08832323.2015.1087371
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Online Versus Face-to-Face Accounting Education:
A Comparison of CPA Exam Outcomes Across
Matched Institutions
John Daniel Morgan
To cite this article: John Daniel Morgan (2015) Online Versus Face-to-Face Accounting
Education: A Comparison of CPA Exam Outcomes Across Matched Institutions, Journal of
Education for Business, 90:8, 420-426, DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2015.1087371
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2015.1087371
Published online: 14 Oct 2015.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 33
View related articles
View Crossmark data
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: 19:44
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR BUSINESS, 90: 420–426, 2015
Copyright Ó Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0883-2323 print / 1940-3356 online
DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2015.1087371
Online Versus Face-to-Face Accounting Education:
A Comparison of CPA Exam Outcomes Across
Matched Institutions
John Daniel Morgan
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
Winona State University, Winona, Minnesota, USA
Programmatic-level comparisons are made between the certified public accountant (CPA)
exam outcomes of two types of accounting programs: online or distance accounting
programs and face-to-face or classroom accounting programs. After matching programs
from each group on student selectivity at admission, the two types of programs are compared
on CPA exam outcomes of graduates. Results show online or distance accounting programs
have much lower average CPA pass rates than their matched face-to-face counterparts with
equivalent student selection criteria. In addition, average 6-year graduation rates and average
propensity to sit for the CPA exam after graduation are much lower in the online or distance
accounting programs.
Keywords: accounting, CPA exam, online, outcomes
Over recent decades substantial increases in the availability
of online education have taken place (Bryant, Kahle, &
Schafer, 2005; Redpath, 2012). Affordable personal computers and ubiquitous high-speed internet provide a practical means for delivering online (distance) education to ever
larger percentages of the student population. Growth in
online education is predicted to accelerate in the future
(Ng, 2011; Gagne & Shepherd, 2001).
Benefits of online education include greater access to
education from any geographic location, flexibility related
to asynchronous lecture delivery, and benefits deriving
from working from home. Nontraditional students with significant other work and family obligations are believed to
benefit most from these characteristics (Ng, 2011).
Advantages of online education to an educational institution reside in the potential for expanding student recruitment because physical location of students is no longer
limiting. Online education also has a potential to reduce
delivery costs through reduction of physical plant (i.e.,
fewer requirements for bricks and mortar), and a potential
Correspondence should be addressed to John Daniel Morgan, Winona
State University, Department of Accounting, P.O. Box 5838, 323C Somsen
Hall, Winona, MN 55987, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Color versions of one or more figures in this article are available online
at www.tandfonline.com/vjeb
reduction to faculty costs especially in the case of massive
open online courses, a form of online education growing
rapidly in popularity in the United States since 2010 (Hu,
2013).
Growth in online education, not surprisingly, also has its
critics. Concerns about quality of online education have
been expressed by educators, employers, and consumers
alike. A large body of academic literature has concerned
itself with the quality of online education and whether outcomes are in fact comparable to more traditional face-toface education. Many regard the issue as unsettled with
available empirical evidence contradictory and inconclusive (Arbaugh et al., 2009; Bekele & Menchaca, 2008; Shachar, 2008).
Two relatively recent literature reviews, and one metaanalysis, conclude evidence about the relative quality of
online education is hampered by inherent design limitations, appears to be dependent on course content and student characteristics, and remains contentious (Arbaugh et
al., 2009; Bekele & Menchaca, 2008; Shachar, 2008).
Public perceptions that online education is inferior to
traditional classroom-based education is widespread
(Drago, Peltier, Hay, & Hodgkinson, 2005; Metrejean &
Noland, 2011). Redpath (2012) provided data showing
online delivery of business education is equated with lower
quality in the minds of most business educators.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
ONLINE VERSUS FACE-TO-FACE EDUCATION
Other research suggests one important moderating factor
to comparative outcomes of online education is the nature
of course content and whether it is quantitative or qualitative. Online course outcomes have been found to be generally more negative in quantitative courses than in
qualitative courses (Anstine & Skidmore, 2005; Arbaugh,
2005; Chen, Jones, & Moreland, 2013; Smith, Heindel, &
Torres-Ayala, 2008). Research also shows greater student
dissatisfaction with online coursework when course content
is quantitative rather than qualitative (Arbaugh, 2005;
Smith et al., 2008).
Five studies were identified directly comparing online
and face-to-face outcomes within a quantitative undergraduate business course. All five studies reported significantly
lower examination outcomes in online sections taking the
same examinations as face-to-face sections (Brown & Liedholm, 2002; Chen et al., 2013; Lawrence & Singhania,
2004; Stephenson, McGuirk, Zeh, & Watts-Reaves, 2005;
Vamosi, Pierce, & Slotkin, 2004).
Other empirical studies directed at qualitative undergraduate business courses have been less conclusive. The
predominant finding has been one of no significant difference in outcomes between online and face-to-face course
delivery (Estelami, 2012; Redpath, 2012).
MOTIVATION
The preponderance of prior empirical evidence indicates
negative outcomes in quantitative undergraduate business
courses, which would include most accounting courses.
Online students typically score lower on common examination within this particular context. Whether these courselevel differences in outcome on common exams translate
after four years of university education into more significant and long lasting negative outcomes affecting students’
ability to advance in their careers or pass professional
exams is not well understood. Do these demonstrated
course level differences in testing outcomes compound
over four years of undergraduate university education in
ways that affect events after graduation? For example, is a
student’s ability to pass the uniform certified public accountant (CPA) exam after graduation impacted by online education, or are course level differences relatively
unimportant to long-run success and life after graduation?
One possible negative (and career limiting) outcome of
online education would be if online education lowers the
likelihood of being able to pass the uniform CPA exam and
therefore to become a certified as a public accountant. The
CPA designation is well known to be positively associated
with higher lifetime earnings and better career potentials
for accountants ( National Association of State Boards of
Accountancy [NASBA], 2014a). A clearer understanding
of the relationship between type of accounting education,
online versus face-to-face, and CPA exam outcomes is
421
therefore a useful relationship to describe for students and
educators alike.
This study was motivated by the following question: Do
demonstrated course-level differences in common exam
scores, translate over the four years of undergraduate
accounting education into measurable postgraduation difficulties in the ability to pass the uniform CPA exam? The
question of impact on CPA success after graduation has
never been addressed in academic literature. This study
uniquely attempts to understand and describe differences
between the two types of accounting education from a
broader postgraduation CPA exam perspective rather than
from the individual undergraduate business course perspective of earlier research.
