Stephen & Astrid believe in the value of teachers as social capital and have been team teaching for more than a decade together. They teach an intermediate accounting course, a Masters course in accounting education and supervise several Masters and PhD students. They also present CPD courses on team teaching and collaboration. There innovations in teaching and learning are evidenced based and have won several awards.
Their teaching is characterised by:
|
|
Innovations
|
Stephen and Astrid have developed a collection Messenger bots, designed to inter alia act as virtual 'tutors' for accounting students. The bots were developed using a visual development environment that requires no coding knowledge. It is submitted that instructors, rather than programmers, should take ownership of developing bots for teaching and learning purposes.
|
Team assessment has been suggested as a competency-based collaborative learning technique. Critical to the success of an assessment for learning, in competency-based education, is the use of formative feedback. This innovation represents Team Assessment with Immediate Feedback (TAIF), in which immediate formative feedback is provided to the students by their peers and the assessment instrument (IF-ATⓇ).
I could honestly not wait to tell my family all about this experience. I really did love every second of our test (Student) |
HyperBooks
|
HyperDocs embrace the online collaborative features of Google apps and allows one to move deeper within the SAMR model of classroom technology integration. Where PowerPoint has largely ‘Substituted’ the overhead projector and whiteboard, HyperDocs allow a move from ‘Substitution’ to ‘Modification’ or ‘Redefinition’. Enter the HyperBook.... Read more
|
|
|
Awards
|
Teaching Excellence & Innovation Laureate Award (2016) University of Pretoria
|
Teaching Philosophy
|
|
From cheating emissions tests, recalling cars, Leonardo DiCaprio threatening to make a film, to tumbling sales ... the Volkswagen emissions scandal erupted during 2015. The German carmaker became engulfed in the worst scandal in its 78-year history after it admitted to manipulating emissions test data on its diesel vehicles in the US and Europe. The crisis has wiped billions of euros off the company’s shares and rocked the European car industry (Financial Times, 2015)
Although accounting may not have played a direct role in the Volkswagen emissions scandal, stakeholders are dependent on the accountant’s reporting thereof to inform their understanding of the financial and other effects of the scandal on Volkswagen’s performance, as these cannot be directly observed. The accountant is therefore required to provide financial information that is useful to present and potential equity investors, lenders, and other creditors in making decisions in their capacity as capital providers to the entity. In addition, the accountant needs to provide information to other stakeholders, including employees, customers, suppliers, business partners, local communities, legislators, regulators, and policy-makers, that may be interested in an organisation’s ability to create value over time and contribute to society. The stakeholders may make several significant decisions on the basis of information that accountants provide (or in some circumstances, elect not to provide). Such decisions include, for example: Should they support the entity? Is the entity earning sufficient ‘profits’? Is the entity earning excessive ‘profits’? Is the entity fulfilling its social responsibilities by inter alia investing in community support programs and if so, how much? (Deegan, 2006). Against this background, we ponder the considerations of Volkswagen’s accountant in terms of:
What to report? When to report? What amount to report? How to present and/or disclose reported items?
In answering these questions, the power and influence of the accountant and accounting’s role in society becomes apparent. In considering the what, when, and how, accountants can achieve a specific outcome by manipulating the selection of, and the manner in which, information is reported. In so doing, the accountant may contribute towards creating or restoring an organisation’s reputation, status or legitimacy in response to public pressure and media attention relating to a controversial matter (Deegan, 2006).
In communicating reality, we construct reality (Hines, 1988, p. 257) |
Accounting therefore plays a very important and pervasive role within society. Accounting students cannot simply learn the various concepts and rules of financial accounting (as embodied within conceptual frameworks and accounting standards) without considering the implications that accounting information can have. This would be illogical and, following the high-profile accounting failures (Enron, WorldCom etc.), potentially dangerous (Deegan, 2006).
At the beginning of 2007 we began teaching an intermediate financial accounting course, which later became affectionately know as ‘IFRS Rookies’, at the University of Pretoria. When the Volkswagen scandal erupted, we were preparing to teach International Accounting Standard (IAS) 37, Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets. This topic led us to discuss and explore the Volkswagen scandal and the choices, decisions and judgments that the accountant of Volkswagen may face when reporting thereon. We considered the consequences of these choices, decisions and judgments. For example: What are the expenses and losses that may have been incurred or need to be provided for? Are these expenses or losses contingent on any future developments? Would reporting losses amount to admission of guilt in pending legal proceedings? How would one estimate and measure these losses, if any? What effect would any presentations and disclosures have on: market capitalisation; credit agency ratings; product demand; state support, and the work force.
