An exploration of student failure on an

undergraduate accounting programme of study

LOUI SE GRACI A* and ELLI S JENKI NS
University of Glamorgan, S Wales, UK
Received: July 2001
Revised: October 2001
Accepted: November 2001
Abstract
Academic failure creates nancial and emotional issues for students, with associated resource and
performance implications for higher education institutions. The literature reveals that much of the
work on student performance is quantitative, restricting understanding of the deeper feelings and
perceptions of students towards their studies. This paper explores undergraduate student perform-
ance from an experiential perspective, recognising the complexity and subjectivity of academic
performance. Findings appear to highlight: the negative focus of reasoning underlying the choice of
study; the impact of affect; the importance of the role of the tutor; the tutor expectations gap; levels
of control and personal responsibility for learning; and patterns of participation as possible
signicant and important factors in understanding academic performance. Finally, the implications
of the ndings are discussed and further research outlined in terms of developing a predictive model
that could offer early identication of students who are susceptible to academic failure and
establishing appropriate, proactive support strategies for such students.
Keywords: Academic performance, accounting education, experiential perspective, semistructured
interviews, student reections on failure
Introduction
Academic success is of primary importance to students, their teachers and the higher
educational institutions (HEIs) at which they study. Academic failure creates a major
nancial and emotional burden for students as they struggle to come to terms with failure
in both a personal and economic sense. It also has resource and performance implications
for the HEIs, the relative performances of which are monitored and published in annual
league tables. Academic failure impacts upon degree results and retention rates, both of
which are used as key performance indicators to evaluate HEIs. Moreover, the problems of
student failure are likely to be exacerbated by recent and current Government initiatives to
increase participation rates and widen access, whilst at the same time reducing the
nancial support offered to students via grants.
This paper explores undergraduate academic performance through student experience. It
seeks to understand the meaning and emphasis that students place on different aspects of
their learning experience and hence provides an understanding of how experiential factors
inuence academic performance on the second and nal years of study. In addition, by
* Address for correspondence: Mrs. Louise Gracia, Business School, University of Glamorgan, Llantwit Road,
Treforest, S Wales, CF37 1DL, UK. E-mail lgracia@glam.ac.u k
Accounting Education 11 (1), 93107 (2002)
Accounting Education
ISSN 09639284 print/ISSN 14684489 online 2002 Taylor & Francis Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/0963928021015329 0
adopting a qualitative approach, it attempts to address the decit of deeper understanding
of student experience on academic performance within the existing accounting education
literature.
Literature review
The research that has attempted to identify and analyse the factors that explain differences
in academic performance tends to be quantitative in nature and presents a variety of
conicting and contradictory conclusions. The impact of prior accounting knowledge on
academic performance in rst year university accounting studies continues to be one of the
most widely researched factors. Despite its frequency of study no consensus exists on its
inuence or otherwise on academic performance.
Baldwin and Howe (1982) found no difference between the overall performance of
students irrespective of their level of prior accounting knowledge. Bergin (1983) conrms
this nding, concluding that overall course performance is unrelated to prior high school
accounting exposure. This view is further supported by Schroeder (1986), who also found
no difference in the overall course performance of students with prior high school
accounting exposure and those without. Bartlett et al. (1992,1993) carried out a
longitudinal study of students specializing in accounting over the period 19891992. They
carried out tests of the relationship between academic performance and a large range of
explanatory variables including age, gender, region, prior study and educational attributes.
They concur that the prior study of accounting has no signicant effect on academic
performance, concluding that only the prior study of economics has a signicant effect on
performance.
Further studies offer different ndings. Studies by Mitchell (1985,1988) found that
students with prior accounting or A level mathematics perform better statistically, in the
computational and quantitative aspects of courses. Gul and Fong (1993) conrm the
signicance of the prior study of accounting and mathematics as well as personality type,
in predicting academic performance. Similar results by Tho (1994) found the prior study
of high school accounting, mathematics and grades achieved in studies of high school
economics to be signicant in explaining academic performance. The signicance of prior
study of accounting and mathematics as predictor variables of academic performance is
also consistent with the ndings of others including Eskew and Faley (1988), Farley and
Ramsey (1988), and Naser and Peel (1998). Other commentators including Doran et al.
(1991) produce conicting conclusions concerning the impact of prior accounting
knowledge on academic performance in two accounting courses Accounting Principles I
and II (API and APII). They found prior study of high school bookkeeping to be positively
related to performance in API but negatively related to performance in APII.
The impact of gender is also widely studied, but the research ndings are often
contradictory and hence inconclusive in nature. Fraser et al. (1978) and Mutchler et al.