Faculty at accounting programs across the nation are
currently engaged in ongoing discussions regarding the
desirability of converting accounting curriculums into
online formats. Educational trends appear to be moving in
that direction. A clearer understanding of the relationship
between CPA exam outcomes of graduates and online education is clearly relevant to this discussion.
DATA SELECTION
Schools selected and analyzed in this study began with all
U.S. colleges and universities intersecting two published
databases, and also meeting several other selection criteria
noted below. The first database (and starting place), was the
National Association of State Boards of Accountancy
(NASBA) 2013 Uniform CPA Examination Candidate Performance (NASBA, 2014b), the annual publication of this
organization. NASBA data reports, by institution, CPA
exam outcomes at all U.S. colleges and universities having
graduates completing at least five CPA examination testing
events during the calendar year (a testing event is a CPA
exam section). Schools whose graduates complete fewer
than five CPA exam testing events during calendar are not
separately identified in NASBA data and therefore could
not be included in this study.
The second database whose intersection with the first
resulted in an initial sample was Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics (Institute of
Education Sciences [IES], 2014), an online database of the
U.S. Department of Education. This database provides
information on all U.S. colleges and universities, including
data about the percentage of students completing coursework online, six-year graduation rates by institution, number of accounting bachelor’s degrees granted by institution,
average ACT scores of entering freshmen by institution
when collected, and other similar institutional information.
The Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for
Education Statistics database also provided data necessary
to identify and exclude two-year community and technical
colleges from the sample.
422
J. D. MORGAN
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
FIGURE 1 Student selectivity: A potential confounding variable.
The sample resulting from the intersection of these two
databases included 894 U.S. colleges and universities
which were grouped into one of three categories, online
universities, face-to-face universities, or mixed.
In this study, an online university is any college or university in the sample of 894 schools offering its entire
accounting curriculum online, and also having at least 25%
of all students completing 100% of their curriculum online.
In this study, a face-to-face university is any college or
university in the sample of 894 schools not offering its
entire accounting curriculum online and having fewer than
10% of all graduates in any major completing the entire
curriculum online.
Mixed universities are all colleges or universities not
meeting the definition of either an online university or a
face-to-face university. Typically these universities fell
somewhere in between in terms of online coursework
offered and completed by students.
Based on the operational definitions, 37 online universities were identified. These 37 online universities granted a
total of 6,111 bachelor’s degrees in accounting in 2013
(IES, 2014), and had graduates completing a total of 1,716
sections of the uniform CPA exam in 2013 (NASBA,
2014a).
A total of 384 face-to-face universities were identified.
These 384 universities granted a total of 14,383 bachelor’s
degrees in accounting in 2013 (IES, 2014), and had graduates completing a total of 37,580 sections of the uniform
CPA exam in 2013 (NASBA, 2014b).
RESEARCH METHODS
Analysis in quasiexperimental designs (i.e., designs lacking
random assignment of subjects to groups) need to be particularly cognizant of confounds when interpreting results. In
the context of this research an important potential confound
is systematic difference between the two groups in student
selectivity at admission. Student selectivity is a known
correlate to CPA exam pass rates, and thus is a potential
confound to interpreting results. Programs having higher
student selectivity are known in general to produce graduates with better scores on the uniform CPA exam (Boone,
Legoria, Seifert, & Stammerjohan, 2006; Zook & Bremser,
1982). Systematic differences in student selectivity for
online and face-to-face accounting programs are known to
exist, and therefore potentially confound interpretation of
differences in CPA exam pass rates between the two
groups. Figure 1 summarizes this relationship.
A proper design for a study of this type must eliminate or
greatly reduce expected confounding effects of differential
student selectivity at admission between the two types of
accounting program. Selectivity of students admitted into
most online accounting programs has been found to be minimal with approximately half of these programs having
completely open admission. Face-to-face accounting programs on the other hand are found in most cases to require
certain admission standards be met including standardized
test scores at a certain level (e.g., ACT or SAT scores),
high school GPAs or class ranks in the top third or half of
the class, and completion of a college prep curriculum during high school. Selectivity of students at face-to-face programs, especially in the case of top tier programs, is much
higher than selectivity at most online programs.
The ideal design for resolving differences in selectivity
across groups is a fully randomized experimental design.
Random selection and assignment of subjects to groups
ensures subjects do not systematically differ on any other
variables except those being studied. While a randomized
experiment is the ideal design, it is neither feasible nor ethical in the present context, which is social research outside
the laboratory.
An alternate means to eliminate or reduce expected confounding differences in subjects in a quasiexperimental
design lacking randomization, is the use of statistical techniques to remove the effects of unwanted confounds. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and stepwise regression are
two widely used statistical methods for removing unwanted
confounding variables. However, ANCOVA and/or stepwise regression are only possible if data on the confounding
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
ONLINE VERSUS FACE-TO-FACE EDUCATION
variable is available and reasonably complete. In the present case, only 13 of the 37 online accounting programs collect or report ACT or SAT scores for admission. As ACT
scores are the measure of student selectivity most often
used in research of this type, and as that data is unavailable
for most of the online subjects, ANCOVA and stepwise
regression are not an option in the present case.
A third possible approach, when neither random assignment nor statistical correction for expected confounds is
feasible, is a matched-subjects design (Rubin, 2006).
Matched-subjects designs overcome or greatly reduce the
effects of an expected confounding variable when other
means are not feasible. Matched-subjects designs match
subjects in each group on the confounding variable of concern to reduce differences between groups on this variable.
A matched-subjects design has been employed for this
research study.
As noted earlier, a total of 37 online accounting programs and 384 face-to-face accounting programs were
identified. The 37 online programs were found to have
the following admissions standards: 16 had completely
open admission (no ACT scores or any other admission
requirements), 13 did require ACT or SAT scores for
admission, and eight employed high school transcripts
or in-house testing at admission but did not require
ACT or SAT scores.
The 37 online accounting programs were matched with
37 face-to-face programs having highly similar admissions
standards in the following manner. The 16 online programs
with completely open admission were matched with 16 randomly selected face-to-face programs also having
completely open admission. The 13 online programs requiring ACT or SAT scores for admission were matched with
13 randomly selected face-to-face programs requiring and
having the same average ACT or SAT scores of admitted
students. For example an online program admitting students
with an average ACT score of 20.5 was matched with a randomly selected face-to-face program admitting students
with an average ACT score of 20.5. The final eight online
programs that admitted students using high school transcripts and internal testing were matched with eight randomly selected face-to-face programs employing similar
admission requirements and admitting a similar percentage
of applicants. For example, if an online program of this
type admitted 70–80% of all applicants, it was matched
with a randomly selected face-to-face program that also
admitted 70–80% of all applicants. The matched subject
design is intended to greatly reduce differences in selectivity across the two types of accounting programs and thereby
eliminate or greatly reduce student selectivity as a potential
confound to results.