We used the Volkswagen caselette to teach students that financial accounting is about more than bookkeeping. Students are often under the impression that financial accounting is about the rote learning of accounting rules. When we teach accounting standards (in this instance IAS 37) we work with the students to:
In applying these steps, we often respectfully debate and professionally agree or disagree in a collegial manner with each other before engaging with the students in inquiry-based learning and drawing them into the debate. Through this we facilitate, for example, initial research into the economic event by the students, before encouraging further independent exploration and subsequent group discussion thereof. Development of the students’ reading comprehension is also encouraged and facilitated (Janse van Rensburg, Coetzee and Schmulian, 2014). The outcome of such interventions is to enhance the students’ thinking, reading and critical responses, and enable the students to understand, through role playing, the choices, decisions and judgments expected of them as professional accountants.
At the beginning of 2007 we began teaching an intermediate financial accounting course, which later became affectionately know as ‘IFRS Rookies’, at the University of Pretoria. When the Volkswagen scandal erupted, we were preparing to teach International Accounting Standard (IAS) 37, Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets. This topic led us to discuss and explore the Volkswagen scandal and the choices, decisions and judgments that the accountant of Volkswagen may face when reporting thereon. We considered the consequences of these choices, decisions and judgments. For example: What are the expenses and losses that may have been incurred or need to be provided for? Are these expenses or losses contingent on any future developments? Would reporting losses amount to admission of guilt in pending legal proceedings? How would one estimate and measure these losses, if any? What effect would any presentations and disclosures have on: market capitalisation; credit agency ratings; product demand; state support, and the work force.
We used the Volkswagen caselette to teach students that financial accounting is about more than bookkeeping. Students are often under the impression that financial accounting is about the rote learning of accounting rules. When we teach accounting standards (in this instance IAS 37) we work with the students to:
- Identify the economic event that needs to be reported to stakeholders.
- Explore that economic event and gain an understanding of that event and the information that stakeholders may require of the event.
- Anticipate the effect this information may have on the users’ decisions.
- Identify the concepts, as contained in the Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting (the Framework), that may assist in presenting the information.
- Identify the relevant accounting standard/s for the economic event and understand how the principles in that standard, are based on the concepts from the Framework.
- Discuss how the rules of the standard are developed based on these principles.
- Demonstrate that the rules are not always aligned with the concepts and principles as a result of practical and cost/benefit considerations.
- Review the minimum disclosure requirements established through this process against the users’ information needs established from the outset of the process.
In applying these steps, we often respectfully debate and professionally agree or disagree in a collegial manner with each other before engaging with the students in inquiry-based learning and drawing them into the debate. Through this we facilitate, for example, initial research into the economic event by the students, before encouraging further independent exploration and subsequent group discussion thereof. Development of the students’ reading comprehension is also encouraged and facilitated (Janse van Rensburg, Coetzee and Schmulian, 2014). The outcome of such interventions is to enhance the students’ thinking, reading and critical responses, and enable the students to understand, through role playing, the choices, decisions and judgments expected of them as professional accountants.
Our aim is that our students actively learn, through observing our interaction with each other and through their interaction and educational experiences with us and each other, to think more critically, read more attentively, communicate more precisely, while growing as independent thinkers and life long learners.
Our teaching method evolved over time. Initially we taught as we had been taught. Astrid was a student at the University of Pretoria, studying in teacher-centered accounting class characterised by the rote learning of accounting rules, imparted by lecturers who favored one-way communication concentrated around textbook-based lecture methods (Coetzee and Schmulian, 2012). In this environment, she was no more than a passive recipient of information and rarely provided with the opportunity of challenging the single answer of the structured, unrealistic and oversimplified textbook questions. Her lecturers implicitly implied that to every possible business scenario a single correct way to account for that scenario must exist. Stephen was a part-time student at the University of South Africa. While his study material was also centered around a textbook and oversimplified single correct answer scenarios, he had unwittingly engaged in experiential learning through working as a trainee accountant while completing his studies. Astrid’s experiential learning began during her training contract period in the dynamic and multifaceted public practice environment.