(1987) found that female students outperform their male counterparts. Findings by Tyson
(1989) support this view and conclude that female students outperform male students in all
sections of an introductory accounting class. However, Lipe (1989) failed to nd any
evidence of a gender effect. Similarly, Auyeung and Sands (1994) found no difference
between the performance of male and female students. In contrast, Koh and Koh (1999)
found gender, previous working experience, academic aptitude and age to be signicant
predictors of academic performance. Doran et al. (1991) produced further conicting
94 Gracia and Jenkins
results in their study of the impact of gender on performance in two accounting courses
(API and APII). They found that men outperform women in API, but not in APII.
Other studies have focused on the impact of entry qualications on academic
performance. Studies by Chapman (1994, 1996, 1997) primarily demonstrate the variability
of standards in UK university departments using A level grades as a measure of input
quality. A further study by Paton-Salzberg and Lindsay (1993) found that paid work has
a signicant and negative effect on progress by increasing the rate at which modules are
failed.
The literature review reveals that much of the work on the factors affecting student
performance is quantitative in nature, focusing mainly on rst year students. In addition
much of this quantitative research demonstrates the weak and often conicting relation-
ships that exist between student performance and background characteristics. One
explanation for the conicting ndings of UK studies may be that results are outdated due
to the changing education environment in the last ten years specically the downward
drift of A level standards; the expansion in higher education; widening and increasing
participation rates; increasing cost pressures on institutions; and the replacement of student
grants with loans. Other studies from outside the UK may produce ndings that are
culturally specic and the lessons may not be readily transferable to the UK. Despite their
different ndings, all these studies have one thing in common they are positivistic and
the primary research approach is quantitative. Each attempts to establish a statistically-
valid cause-effect relationship, focusing on the statistically measurable which are largely
background factors.
The disparate results of these studies may suggest that academic performance is not a
simple phenomenon that can be predicted on the basis of a selection of demographic data,
a view supported by Bartlett et al. (1993). It seems likely that there are more active and
subjective forces at work in determining performance that are not captured by statistical
studies. Reliance on quantitative data alone precludes a deeper understanding of the
perception and feelings of students towards their studies and their impact on academic
performance.
Some commentators have focused on this experiential perspective of learning. Boud
(1988) argues that students with a higher level of personal responsibility may become
more actively involved and engaged with the subjects studied and stresses the central
importance of autonomy in student learning. Others, including Barnett (1992) support this
argument. Candy et al. (1994) identify a wider spectrum of learning skills including
personal skills and attributes as important for effective learning.
These issues of personal responsibility and the role of personal skills have long been
linked to effective education. Carl Rogers (1969) founded the person-centred approach to
counselling which places self-awareness, personal responsibility and reection at its core.
He extended his humanistic ideas beyond the counselling arena and into education and
concludes that participative learning, where the learner takes personal responsibility for his
learning, is most effective. Kluever and Green (1998) also emphasize the role of personal
responsibility in learning and created a Responsibility Scale assessment for use with
students. Other researchers in the eld also focus on self-directed learning. Knowles
(1975) concludes that self-directed learning is more in line with an adult s natural process
of psychological development and creates better learners. He maintains that learners who
enter educational programmes using more open and independent learning regimes (such as
higher education) need to be self-directed in their approach and held that if such skills
An exploration of student failure 95
were lacking this causes anxiety, frustration and often failure. Others connect self-directed
learning with personal change. Brookeld (1988) stresses the importance of critical
reection and the creation of personal meaning in the context of effective learning.
The learning process itself also receives a signicant amount of research attention,
especially in relation to cognition. Others including Goleman (1995) and Boler (1999),
have raised the prole of emotion as a component of intelligence. Goleman maintains that
self-awareness, self-responsibility and empathy are important determinants of generic
intelligence, necessary to maximise intellectual potential.
Learning is clearly a complex phenomenon involving changes in knowledge, under-
standing, skills and attitudes brought about by experience and reection upon that
experience. A large part of the research on learning focuses on the issues of cognition, and
within accounting education on demographic data. Whilst the importance of these areas is
acknowledged, increasingly the signicance of other aspects of learning, such as personal
responsibility, personal meaning and an individual s subjective experience are being
recognized. It is these areas that this study considers
Research method
Exploratory research requires open-ended methods of data gathering and analysis and
hence qualitative research methods have been employed. The qualitative approach adopts
a grounded theory perspective. Grounded theory is . . . one of the interpretative methods
that share the common philosophy of phenomenology that is, methods that are used to
describe the world of the person or persons under study , (Hussey and Hussey, 1997,
p. 70). It comprises a series of in-depth semistructured interviews with students from the
second and nal year cohorts enrolled on the BA (Hon) Accounting and Finance at a
University Business School in the academic year 1999/2000. The interviews were taped
and transcribed. This permitted a detailed comparative analysis of the similarities and
differences between students. The analysis focused upon the impact of experiential factors
on individual academic achievement.