Statistical analyses have been conducted using one-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine whether CPA
exam pass rates are significantly different between online
and a matched set of face-to-face schools.
423
RESULTS
As a baseline for interpreting the results of this study, several facts should be remembered. First, average CPA exam
pass rates for all accounting programs in the 2013 calendar
year was 49.5% (NASBA, 2014a). Second, the 384 face-toface accounting programs identified as face-to-face programs in this study have an average CPA exam pass rate of
50%, marginally higher than the national average of 49.5%,
an expected outcome since no online programs with lower
pass rates are included in this group. Lastly the 37 face-toface accounting programs selected for matching with the 37
online accounting programs had an average CPA exam
pass rate of 44.9%, reflecting the lower student selection
criteria used by those schools.
Using an ANOVA, CPA exam pass rates of the 37 online
schools are compared to CPA exam pass rates of 37 face-toface accounting programs matched on the basis of student
selectivity at admission. Table 1 summarizes the results of
the one-way ANOVA. The null hypothesis is rejected (p <
.05). CPA exam pass rates are different in the two matched
groups.
Table 2 provides descriptive statistics. Average CPA
exam pass rate of the 37 online accounting programs
(35.4%) is well below that of the 37 matched face-to-face
accounting programs (44.9%).
Not surprisingly both groups have CPA exam pass rates
below the national average pass of 49.5%. This is expected
because both groups are comprised of accounting programs
with lower student selectivity at admission than normal for
most U.S. colleges and universities.
Table 3 reports average six-year graduation rates for
each group based on National Center for Education Statistics (IES, 2014). Students at the 37 online schools have significantly lower average six-year graduation rates than
students at the 37 matched face-to-face schools. Six-year
graduation rates at the online schools are only 74% of the
matched face-to-face schools.
Table 4 reports number of CPA exam sections completed
per graduate of each group expressed as a ratio of bachelor’s
degrees in accounting granted in 2013 (IES, 2014; NASBA,
2014b). Graduates from online accounting programs
attempted to take CPA exam sections at a much lower ratios
than graduates of the 37 matched face-to-face schools.
TABLE 1
Analysis of Variance (37 Online Programs With 37 Matched Face-toFace Accounting Programs)
Dependent variable
Between groups
Within groups
Total
*p. < .05.
Sum of squares
df
Mean square
F
Sig.
1662.034
21058.538
22720.571
1
72
73
1662.034
292.480
5.683
.02*
424
J. D. MORGAN
TABLE 2
Descriptive Statistics (37 Online Programs With 37 Matched Face-to-Face Accounting Programs)
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
Percentage passing
Dependent variable
N
M
SD
SE
Lower bound
Upper bound
Min.
Max.
Face-to-face programs
Online programs
Total
37
37
74
44.903
35.424
40.164
19.490
14.320
17.642
3.204
2.354
2.050
38.404
30.650
36.076
51.401
40.199
44.251
10.0
12.5
10.0
83.3
83.3
83.3
These data collectively suggest online accounting programs compared to a matched set of 37 face-to-face
accounting programs having similar student selectivity,
have significantly lower CPA exam pass rates, lower sixyear graduation rates, and graduates showing a lower propensity to sit for the CPA exam after graduation. Removing
the effects student selectivity at admission reduces the size
of these negative outcomes between groups but the differences that remain are still significant in both the statistical
and practical sense.
the CPA exam is a goal, online accounting education may
not be the best educational choice for achieving that goal.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
Data describe comparative CPA exam outcomes of online
accounting programs to a matched set of face-to-face
accounting programs. Results provide persuasive evidence
graduates of online accounting programs, on average, have
lower scores on the uniform CPA exam than do graduates of
the matched set of face-to-face accounting programs. Additionally, online program students have significantly lower
six-year average graduation rates than do students at the
matched set of face-to-face programs, and online graduates
have a much lower propensity to sit for the uniform CPA
exam at all. These undesirable outcomes for online education have implications for those evaluating the relative costs
and benefits of expanding online accounting offerings at
their institutions. Even if online programs increase student
enrollment to some degree, reduce brick and mortar costs,
and potentially reduce faculty costs, online accounting education also appears to also be associated with the negative
outcomes of lower CPA exam pass rates, lower persistence
to graduation, lower propensity to sit for the CPA exam after
graduation.
Results also have implications for accounting students
desiring careers as certified public accountants. If passing
This study does have limitations that should be noted.
Absent random assignment of students to groups, and
absent random assignment of teachers to groups, it is not
possible with complete confidence to infer reported outcomes are free of confounds. While matching on student
selectivity greatly reduces the most obvious confound, a
confound documented in prior research as a powerful factor
in CPA exam success, other unknown confounds not yet
imagined may exist. Students self-select into online and
face-to-face educational programs and therefore may potentially systematically differ in ways affecting CPA exam
outcomes, but not related to form of course delivery. Faculty also self-select into teaching online courses and may
also differ systematically from faculty choosing not to participate in online education. This empirical study has been
designed to minimize one obvious and likely confound
(systematic differences in student selectivity) but does not
fully eliminate the possibility of other confounds. Only
through a fully randomized experimental design can all
confounds be eliminated with confidence. Unfortunately, in
the context of online versus face-to-face accounting education, fully randomized experiments are not possible and
other less satisfactory approaches to eliminating confounds
are the best to be hoped for. Open societies rightly provide
students the choice of type of education to pursue, and faculty are generally permitted to choose how they wish to
provide it. Thus persuasive evidence as opposed to conclusive experimental evidence is the best that can be expected
in the circumstances. Results of this study (in my opinion),
are reasonably persuasive and suggest online accounting
TABLE 3
Average Graduation Rates: Percentage of Full-Time, First-Time Students Graduating After 6 Years
TABLE 4
Average CPA Exam Sections Completed in 2013 Per Accounting
Bachelor’s Degree Granted in 2013
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Category
Face to face (n D 37)
Online (n D 37)
Graduation rate
44.3% six-year graduation rate
33.0% six-year graduation rate
Category
Face to face (n D 37)
Online (n D 37)
Ratio
1.18 sections taken per graduate
0.43 sections taken per graduate
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
ONLINE VERSUS FACE-TO-FACE EDUCATION
education may be associated with some rather important
negative outcomes.
