassorassignedtostudent
Distanceeducation
DataanalysissoftwaresuchasStatistix,SPSS,
LINPRO,SASassignedtostudents
Course-specificcomputerteleconferences
orbulletin
Filmusedinclassorassignedtostudents
Multimediaforstudents’individualized
learning
Electroniclistsfordiscussionswithcolleagues
Multimediaforin-classpresentations
83.6
80.6
15.7
14.6
0.7
4.8
16.4
19.4
80.5
15.0
4.5
19.5
76.3
75.6
17.4
23.0
6.3
1.4
23.7
24.4
67.0
60.6
52.1
25.6
28.9
33.9
7.4
10.5
14.0
33.0
39.4
47.9
information about whether significant
differencesexistamongfaculty’schoicesoftechnologyby(a)areaofteaching,
(b) academic rank, (c) course offering,(d)AACSBaccreditation,(e)work
experienceorage,and(f)gender.
AreaofTeaching
Analysis by teaching area showed
that applications of computer technology were fairly widespread and not
limited to accounting information systems (AIS; see Table 3). However, I
observed that business law professors
used significantly less e-mail for contacts with students, computer spreadsheets for students’ assignments, presentation software, and data analysis
softwarethandidallotherfaculty(p