Sample selection
A random sample of 42 students was selected to ensure a mix of academic proles. A
simple measure of academic prole was used whereby students who passed all modules in
their previous year, at the rst sitting, were placed in a rst subgroup (50 students), and
those who had failed one or more modules at the rst sitting were placed into a second
subgroup (46 students). Equal numbers of students were then drawn randomly from these
two subgroups.
Such sampling attempts to adequately capture the heterogeneity in the population and
provide a fairer representation of the cohorts under investigation. Within the sample there
was an even balance of students in terms of academic prole, gender and year of study,
increasing condence in the data collected and its subsequent analysis.
Students were approached via a standard letter that explained the purpose of the research
and requested participation in the study. All selected students agreed to be interviewed.
Data collection
This primarily comprised 18 individual, in-depth interviews. Prior to these being
undertaken, four group interviews were conducted with the remaining 24 students from the
96 Gracia and Jenkins
sample. The representative random balance across the individual and group interview
clusters was maintained. The purpose of the preliminary group interviews was to expose a
contextual picture of student experience and permit students themselves to identify
meaningful areas of that experience. These areas were used to directly inform the
individual interview design, increasing the relevance of its content to the participants and
the research aim itself (Bogdan and Biklen, 1992).
Group interviews were used in the preliminary stage to exploit group interactions which
facilitate open discussion and thereby increase accessibility to data (Morgan, 1997).
However, it is recognized that dominant individuals may colour the overall group views,
but any potential undue inuence is mitigated by the individual interview content also
being informed by the literature search. The subsequent individual interviews were used to
explore student failure by providing an in-depth insight into the student experience,
capturing data rich in its experiential content. As such, it is this deep individual data that
is analysed to explore any differences between the experiences of students with differing
academic proles against the broad context. Maxwell (1996) recommends such con-
textualizing of qualitative data, to augment understanding by identifying conceptual
linkages between emergent categories and their surrounding context.
The individual interviews were undertaken by the same interviewer, in the same
interview room recognizing the value of context and setting. They were semistructured
and conducted using nondirective and reective techniques throughout, allowing explora-
tion of the issues via open questioning and encouragement to expand responses. Reective
techniques provide participants with an opportunity to corroborate or clarify responses.
This permits the interviewer to test his/her understanding of participant meaning and
serves as a strong check on the integrity of the data as it is collected. The content of the
individual interviews comprised potentially inuential experiential areas identied from
the existing education literature and the evaluation of the group interviews as
follows:
c Reasons for choice of institution and subject and motivation to study.
c The learning experience.
c The social dimension of learning.
c Control in the learning process.
c Expectation and experience of staff.
c Student rights and responsibilities.
c Experience of, and reection on, assessment and module failure.
c Personal reections.
Sufcient exibility was maintained to enable the order and phrasing of questions to be
varied, if necessary. Each individual interview was 5565 minutes in length and taped
with interviewee permission in its entirety to allow complete data capture and subsequent
transcription. Whilst it is recognized that audiotape only captures the spoken conversation,
omitting the visual aspects of facial expressions and body language, it was felt that video-
recording interviews would intrude on the interview process and hence impinge upon data
collection and compromise its validity.
Data analysis
The semistructured nature of the interviews allowed some structuring of the data prior to
data collection. This preliminary structuring generated a series of categories within which
An exploration of student failure 97
data for each interviewee was transcribed and checked by the researchers. Such self-
transcription with repeated reading of the transcripts allowed fuller immersion in the data,
enhancing understanding and also providing transcription validity and reliability.
Data was analysed using open coding techniques to establish the emergent themes and
sub-themes. Codes were initially established independently by both researchers. The
researchers then compared and rigorously discussed these independently derived codes as
part of an iterative process of data interpretation, continuing until consensus of data coding
and analysis was achieved. This encouraged a more objective and detailed exploration of
the individual data.
Results and discussion of ndings
To protect the condentiality of the participants in this research the Pass students are
denoted P19 and the Fail students F19, in the analysis that follows.