This study also should not be generalized to very different learning contexts. Evidence presented here shows
online accounting education is associated with some negative outcomes. It does not automatically follow that all
online education in all contexts results in similar negative
outcomes. In fact, several published studies show context
does matter when comparing outcomes of online and faceto-face learning; courses, fields, and nature of content when
comprised of relatively more quantitative material (especially those with complex applications) are associated with
larger negative outcomes for online presentation than are
courses having relatively more qualitative content
(Arbaugh, 2005; Chen et al., 2013). Student characteristics
also matter (McLaren, 2004; Xu & Jaggars, 2013).
Another weakness of this study is that nothing in the
results reported provide much understanding of why there
appear to be negative outcomes for online accounting education. Research that develops and elaborates why this relationship exists would be useful and informative. Chen et al.
(2013) speculated differences in learning outcomes perhaps
result from differences in psychological space as described
and predicted in transactional distance theory. Watters and
Robertson (2009) speculated differential learning outcomes
may be moderated by the learning tasks themselves including the characteristics of course content. Differences in satisfaction and learning outcomes associated with online
education appear to be moderated by student learning styles,
student personality, motivation, and a variety of demographic factors such as age, gender, and marital status
(Beqiri, Chase, & Bishka, 2010; Eom, 2006; Flanagan, 2012;
McLaren, 2004). To date academic literature contains mostly
speculation with very little empirical evidence in support.
To conclude, this particular study has investigated and
described relationships between accounting educational
delivery mode, online versus face-to-face, and educational
outcomes including CPA exam pass rates, persistence to
graduation, propensity to sit for the CPA exam after graduation. The research design has been quasi-experimental.
Results provide persuasive though not conclusive evidence
that online accounting programs have lower average CPA
exam pass rates, lower six-year graduation rates, and graduates with a lower propensity to sit for the CPA exam after
graduation than do accounting graduates of face-to-face
accounting programs of comparable selectivity.
REFERENCES
Anstine, J., & Skidmore, M. (2005). A small sample study of traditional
and online courses with sample selection adjustment. Journal of Economic Education, 36, 107–127.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2005). How much does “subject matter” matter? A study of
the disciplinary effects in on-line mba courses. Academy of Management
Learning & Education, 4, 57–73.
425
Arbaugh, J. B., Godfrey, M. R., Johnson, M., Pollack, B. L., Niendorf, B.,
& Wresch, W. (2009). Research in online and blended learning in the
business disciplines: Key findings and possible future directions. Internet and Higher Education, 12, 71–87.
Bekele, T., & Menchaca, M. (2008). Research on internet-supported learning: A review. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9, 373–405.
Beqiri, M., Chase, S., & Bishka, A. (2010). Online course delivery. Journal
of Education for Business, 85, 95–100.
Boone, J., Legoria, J., Seifert, D., & Stammerjohan, W. (2006). The associations among program attributes, 150 h status and CPA exam pass rates.
Journal of Accounting Education, 24, 202–215.
Brown, B. W., & Liedholm, C. E. (2002). Can web courses replace the
classroom in principles of microeconomics? American Economic
Review Papers and Proceedings, 92, 444–448.
Bryant, S. M., Kahle, J. B., & Schafer, B. A. (2005). Distance education: A
review of the contemporary literature. Issues in Accounting Education,
20, 255–272.
Chen, C., Jones, K., & Moreland, K. (2013). Online accounting education
versus in-class delivery: Does course level matter? Issues in Accounting
Education, 28, 1–16.
Drago, W., Peltier, J. W., Hay, A., & Hodgkinson, M. (2005). Dispelling
the myths of online education: Learning via the information superhighway. Management Research News, 28(7), 1–17.
Eom, S. (2006). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An empirical
investigation. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4,
215–235.
Estelami, H. (2012). An exploratory study of the drivers of student satisfaction and learning experiences in hybrid-online and purely online marketing courses. Marketing Education Review, 22, 143–155.
Flanagan, J. (2012). Online versus face-to-face instruction: Analysis of
gender and course format in undergraduate business statistics courses.
Academy of Business Research Journal, 2, 89–98.
Gagne, M., & Shepherd, M. (2001). Distance learning in education. T.H.E.
Journal, 28(9), 58–60.
Hu, H. (2013). MOOC migration: Massive open online courses are changing the way we think about higher education. Diverse: Issues in Higher
Education, 30(4), 10–11.
Institute of Education Sciences. (2014). College navigator [data file].
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/COLLEGENAVIGATOR/?sD
all&lD5&icD1
Lawrence, J., & Singhania, R. (2004). A study of teaching and testing strategies for a required statistics course for undergraduate business students.
Journal of Education for Business, 79, 333–338.
McLaren, C. (2004). A comparison of student persistence and performance
in online and classroom business statistics experiences. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 2, 1–10.
Metrejean, E., & Noland, T. (2011). An analysis of CPA firm recruiters’
perceptions of online masters of accounting degrees. Journal of Education for Business, 86, 25–30.
National Association of State Boards of Accountancy. (2014a). 2013 uniform CPA examination, candidate performance. Nashville, TN: Author.
National Association of State Boards of Accountancy. (2014b). Five popular reasons for earning a CPA license. Retrieved from http://nasba.org/
licensure/gettingacpalicense/whygetlicensed/five-popular-reasons-forearning-a-cpa-license
Ng, C. (2011). Emerging trends in online accounting education at colleges.
Pennsylvania CPA Journal, 82, 1–3.
Redpath, L. (2012). Confronting the bias against on-line learning in management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education,
11, 125–140.
Rubin, D. (2006). Matched sampling for causal inference. Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press.
Shachar, M. (2008). Meta-analysis: The preferred method of choice for the
assessment of distance learning quality factors. International Review of
Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3), 1–15.
426
J. D. MORGAN
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
Smith, G., Heindel, A., & Torres-Ayala, A. (2008). Disciplinary differences in e-learning instructional design: The case of mathematics. Journal
of Distance Education, 22(3), 63–87.
Stephenson, K., McGuirk, A., Zeh, T., & Watts-Reaves, D. (2005). Comparisons of the educational value of distance delivered versus traditional
classroom instruction in introductory agricultural economics. Review of
Agricultural Economics, 27, 605–620.
Vamosi, A., Pierce, B., & Slotkin, M. (2004). Distance learning in an
accounting principles course—Student satisfaction and perceptions of
efficacy. Journal of Education for Business, 79, 360–366.
Xu, D., & Jaggars, S. (2013). The impact of online learning on
students’ course outcomes: Evidence from a large community and
technical college system. Economics of Education Review, 37,
46–57.
Watters, M. P., & Robertson, P. J. (2009). Online delivery of accounting
courses: Student perceptions. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 13(3), 54–60.
Zook, D., & Bremser, W. (1982). A correlation between the characteristics
of candidates and performance on the uniform CPA examination. Delta
Pi Epsilon Journal, 24, 45–52.