Our inherent passion for teaching led Stephen to move from the professional accounting environment to teach at a community college and Astrid to teach at ‘Tuks after 5’. Our teaching paths converged in 2007 when we began teaching the intermediate accounting course, that was to become our ‘IFRS Rookies’. In our early years at the University of Pretoria, we were both confronted for the first time by academic research. Given our passion for teaching we soon encountered accounting education research and began sharing what we read.
Our inherent passion for teaching led Stephen to move from the professional accounting environment to teach at a community college and Astrid to teach at ‘Tuks after 5’. Our teaching paths converged in 2007 when we began teaching the intermediate accounting course, that was to become our ‘IFRS Rookies’. In our early years at the University of Pretoria, we were both confronted for the first time by academic research. Given our passion for teaching we soon encountered accounting education research and began sharing what we read.
Our passion is teaching and our research flows from this. Pedagogy should be informed by literature and teaching methods can only be improved if our knowledge of other available methods is obtained and developed. Our research underpins our teaching and the two are irrevocably interwoven.
Grounded in our research and reading of the literature, today our classes are increasingly student-centered, flipping out the rote learning to YouTube, filling up the class space with principle-based exercise work and case-based learning, allowing students to embrace discussions, debates and role-plays. Increasing engagement with our students has brought to the fore the need for differentiated instruction to more effectively reach the diversity of students present in our classrooms (Coetzee, Schmulian and Kotze, 2013; Janse van Rensburg, Coetzee and Schmulian, 2014; Kirstein, Coetzee and Schmulian, 2015).
In our IAS 37 class, we discussed accounting for the Volkswagen emissions scandal. Together with the students, we collaboratively sourced and read news articles and watched CNN, empowering ourselves with knowledge of the economic event, before considering the stakeholders that could be impacted by the choices, decisions and judgments in accounting for this scandal. We grounded the questions, observations and discussions in accounting theories (legitimacy and stakeholder theory), providing rigour to the debate. Finally, we explored the effect of the accounting Framework and in further informing our dialogue, before concluding with summarised predictions, of what accounting treatment, for the scandal, the soon to be released interim financial reports may contain. In the follow up discussion, after the release of the interim reports, which many students watched live in their own time, some agreed with the content, others differed to varying degrees and other completely disagreed. We considered the basis of their agreement or disagreement. Accounting is shades of grey that needs to be grounded in theory, concepts, principles, rules, professional judgement and estimations, rather than black and white measurements of a technicolor world.
Indeed, reflecting on our own methods and goals in teaching accounting, questions come to mind before answers, stirring discussions over breakfast, debating and re-evaluating our teaching choices, decisions and judgements, while grounding these in our understanding of education theories, research, common sense and our passion for teaching accounting.
In our IAS 37 class, we discussed accounting for the Volkswagen emissions scandal. Together with the students, we collaboratively sourced and read news articles and watched CNN, empowering ourselves with knowledge of the economic event, before considering the stakeholders that could be impacted by the choices, decisions and judgments in accounting for this scandal. We grounded the questions, observations and discussions in accounting theories (legitimacy and stakeholder theory), providing rigour to the debate. Finally, we explored the effect of the accounting Framework and in further informing our dialogue, before concluding with summarised predictions, of what accounting treatment, for the scandal, the soon to be released interim financial reports may contain. In the follow up discussion, after the release of the interim reports, which many students watched live in their own time, some agreed with the content, others differed to varying degrees and other completely disagreed. We considered the basis of their agreement or disagreement. Accounting is shades of grey that needs to be grounded in theory, concepts, principles, rules, professional judgement and estimations, rather than black and white measurements of a technicolor world.
Indeed, reflecting on our own methods and goals in teaching accounting, questions come to mind before answers, stirring discussions over breakfast, debating and re-evaluating our teaching choices, decisions and judgements, while grounding these in our understanding of education theories, research, common sense and our passion for teaching accounting.
External References:
Deegan, C., & Unerman, J. (2006). Financial accounting theory. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
Hines, R. D. (1988). Financial accounting: in communicating reality, we construct reality. Accounting, organizations and society, 13(3), 251-261.
Troen, V & Boles, K.C. (2012). The Power of Teacher Teams. Thousand Oakes: Corwin.
Deegan, C., & Unerman, J. (2006). Financial accounting theory. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
Hines, R. D. (1988). Financial accounting: in communicating reality, we construct reality. Accounting, organizations and society, 13(3), 251-261.
Troen, V & Boles, K.C. (2012). The Power of Teacher Teams. Thousand Oakes: Corwin.