The focus of the investigation is to seek to understand, through student experience, why
some students pass and others fail even though they are subjected to the same teaching and
learning environment. To this end it is the areas of difference between the experience of
pass and fail students that is of interest as possible areas of explanation. The analysis of the
data revealed a number of interesting differences as follows:
When reecting on their own academic failure(s), F students cite a myriad of underlying
reasons and explanations. Common rationales include a poor memory; lack of adequate
revision, attendance, time-management, motivation, encouragement or interest in a subject;
poor teaching and illness.
I didn t do enough work. F2
I let things slide and left it too late. F4
I just didn t attend any classes most of the time. F1
I left things to the last minute and I just ran out of time to revise. F5
I think I failed modules because I didn t like them. F7
F students almost invariably expressed failure as a personal failing regardless of the
reasons underlying their failure, which clearly demonstrates the potential personal impact
that failure has on students. This acceptance of failure at a personal level may indicate that
failure is internalized by students creating their view of failure as some form of personal
deciency. There is some support for this within the data:
I just have a really bad memory. F3
I don t deserve to be on the nal year. F5
I m no good at organizing myself all my course notes are all over my bedroom
oor I don t know where to start. F6
I failed because of my lack of application I m really bad at getting down to
work. F8
I nd it hard to concentrate I always have done. F9
These initial rationales for failure were subsequently explored at a deeper level with
students, which revealed a series of possible explanatory factors as follows:
98 Gracia and Jenkins
1. The impact of affect
A number of F students stated that their initial decisions to enter university and study
accounting were not driven by personal desire, or were unclear as to how these decisions
had arisen:
I came to university, well I wasnt going to come because I couldnt nd a course
that I liked, my mates were saying that I ought to go to university, so I thought OK
Id apply. I wanted to do Law, but I didn t get the points. F1
There wasn t a particular reason . . . I always wanted to be an architect. F2
I felt under pressure to come . . . peer pressure mainly . . . I had no intention of
coming. F3
I didn t want to do accountancy. I wanted to do Art and Design but Im not very
good at drawing. My friend was doing accountancy so I thought I would try it. Id
rather be at a different university; this university is too close to home really.
F4
To some extent F students may be seen as providing negative reasons to support their
choices. In contrast, most P students provide positive reasons to support their choices of
where and what to study. These P students frequently relate their initial decision to study
at university to some form of encouragement, from family and friends and linked their
choice of accounting to an afnity or comfortable association with numeracy, or a prior
study of accounting.
I felt that this university was more exible to the needs of mature students.
P1
I had friends studying here and they recommended it. The course has a sandwich
year and you can get a years work experience which means youve got more
chance of getting a job at the end of it. P2
My Dad has a business and from a young age Ive sat with my Mum when she
was doing the accounts. As I got older she gave me accounting jobs to do. I ve
always wanted to do accountancy. P3
I ve had an interest in gures all along and my parents were very encouraging
when I wanted to come. P7
I chose accountancy because I had studied it on my Access to Education course
and decided that I really liked it. P4
This raises the possibility that the vague or negatively focused patterns of reasoning of F
students may colour the longer-term attitude of students towards their studies, in a way that
somehow adversely affects academic performance. One possible mechanism through
which this inuence might be exerted is affect i.e. mood and general outlook. There is
increasing evidence that shows that affective states have a powerful inuence on an
individual s thought and behaviour patterns. Affect has a profound inuence on the
memories we retrieve and the information we notice and learn (Ciarrochi et al. 2001,
p. 47). Furthermore, Ciarrochi et al. hold that affect inuences both the process of thinking
and the content of thinking, judgements and behaviour. They also state that affect infusion
increases when individuals engage in thinking that uses memory-based information, which
is typical of the pattern of learning that predominates in higher education. This view of the
impact of affect on learning is supported by Adolphs and Damasio (2001) who state that
affect inuences all other aspects of cognitive functioning, including memory, attention
An exploration of student failure 99
and decision making (p. 45). The ndings of Suls (2001) also indicate that feelings of
negative affect can create negative thinking and attitudes that impair an individual s ability
to manage the situations he/she faces.
Given this established impact of affect on learning (amongst other things) this may
provide a possible explanation as to why students with negatively-focused patterns of
reasoning may not perform as well academically as their counterparts. Indeed, responses
from F students seem to support the role of affect in interfering with their academic
performance:
Sometimes I nd it difcult to motivate myself. I know I should be doing some
work, but I just can t make myself do it if I don t feel like it. F8
Its always been the case that if I m not in the mood to revise that s it! There s
no point in even trying because I know that I won t take any of it in anyway. So
much of it is just memory work anyway and thats not my strong point. F6
I m here for the social-life really I d really rather go out with the boys than stay
in and study! F9
2. Patterns of participation
F students are frequently critical of their own levels of condence and feel that this
adversely impinges on their ability to enter into verbal participation in classroom
discussions.