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Online Versus Face-to-Face Accounting Education:
A Comparison of CPA Exam Outcomes Across
Matched Institutions
John Daniel Morgan
To cite this article: John Daniel Morgan (2015) Online Versus Face-to-Face Accounting
Education: A Comparison of CPA Exam Outcomes Across Matched Institutions, Journal of
Education for Business, 90:8, 420-426, DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2015.1087371
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2015.1087371
Published online: 14 Oct 2015.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 33
View related articles
View Crossmark data
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: 19:44
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR BUSINESS, 90: 420–426, 2015
Copyright Ó Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0883-2323 print / 1940-3356 online
DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2015.1087371
Online Versus Face-to-Face Accounting Education:
A Comparison of CPA Exam Outcomes Across
Matched Institutions
John Daniel Morgan
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
Winona State University, Winona, Minnesota, USA
Programmatic-level comparisons are made between the certified public accountant (CPA)
exam outcomes of two types of accounting programs: online or distance accounting
programs and face-to-face or classroom accounting programs. After matching programs
from each group on student selectivity at admission, the two types of programs are compared
on CPA exam outcomes of graduates. Results show online or distance accounting programs
have much lower average CPA pass rates than their matched face-to-face counterparts with
equivalent student selection criteria. In addition, average 6-year graduation rates and average
propensity to sit for the CPA exam after graduation are much lower in the online or distance
accounting programs.
Keywords: accounting, CPA exam, online, outcomes
Over recent decades substantial increases in the availability
of online education have taken place (Bryant, Kahle, &
Schafer, 2005; Redpath, 2012). Affordable personal computers and ubiquitous high-speed internet provide a practical means for delivering online (distance) education to ever
larger percentages of the student population. Growth in
online education is predicted to accelerate in the future
(Ng, 2011; Gagne & Shepherd, 2001).
Benefits of online education include greater access to
education from any geographic location, flexibility related
to asynchronous lecture delivery, and benefits deriving
from working from home. Nontraditional students with significant other work and family obligations are believed to
benefit most from these characteristics (Ng, 2011).
Advantages of online education to an educational institution reside in the potential for expanding student recruitment because physical location of students is no longer
limiting. Online education also has a potential to reduce
delivery costs through reduction of physical plant (i.e.,
fewer requirements for bricks and mortar), and a potential
Correspondence should be addressed to John Daniel Morgan, Winona
State University, Department of Accounting, P.O. Box 5838, 323C Somsen
Hall, Winona, MN 55987, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Color versions of one or more figures in this article are available online
at www.tandfonline.com/vjeb
reduction to faculty costs especially in the case of massive
open online courses, a form of online education growing
rapidly in popularity in the United States since 2010 (Hu,
2013).
Growth in online education, not surprisingly, also has its
critics. Concerns about quality of online education have
been expressed by educators, employers, and consumers
alike. A large body of academic literature has concerned
itself with the quality of online education and whether outcomes are in fact comparable to more traditional face-toface education. Many regard the issue as unsettled with
available empirical evidence contradictory and inconclusive (Arbaugh et al., 2009; Bekele & Menchaca, 2008; Shachar, 2008).
Two relatively recent literature reviews, and one metaanalysis, conclude evidence about the relative quality of
online education is hampered by inherent design limitations, appears to be dependent on course content and student characteristics, and remains contentious (Arbaugh et
al., 2009; Bekele & Menchaca, 2008; Shachar, 2008).
Public perceptions that online education is inferior to
traditional classroom-based education is widespread
(Drago, Peltier, Hay, & Hodgkinson, 2005; Metrejean &
Noland, 2011). Redpath (2012) provided data showing
online delivery of business education is equated with lower
quality in the minds of most business educators.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
ONLINE VERSUS FACE-TO-FACE EDUCATION
Other research suggests one important moderating factor
to comparative outcomes of online education is the nature
of course content and whether it is quantitative or qualitative. Online course outcomes have been found to be generally more negative in quantitative courses than in
qualitative courses (Anstine & Skidmore, 2005; Arbaugh,
2005; Chen, Jones, & Moreland, 2013; Smith, Heindel, &
Torres-Ayala, 2008). Research also shows greater student
dissatisfaction with online coursework when course content
is quantitative rather than qualitative (Arbaugh, 2005;
Smith et al., 2008).
Five studies were identified directly comparing online
and face-to-face outcomes within a quantitative undergraduate business course. All five studies reported significantly
lower examination outcomes in online sections taking the
same examinations as face-to-face sections (Brown & Liedholm, 2002; Chen et al., 2013; Lawrence & Singhania,
2004; Stephenson, McGuirk, Zeh, & Watts-Reaves, 2005;
Vamosi, Pierce, & Slotkin, 2004).
Other empirical studies directed at qualitative undergraduate business courses have been less conclusive. The
predominant finding has been one of no significant difference in outcomes between online and face-to-face course
delivery (Estelami, 2012; Redpath, 2012).
MOTIVATION
The preponderance of prior empirical evidence indicates
negative outcomes in quantitative undergraduate business
courses, which would include most accounting courses.
Online students typically score lower on common examination within this particular context. Whether these courselevel differences in outcome on common exams translate
after four years of university education into more significant and long lasting negative outcomes affecting students’
ability to advance in their careers or pass professional
exams is not well understood. Do these demonstrated
course level differences in testing outcomes compound
over four years of undergraduate university education in
ways that affect events after graduation? For example, is a
student’s ability to pass the uniform certified public accountant (CPA) exam after graduation impacted by online education, or are course level differences relatively
unimportant to long-run success and life after graduation?
One possible negative (and career limiting) outcome of
online education would be if online education lowers the
likelihood of being able to pass the uniform CPA exam and
therefore to become a certified as a public accountant. The
CPA designation is well known to be positively associated
with higher lifetime earnings and better career potentials
for accountants ( National Association of State Boards of
Accountancy [NASBA], 2014a). A clearer understanding
of the relationship between type of accounting education,
online versus face-to-face, and CPA exam outcomes is
421
therefore a useful relationship to describe for students and
educators alike.
This study was motivated by the following question: Do
demonstrated course-level differences in common exam
scores, translate over the four years of undergraduate
accounting education into measurable postgraduation difficulties in the ability to pass the uniform CPA exam? The
question of impact on CPA success after graduation has
never been addressed in academic literature. This study
uniquely attempts to understand and describe differences
between the two types of accounting education from a
broader postgraduation CPA exam perspective rather than
from the individual undergraduate business course perspective of earlier research.
Faculty at accounting programs across the nation are
currently engaged in ongoing discussions regarding the
desirability of converting accounting curriculums into
online formats. Educational trends appear to be moving in
that direction. A clearer understanding of the relationship
between CPA exam outcomes of graduates and online education is clearly relevant to this discussion.
DATA SELECTION
Schools selected and analyzed in this study began with all
U.S. colleges and universities intersecting two published
databases, and also meeting several other selection criteria
noted below. The first database (and starting place), was the
National Association of State Boards of Accountancy
(NASBA) 2013 Uniform CPA Examination Candidate Performance (NASBA, 2014b), the annual publication of this
organization. NASBA data reports, by institution, CPA
exam outcomes at all U.S. colleges and universities having
graduates completing at least five CPA examination testing
events during the calendar year (a testing event is a CPA
exam section). Schools whose graduates complete fewer
than five CPA exam testing events during calendar are not
separately identified in NASBA data and therefore could
not be included in this study.
The second database whose intersection with the first
resulted in an initial sample was Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics (Institute of
Education Sciences [IES], 2014), an online database of the
U.S. Department of Education. This database provides
information on all U.S. colleges and universities, including
data about the percentage of students completing coursework online, six-year graduation rates by institution, number of accounting bachelor’s degrees granted by institution,
average ACT scores of entering freshmen by institution
when collected, and other similar institutional information.
The Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for
Education Statistics database also provided data necessary
to identify and exclude two-year community and technical
colleges from the sample.
422
J. D. MORGAN
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
FIGURE 1 Student selectivity: A potential confounding variable.
The sample resulting from the intersection of these two
databases included 894 U.S. colleges and universities
which were grouped into one of three categories, online
universities, face-to-face universities, or mixed.
In this study, an online university is any college or university in the sample of 894 schools offering its entire
accounting curriculum online, and also having at least 25%
of all students completing 100% of their curriculum online.
In this study, a face-to-face university is any college or
university in the sample of 894 schools not offering its
entire accounting curriculum online and having fewer than
10% of all graduates in any major completing the entire
curriculum online.
Mixed universities are all colleges or universities not
meeting the definition of either an online university or a
face-to-face university. Typically these universities fell
somewhere in between in terms of online coursework
offered and completed by students.
Based on the operational definitions, 37 online universities were identified. These 37 online universities granted a
total of 6,111 bachelor’s degrees in accounting in 2013
(IES, 2014), and had graduates completing a total of 1,716
sections of the uniform CPA exam in 2013 (NASBA,
2014a).
A total of 384 face-to-face universities were identified.
These 384 universities granted a total of 14,383 bachelor’s
degrees in accounting in 2013 (IES, 2014), and had graduates completing a total of 37,580 sections of the uniform
CPA exam in 2013 (NASBA, 2014b).
RESEARCH METHODS
Analysis in quasiexperimental designs (i.e., designs lacking
random assignment of subjects to groups) need to be particularly cognizant of confounds when interpreting results. In
the context of this research an important potential confound
is systematic difference between the two groups in student
selectivity at admission. Student selectivity is a known
correlate to CPA exam pass rates, and thus is a potential
confound to interpreting results. Programs having higher
student selectivity are known in general to produce graduates with better scores on the uniform CPA exam (Boone,
Legoria, Seifert, & Stammerjohan, 2006; Zook & Bremser,
1982). Systematic differences in student selectivity for
online and face-to-face accounting programs are known to
exist, and therefore potentially confound interpretation of
differences in CPA exam pass rates between the two
groups. Figure 1 summarizes this relationship.
A proper design for a study of this type must eliminate or
greatly reduce expected confounding effects of differential
student selectivity at admission between the two types of
accounting program. Selectivity of students admitted into
most online accounting programs has been found to be minimal with approximately half of these programs having
completely open admission. Face-to-face accounting programs on the other hand are found in most cases to require
certain admission standards be met including standardized
test scores at a certain level (e.g., ACT or SAT scores),
high school GPAs or class ranks in the top third or half of
the class, and completion of a college prep curriculum during high school. Selectivity of students at face-to-face programs, especially in the case of top tier programs, is much
higher than selectivity at most online programs.
The ideal design for resolving differences in selectivity
across groups is a fully randomized experimental design.
Random selection and assignment of subjects to groups
ensures subjects do not systematically differ on any other
variables except those being studied. While a randomized
experiment is the ideal design, it is neither feasible nor ethical in the present context, which is social research outside
the laboratory.
An alternate means to eliminate or reduce expected confounding differences in subjects in a quasiexperimental
design lacking randomization, is the use of statistical techniques to remove the effects of unwanted confounds. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and stepwise regression are
two widely used statistical methods for removing unwanted
confounding variables. However, ANCOVA and/or stepwise regression are only possible if data on the confounding
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
ONLINE VERSUS FACE-TO-FACE EDUCATION
variable is available and reasonably complete. In the present case, only 13 of the 37 online accounting programs collect or report ACT or SAT scores for admission. As ACT
scores are the measure of student selectivity most often
used in research of this type, and as that data is unavailable
for most of the online subjects, ANCOVA and stepwise
regression are not an option in the present case.
A third possible approach, when neither random assignment nor statistical correction for expected confounds is
feasible, is a matched-subjects design (Rubin, 2006).
Matched-subjects designs overcome or greatly reduce the
effects of an expected confounding variable when other
means are not feasible. Matched-subjects designs match
subjects in each group on the confounding variable of concern to reduce differences between groups on this variable.
A matched-subjects design has been employed for this
research study.
As noted earlier, a total of 37 online accounting programs and 384 face-to-face accounting programs were
identified. The 37 online programs were found to have
the following admissions standards: 16 had completely
open admission (no ACT scores or any other admission
requirements), 13 did require ACT or SAT scores for
admission, and eight employed high school transcripts
or in-house testing at admission but did not require
ACT or SAT scores.
The 37 online accounting programs were matched with
37 face-to-face programs having highly similar admissions
standards in the following manner. The 16 online programs
with completely open admission were matched with 16 randomly selected face-to-face programs also having
completely open admission. The 13 online programs requiring ACT or SAT scores for admission were matched with
13 randomly selected face-to-face programs requiring and
having the same average ACT or SAT scores of admitted
students. For example an online program admitting students
with an average ACT score of 20.5 was matched with a randomly selected face-to-face program admitting students
with an average ACT score of 20.5. The final eight online
programs that admitted students using high school transcripts and internal testing were matched with eight randomly selected face-to-face programs employing similar
admission requirements and admitting a similar percentage
of applicants. For example, if an online program of this
type admitted 70–80% of all applicants, it was matched
with a randomly selected face-to-face program that also
admitted 70–80% of all applicants. The matched subject
design is intended to greatly reduce differences in selectivity across the two types of accounting programs and thereby
eliminate or greatly reduce student selectivity as a potential
confound to results.