I m really quiet in the classroom and I don t like it if the teacher asks me a
question. I can feel people looking at me and I ll say that I don t know, even if I
do, just to stop the process. F8
I m naturally shy I d like to be able to talk more but it just makes me feel really
stressed and uncomfortable. F6
It depends on how many people you know in the class. If you don t know people
there s not that same sense of security about participating. F4
I m usually very quiet and I don t say very much. I m just not condent enough
and I get very embarrassed if I don t give the right answer. F3
I usually keep quiet in case I get things wrong. F1
I am afraid to express my opinion I don t want the others to laugh at me.
F2
Generally speaking the level of difculty is less amongst the P students:
I don t mind participating in the tutorials. If I ve got something to say I ll just say
it. P2
I just say what I want. I m not bothered if it s wrong or not. P1
I am sometimes a little bit afraid to discuss my opinions. It s important that the
tutor is not too critical and is supportive of the student s ideas. P4
Many of the F students appear fearful that their answers will be incorrect, stemming from
anxious sensitivity towards the reaction of others and a lack of condence in their own
abilities. Such feelings inhibit participation, which may interfere with a student s ability to
fully engage with the learning situation and the other participants in the learning
experience:
100 Gracia and Jenkins
I won t go to a class if I don t know anyone to talk to. F5
I m not very good at mixing with the other students or asking for help if I get
stuck. I often feel that I am alone on this course. F1
I think that the other students don t listen to me they look bored with me or act
as if they cant follow what Im saying. F7
Sometimes because of the lecturer I did not feel like going to the class . . . some
lecturers denitely put up barriers to keep you out I just feel it! F3
Such impairments may damage students ability to maximize their learning potential by
restricting their level of active engagement.
Active engagement with the course can take a variety of forms including verbal
participation. Another broad measure of active engagement with the course is that of
attendance at classes. Attendance records for the academic year 1999/2000 show that the
recorded attendance rate of P students (P1P9) ranges from 98%67%, with an average
attendance of 88%, whilst that of the F students (F1F9) over the same period ranges from
92%53%, with an average attendance rate of 69%. The lower rates for the F students may
indicate that their levels of active engagement with the course are less than that of their P
contemporaries.
Another area of engagement for the student is that of establishing a relationship with the
tutor. Most students highlight the importance of the tutor as central contributors to their
best and worst learning experiences. Most felt that the difference between the two
extremes is tutor-related. Learning experiences cited include:
One tutor allowed us to sit down in small groups and discuss our opinions. I
started to grow in condence and I really enjoyed that. F3
One lecturer had a really droning voice and just used to give us a handout and
then just read from it all the time. Some students actually fell asleep in her class!
F4
It was the lecturer s fault. He wasn t at all interesting and he used to teach us
with his eyes closed. It seemed that he expected us to do all the work and provide
all the interest. F2
This underlines the pivotal role that tutors have in striking a balance between providing too
much support (which may collude with students to strip them of control, encourage
passivity and stie development of autonomous study patterns) and too little support
(which can isolate students, deterring engagement and frustrate their efforts to become
responsible, autonomous learners). The onus is therefore on tutors to provide appropriate
levels of support and encouragement. The provision of such appropriate levels of support
and encouragement may be even more necessary for F students who may already be
struggling with poor course engagement; lower levels of attendance; a greater tendency to
feel anxious about participating verbally in the classroom; and a preference for abdicating
control for their learning into the hands of a willing tutor.
3. Expectation gap
There is recognition by some students all P of the distinction between teaching and
learning and the active role that students have to play in the learning process:
It s the student s responsibility to work outside of the lectures. P2
It s important to work with the staff, who are there to guide you. P3
An exploration of student failure 101
Teaching and learning aren t the same thing the tutor starts you off, but you
have to go and do the work yourself. P9
P students tend to view their relationships with tutors as reciprocal a partnership
approach within which they work with tutors and recognize that they have to do the
work . This presents a realistic view of the teaching process as something they interact
with to maximize knowledge-transfer and achieve learning outcomes. In contrast, F
students tend to view their relationship with tutors in more dependent and reliant terms
with a narrower view of the teaching process as the means by which they passively receive
knowledge-transfer:
They should be doing all they can to help me to get an A . Their role doesnt end
when the class nishes; they should be prepared to help outside the class. F3
To educate me and to explain the things that we don t understand! F4
They should pass over their knowledge explaining it to us. F1
I need the tutor to direct my learning. F2
Tutors should teach us everything that we need to know otherwise they are not
doing their job properly! F7
I have to push the tutors sometimes to get them to tell me everything I need to
know it makes me feel like a stalker! F8
These F responses largely view the tutor as a holder or store of knowledge and the teaching
process as knowledge-transfer and indicates a much heavier reliance on the tutor. From
this position it is arguable that P students hold more realistic expectations of the role of
tutors whilst an expectation gap is exposed between F students and their tutors.
When exploring with F students the existence of such an expectation gap and its
impact on academic performance, a number of issues arise. Firstly students cite prior study
experience as a possible contributor to the creation of the expectation gap . Many students
come to university directly from school where more directive approaches to learning have
been employed. Some responses seem to indicate that students had assumed that studying
in HE would be similar to that at school:
Coming to university straight from school was quite a shock! In school you talk
through everything, and the teachers will do everything they can to make sure that
you pass. F6
I am used to being in school where everything is done for you the teachers gave
you all the notes and you didn t have to read many books! It is very different in
university and I found it difcult to adjust. F3
Secondly, the issue of the reduced number of contact hours, in comparison to students
prior study experience. This requires students to be able to manage their own learning
outside of formal contact hours and some students felt that they needed more help to
manage this effectively:
In university you see the tutors a lot less than you did at school, and you have to
do a lot of stuff on your own I nd that really hard. F9
It s harder than I thought it was going to be. I nd it hard to structure my own
studying. F2
What F students appear to be describing is that their tutor-expectations are based on their
prior learning exposure and experience and not on realistic information about the learning
102 Gracia and Jenkins
approaches employed within HE. However, if these expectations are not met, students are
faced with the challenge of adapting their approach to learning. If students do not
effectively manage this transition into HE it may compromise their learning. As one
particular F student stated:
It s not just about the technical stuff I also need the tutors to help me to learn
how to study. F7
4. The locus of control over learning
When considering failure the issue of control over learning was raised. Paradoxically,
whilst F students were ready to accept the responsibility for their failures they were
reluctant to take control of their learning. All the F students express dissatisfaction with the
level of control they have feeling it is too much and reject the idea of taking more
control for their learning:
I need the tutor to organize my learning . . . I m no good at organizing myself
I need more self-discipline. F4
It s easier if everything is decided up front by the tutor I prefer them to be in
control it gives me less to worry about. F2
I don t think its practical to have too much control. F3
I don t really want to take control of the learning I m not even sure how I could
get control of it. If I had control and then I failed I would feel that it was my
fault! F6
In contrast, P students generally demonstrate some level of control over their learning:
I am the one who is here to study, so I should do that . . . it is not the tutor s
responsibility. P2
In the classroom I feel 100% in control. P1
I have lots of control I can do as much work as I want outside of the class. Its
up to me to read into it as much as I like. P4
As such F students appear to be more control-averse than their P counterparts and reveal
a preference for the tutor controlling their learning. This could be interpreted as the
adoption of a more passive approach to their learning. This desire to be controlled or
directed suggests that F students within the sample place the locus of control for their
learning with others, whilst P students seem more likely to place the locus of control with
themselves and adopt a more active approach to their learning. Again the adoption of
control-averse or control-accepting patterns of behaviour by a particular student may be
linked to their prior educational experiences as discussed above, which may have provided
a more directed approach that some students struggle to move away from and towards a
more autonomous style of learning.
Shared characteristics of F students and support mechanisms
The research reveals a number of broad and common experiential features or character-
istics amongst the F students. If students exhibit these characteristics it is possible that it
may render them more susceptible to failure and hence be useful in understanding the
differing levels of academic performance between students.
These features comprise:
An exploration of student failure 103
c Negative focus of reasoning and the impact of affect
The vague or negatively-focused reasoning underlying the initial study choices of F
students may belie a longer term affective state which inuences the longer-term attitude
of students towards their studies, in a way that adversely affects academic performance.
Provision of sustained student support strategies that include opportunities for long-term,
open discussions of affective and attitudinal factors may be useful here.
c Patterns of participation
F students describe more reticence to participate than P students. Feelings of lack of
condence and anxiety about the reaction of peers and tutors if they give an incorrect
response act as participation inhibitors. These negative feelings concerning self may also
impair a student s engagement with the course in terms of developing supportive study
relationships with fellow students and their tutors and may interfere with patterns of class
attendance and subsequent academic performance. The provision of a non-judgemental
classroom climate that offers open acceptance of students may be useful in fostering
student discussion and development and in actively supporting engagement. In addition it
may be sensible to monitor attendance as an early-warning indicator of engagement
difculties.
c Tutor expectations gap
P and F students view the relationship between themselves and their tutors in different
ways. F students are inclined to expect the tutor to actively provide learning as an
educational product, viewing themselves as the passive recipients of the learning product.