Statistical analyses have been conducted using one-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine whether CPA
exam pass rates are significantly different between online
and a matched set of face-to-face schools.
423
RESULTS
As a baseline for interpreting the results of this study, several facts should be remembered. First, average CPA exam
pass rates for all accounting programs in the 2013 calendar
year was 49.5% (NASBA, 2014a). Second, the 384 face-toface accounting programs identified as face-to-face programs in this study have an average CPA exam pass rate of
50%, marginally higher than the national average of 49.5%,
an expected outcome since no online programs with lower
pass rates are included in this group. Lastly the 37 face-toface accounting programs selected for matching with the 37
online accounting programs had an average CPA exam
pass rate of 44.9%, reflecting the lower student selection
criteria used by those schools.
Using an ANOVA, CPA exam pass rates of the 37 online
schools are compared to CPA exam pass rates of 37 face-toface accounting programs matched on the basis of student
selectivity at admission. Table 1 summarizes the results of
the one-way ANOVA. The null hypothesis is rejected (p <
.05). CPA exam pass rates are different in the two matched
groups.
Table 2 provides descriptive statistics. Average CPA
exam pass rate of the 37 online accounting programs
(35.4%) is well below that of the 37 matched face-to-face
accounting programs (44.9%).
Not surprisingly both groups have CPA exam pass rates
below the national average pass of 49.5%. This is expected
because both groups are comprised of accounting programs
with lower student selectivity at admission than normal for
most U.S. colleges and universities.
Table 3 reports average six-year graduation rates for
each group based on National Center for Education Statistics (IES, 2014). Students at the 37 online schools have significantly lower average six-year graduation rates than
students at the 37 matched face-to-face schools. Six-year
graduation rates at the online schools are only 74% of the
matched face-to-face schools.
Table 4 reports number of CPA exam sections completed
per graduate of each group expressed as a ratio of bachelor’s
degrees in accounting granted in 2013 (IES, 2014; NASBA,
2014b). Graduates from online accounting programs
attempted to take CPA exam sections at a much lower ratios
than graduates of the 37 matched face-to-face schools.
TABLE 1
Analysis of Variance (37 Online Programs With 37 Matched Face-toFace Accounting Programs)
Dependent variable
Between groups
Within groups
Total
*p. < .05.
Sum of squares
df
Mean square
F
Sig.
1662.034
21058.538
22720.571
1
72
73
1662.034
292.480
5.683
.02*
424
J. D. MORGAN
TABLE 2
Descriptive Statistics (37 Online Programs With 37 Matched Face-to-Face Accounting Programs)
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
Percentage passing
Dependent variable
N
M
SD
SE
Lower bound
Upper bound
Min.
Max.
Face-to-face programs
Online programs
Total
37
37
74
44.903
35.424
40.164
19.490
14.320
17.642
3.204
2.354
2.050
38.404
30.650
36.076
51.401
40.199
44.251
10.0
12.5
10.0
83.3
83.3
83.3
These data collectively suggest online accounting programs compared to a matched set of 37 face-to-face
accounting programs having similar student selectivity,
have significantly lower CPA exam pass rates, lower sixyear graduation rates, and graduates showing a lower propensity to sit for the CPA exam after graduation. Removing
the effects student selectivity at admission reduces the size
of these negative outcomes between groups but the differences that remain are still significant in both the statistical
and practical sense.
the CPA exam is a goal, online accounting education may
not be the best educational choice for achieving that goal.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
Data describe comparative CPA exam outcomes of online
accounting programs to a matched set of face-to-face
accounting programs. Results provide persuasive evidence
graduates of online accounting programs, on average, have
lower scores on the uniform CPA exam than do graduates of
the matched set of face-to-face accounting programs. Additionally, online program students have significantly lower
six-year average graduation rates than do students at the
matched set of face-to-face programs, and online graduates
have a much lower propensity to sit for the uniform CPA
exam at all. These undesirable outcomes for online education have implications for those evaluating the relative costs
and benefits of expanding online accounting offerings at
their institutions. Even if online programs increase student
enrollment to some degree, reduce brick and mortar costs,
and potentially reduce faculty costs, online accounting education also appears to also be associated with the negative
outcomes of lower CPA exam pass rates, lower persistence
to graduation, lower propensity to sit for the CPA exam after
graduation.
Results also have implications for accounting students
desiring careers as certified public accountants. If passing
This study does have limitations that should be noted.
Absent random assignment of students to groups, and
absent random assignment of teachers to groups, it is not
possible with complete confidence to infer reported outcomes are free of confounds. While matching on student
selectivity greatly reduces the most obvious confound, a
confound documented in prior research as a powerful factor
in CPA exam success, other unknown confounds not yet
imagined may exist. Students self-select into online and
face-to-face educational programs and therefore may potentially systematically differ in ways affecting CPA exam
outcomes, but not related to form of course delivery. Faculty also self-select into teaching online courses and may
also differ systematically from faculty choosing not to participate in online education. This empirical study has been
designed to minimize one obvious and likely confound
(systematic differences in student selectivity) but does not
fully eliminate the possibility of other confounds. Only
through a fully randomized experimental design can all
confounds be eliminated with confidence. Unfortunately, in
the context of online versus face-to-face accounting education, fully randomized experiments are not possible and
other less satisfactory approaches to eliminating confounds
are the best to be hoped for. Open societies rightly provide
students the choice of type of education to pursue, and faculty are generally permitted to choose how they wish to
provide it. Thus persuasive evidence as opposed to conclusive experimental evidence is the best that can be expected
in the circumstances. Results of this study (in my opinion),
are reasonably persuasive and suggest online accounting
TABLE 3
Average Graduation Rates: Percentage of Full-Time, First-Time Students Graduating After 6 Years
TABLE 4
Average CPA Exam Sections Completed in 2013 Per Accounting
Bachelor’s Degree Granted in 2013
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Category
Face to face (n D 37)
Online (n D 37)
Graduation rate
44.3% six-year graduation rate
33.0% six-year graduation rate
Category
Face to face (n D 37)
Online (n D 37)
Ratio
1.18 sections taken per graduate
0.43 sections taken per graduate
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
ONLINE VERSUS FACE-TO-FACE EDUCATION
education may be associated with some rather important
negative outcomes.
This study also should not be generalized to very different learning contexts. Evidence presented here shows
online accounting education is associated with some negative outcomes. It does not automatically follow that all
online education in all contexts results in similar negative
outcomes. In fact, several published studies show context
does matter when comparing outcomes of online and faceto-face learning; courses, fields, and nature of content when
comprised of relatively more quantitative material (especially those with complex applications) are associated with
larger negative outcomes for online presentation than are
courses having relatively more qualitative content
(Arbaugh, 2005; Chen et al., 2013). Student characteristics
also matter (McLaren, 2004; Xu & Jaggars, 2013).