Such an orientation may stem from familiarity and exposure to more directive forms of
learning and the development of a reliance on such methods. This may make transition into
HE troublesome for the student as a result if the shift to more autonomous learning
approaches is not effectively managed. P students, in contrast, are more inclined to view
themselves as active participants in the learning process. Support mechanisms and
information exchange that focus on establishing realistic expectations of the roles and
responsibilities of tutors and students, together with supported transition into HE may
serve to facilitate the development of a partnership approach to learning and hence bridge
the expectations gap.
c Taking control of learning
P students present as more control-accepting than their F counterparts who tend to be more
control-averse. This links with the emerging view of F students as being more passive in
their approach to learning. Such passivity is an inevitable by-product of the abdication of
control and a preference for being directed in their learning. This could perhaps be
interpreted as a form of educational immaturity, where students who may have developed
tutor-reliant forms of learning are unable to adapt their learning strategies to overcome
their passivity. Again, support mechanisms and information exchange may be useful in
encouraging development of active self-responsibility in the learning process.
Despite its cause, failure appears to be internalized by F students who express it largely
in terms of personal deciencies. This strongly demonstrates the personal and emotional
cost of failure to students especially given students dominant assessment-focus. There
may be a case here for re-educating students and ourselves as tutors in terms of how we
perceive failure . Internalizing it as a form of personal deciency is at one end of a
spectrum of responses. An alternative view is that it is a valuable learning experience in
itself that provides a tangible opportunity to understand where improvement and
104 Gracia and Jenkins
development can be made! It is somewhat ironic that failure itself can be a strong building
block of learning and, as such, our attitude towards it may warrant change.
Failure is an important and personal event in the life of a student. Table 1 maps the
particular features identied above to individual students. Such mapping demonstrates how
the experience of each student relates to particular factors. This is important in that it
rstly recognises the individual nature of each student and the reasons underlying their
consequent failure whilst at the same time establishing areas of common experience and
potential rationales for failure across the student sample.
Conclusions and further research
The identication of such common features is useful in terms of understanding the factors
that may render students susceptible to failure and hence permit the early identication of
vulnerable students and the development and targeting of appropriate support mechanisms
to mitigate any potential impairment to academic performance.
Using the areas of difference derived from the study the authors propose to attempt to
develop a predictive model of academic performance with the potential of acting as an
early warning indicator of those students who exhibit the behaviour patterns and attitudes
that may render them susceptible to failure at the start of their studies.
Such a predictive tool does have potential ethical issues connected with it in terms of
providing an appropriate response aimed at support and remedy, subsequent to difculties
being identied. It is the intention to develop such support strategies in tandem with the
predictive model to obviate such ethical issues.
Acknowledgements
The authors are indebted to the university students who took part in the research and to the
many constructive comments of the anonymous reviewer.
References
Adolphs, R., and Damasio, A. (2001) The interaction of affect and cognition: a neuro-biological
perspective. In J.P. Forgas (ed.) Handbook of Affect and Social Cognition. Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum, pp. 3947.
Table 1. Mapping potential explanatory factors of failure
Possible failure factor
Student references in body of
report (F1F9)
Negative focus of reasoning and the impact of affect F1, F2, F3, F4, F6, F8, F9
Reluctant patterns of participation and its impact on
engagement
F1, F2, F3 F4, F5, F6, F7, F8
Tutor expectation-gap and the impact on transition F1, F2, F3, F4, F6, F7, F8, F9
Internalizing failure personal importance F3, F5, F6, F8, F9
External locus of control over learning and the
development of control-averse behaviour
F2, F3, F4, F6
An exploration of student failure 105
Auyeung, P.K. and Sands, D.F. (1994) Predicting success in rst year university accounting using
gender-based learning analysis. Accounting Education: an international journal 3(3),
25972.
Baldwin, B.A. and Howe, K.R. (1982) Secondary-level study of accounting and subsequent
performance in the rst college course, The Accounting Review 57(3), 61926.
Barnett, R. (1992) Improving University Education. Milton Keynes: SRHE and Open University
Press.
Bartlett, S., Peel, M.J., Pendlebury, M. and Groves, R. (1992) An Analysis of Student Performance
in Undergraduate Accounting Courses. ACCA Occasional Paper 13. London: Association of
Chartered Certied Accountants.
Bartlett, S., Peel, M.J. and Pendlebury, M. (1993) From fresher to nalist: a three year analysis of
student performance on an accounting degree programme. Accounting Education: an
international journal 2(2), 11122.