Another weakness of this study is that nothing in the
results reported provide much understanding of why there
appear to be negative outcomes for online accounting education. Research that develops and elaborates why this relationship exists would be useful and informative. Chen et al.
(2013) speculated differences in learning outcomes perhaps
result from differences in psychological space as described
and predicted in transactional distance theory. Watters and
Robertson (2009) speculated differential learning outcomes
may be moderated by the learning tasks themselves including the characteristics of course content. Differences in satisfaction and learning outcomes associated with online
education appear to be moderated by student learning styles,
student personality, motivation, and a variety of demographic factors such as age, gender, and marital status
(Beqiri, Chase, & Bishka, 2010; Eom, 2006; Flanagan, 2012;
McLaren, 2004). To date academic literature contains mostly
speculation with very little empirical evidence in support.
To conclude, this particular study has investigated and
described relationships between accounting educational
delivery mode, online versus face-to-face, and educational
outcomes including CPA exam pass rates, persistence to
graduation, propensity to sit for the CPA exam after graduation. The research design has been quasi-experimental.
Results provide persuasive though not conclusive evidence
that online accounting programs have lower average CPA
exam pass rates, lower six-year graduation rates, and graduates with a lower propensity to sit for the CPA exam after
graduation than do accounting graduates of face-to-face
accounting programs of comparable selectivity.
REFERENCES
Anstine, J., & Skidmore, M. (2005). A small sample study of traditional
and online courses with sample selection adjustment. Journal of Economic Education, 36, 107–127.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2005). How much does “subject matter” matter? A study of
the disciplinary effects in on-line mba courses. Academy of Management
Learning & Education, 4, 57–73.
425
Arbaugh, J. B., Godfrey, M. R., Johnson, M., Pollack, B. L., Niendorf, B.,
& Wresch, W. (2009). Research in online and blended learning in the
business disciplines: Key findings and possible future directions. Internet and Higher Education, 12, 71–87.
Bekele, T., & Menchaca, M. (2008). Research on internet-supported learning: A review. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9, 373–405.
Beqiri, M., Chase, S., & Bishka, A. (2010). Online course delivery. Journal
of Education for Business, 85, 95–100.
Boone, J., Legoria, J., Seifert, D., & Stammerjohan, W. (2006). The associations among program attributes, 150 h status and CPA exam pass rates.
Journal of Accounting Education, 24, 202–215.
Brown, B. W., & Liedholm, C. E. (2002). Can web courses replace the
classroom in principles of microeconomics? American Economic
Review Papers and Proceedings, 92, 444–448.
Bryant, S. M., Kahle, J. B., & Schafer, B. A. (2005). Distance education: A
review of the contemporary literature. Issues in Accounting Education,
20, 255–272.
Chen, C., Jones, K., & Moreland, K. (2013). Online accounting education
versus in-class delivery: Does course level matter? Issues in Accounting
Education, 28, 1–16.
Drago, W., Peltier, J. W., Hay, A., & Hodgkinson, M. (2005). Dispelling
the myths of online education: Learning via the information superhighway. Management Research News, 28(7), 1–17.
Eom, S. (2006). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An empirical
investigation. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4,
215–235.
Estelami, H. (2012). An exploratory study of the drivers of student satisfaction and learning experiences in hybrid-online and purely online marketing courses. Marketing Education Review, 22, 143–155.
Flanagan, J. (2012). Online versus face-to-face instruction: Analysis of
gender and course format in undergraduate business statistics courses.
Academy of Business Research Journal, 2, 89–98.
Gagne, M., & Shepherd, M. (2001). Distance learning in education. T.H.E.
Journal, 28(9), 58–60.
Hu, H. (2013). MOOC migration: Massive open online courses are changing the way we think about higher education. Diverse: Issues in Higher
Education, 30(4), 10–11.
Institute of Education Sciences. (2014). College navigator [data file].
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/COLLEGENAVIGATOR/?sD
all&lD5&icD1
Lawrence, J., & Singhania, R. (2004). A study of teaching and testing strategies for a required statistics course for undergraduate business students.
Journal of Education for Business, 79, 333–338.
McLaren, C. (2004). A comparison of student persistence and performance
in online and classroom business statistics experiences. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 2, 1–10.
Metrejean, E., & Noland, T. (2011). An analysis of CPA firm recruiters’
perceptions of online masters of accounting degrees. Journal of Education for Business, 86, 25–30.
National Association of State Boards of Accountancy. (2014a). 2013 uniform CPA examination, candidate performance. Nashville, TN: Author.
National Association of State Boards of Accountancy. (2014b). Five popular reasons for earning a CPA license. Retrieved from http://nasba.org/
licensure/gettingacpalicense/whygetlicensed/five-popular-reasons-forearning-a-cpa-license
Ng, C. (2011). Emerging trends in online accounting education at colleges.
Pennsylvania CPA Journal, 82, 1–3.
Redpath, L. (2012). Confronting the bias against on-line learning in management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education,
11, 125–140.
Rubin, D. (2006). Matched sampling for causal inference. Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press.
Shachar, M. (2008). Meta-analysis: The preferred method of choice for the
assessment of distance learning quality factors. International Review of
Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3), 1–15.
426
J. D. MORGAN
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 19:44 11 January 2016
Smith, G., Heindel, A., & Torres-Ayala, A. (2008). Disciplinary differences in e-learning instructional design: The case of mathematics. Journal
of Distance Education, 22(3), 63–87.
Stephenson, K., McGuirk, A., Zeh, T., & Watts-Reaves, D. (2005). Comparisons of the educational value of distance delivered versus traditional
classroom instruction in introductory agricultural economics. Review of
Agricultural Economics, 27, 605–620.
Vamosi, A., Pierce, B., & Slotkin, M. (2004). Distance learning in an
accounting principles course—Student satisfaction and perceptions of
efficacy. Journal of Education for Business, 79, 360–366.
Xu, D., & Jaggars, S. (2013). The impact of online learning on
students’ course outcomes: Evidence from a large community and
technical college system. Economics of Education Review, 37,
46–57.
Watters, M. P., & Robertson, P. J. (2009). Online delivery of accounting
courses: Student perceptions. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 13(3), 54–60.
Zook, D., & Bremser, W. (1982). A correlation between the characteristics
of candidates and performance on the uniform CPA examination. Delta
Pi Epsilon Journal, 24, 45–52.