Bergin, J.L. (1983) The effect of previous accounting study on student performance in rst college-
level nancial accounting course. Issues in Accounting Education Vol. 1, 1928.
Bogdan, R.G. and Biklen, S.K. (1992) Qualitative Research for Education, 2nd edn. Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Boler, M. (1999) Feeling Power Emotions and Education. London: Routledge.
Boud, D. (1988) Developing Student Autonomy in Learning, 2nd edn. London: Kogan Page.
Brookeld, S. (1988) Understanding and Facilitating Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey
Bass.
Candy, P., Crebert, G. and O Leary, J. (1994) Developing Lifelong Learners through Undergraduate
Education. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Chapman, K. (1994) Variability of degree results in geography in UK universities. Studies in Higher
Education 19(1), 89103.
Chapman, K. (1996) Inter-Institutional Variability of Degree Results. London: HEQE.
Chapman, K. (1997) Degrees of difference: variability of degree results in UK Universities, Higher
Education 33 13753.
Ciarrochi, J., Forgas, J.P. and Mayer, J.D. (2001) Emotional Intelligence in Everyday Life A
Scientic Inquiry. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
Doran, B.M., Benillon, M.L. and Smith, C.G. (1991) Determinants of student performance in
accounting principles I and II. Issues In Accounting Education 6(1), Spring, 7384.
Eskew, N. and Faley, R.H. (1988) Some determinants of student performance in the rst college-
level nancial accounting course. The Accounting Review 63(1), 13747.
Farley, A. and Ramsey, A. L. (1988) Student performance in rst year tertiary accounting courses
and its relationship to secondary accounting education. Accounting and Finance 28(1)
2944.
Fraser, A.A., Lyttle, R. and Stolle, C. (1978) Prole of female accounting majors: academic
performance and behavioral characteristics. The Woman CPA, October, 1821.
Goleman, D. (1995) Emotional Intelligence: Why it Can Matter More Than IQ. New York:
Bantam.
Gul, F.A. and Fong, S.C.C. (1993) Predicting success for introductory accounting students: some
further Hong Kong evidence. Accounting Education: an international journal 2(1), 3342.
Hussey, J. and Hussey, R. (1997) Business Research: a Practical Guide for Undergraduate and
Postgraduate Students. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Kluever, R. and Green, K. (1998) The responsibility scale: a research note on dissertation
completion. Educational and Psychological Measurement 58(3), 52031.
Knowles, M. (1975) Self-Directed Learning: A Guide for Learners and Teachers. New York:
Association Press.
Koh, M.Y. and Koh, H.C. (1999) The determinants of performance in an accounting programme.
Accounting Education: an international journal 8(1), 1329.
106 Gracia and Jenkins
Lipe, M.G. (1989) Further evidence on the performance of female versus male accounting students.
Issues in Accounting Education 4(1) Spring, 14452.
Maxwell, J.A. (1996) Qualitative Research Design. California: Thousand Oaks, Sage.
Mitchell, F. (1985) School accounting qualications and student performance in the First Level
university accounting examination. Accounting and Business Research 15(58), Spring,
8186.
Mitchell, F. (1988) High school accounting and student performance in the rst level university
accounting course: a UK study. Journal of Accounting Education 6(2), 27991.
Morgan, D.L. (1997) Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. California: Thousand Oaks, Sage.
Mutchler, J.F., Turner, J.H. and Williams, D.D. (1987) The performance of female versus male
accounting students. Issues in Accounting Education 1(1) March, 6368.
Naser, K. and Peel, M.J. (1998) An exploratory study of the impact of intervening variables on
student performance in a Principles of Accounting Course. Accounting Education: an
international journal, 7(3), 20923.
Paton-Salzberg, R. and Lindsay, R.O. (1993) The Effect of Paid Employment on the Academic
Performance of Full-Time Students in Higher Education. Oxford: Brookes University.
Rogers, C.R. (1969) Freedom to Learn. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill.
Schroeder, N.W. (1986) Previous accounting education and college-level accounting examination
performance. Issues in Accounting Education 1(1), 3747.
Suls, J. (2001) Affect, stress and personality. In J.P. Forgas (ed.) Handbook of Affect and Social
Cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 12749.
Tho, L.M. (1994) Some evidence on the determinants of student performance in the University of
Malaya Introductory Accounting Course. Accounting Education: an international journal 3(4),
33140.
Tyson, T. (1989) Grade performance in introductory accounting courses. Why female students
outperform males. Issues in Accounting Education Spring 4(1), 15360.
An exploration of student failure 107