Being “pulled up short”: Creating moments of surprise and possibility in accounting education

Critical Perspectives on Accounting 19 (2008) 383403

Being pulled up short: Creating moments ofsurprise and possibility in accounting education

Ursula LucasBristol Business School, University of the West of England, Coldharbour Lane,

Frenchay, Bristol BS16 1QY, United KingdomReceived 31 January 2006; received in revised form 11 August 2006; accepted 15 September 2006

Abstract

This paper identifies characteristic features of a pedagogic approach that may be used effectivelywithin a dialogical approach to accounting education. The development of the ideas in the paper aroseas a form of praxis: moments of surprise within teaching that led to reflection on what we expect fromstudents as they engage in critical reflection. In particular, the paper discusses the role of epistemolog-ical beliefs in learning and the way in which these may affect the receptivity of students to the expec-tation of critical reflection. Moments of surprise have two aspects. Firstly, they represent momentswhen the lecturer is pulled up short and recognises the unexpected impact of a learning activity andis propelled into reflection. Secondly, they represent moments when students are pulled up shortand are propelled into questioning taken-for-granted assumptions about themselves and the subject.It is argued that such moments of surprise initially arise out of a willingness on the part of the lecturerto improvise and engage in the eros of learning and teaching. These arguments are supported by adetailed description and analysis of five learning activities within a United Kingdom auditing course. 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Accounting education; Auditing education; Dialogical education; Epistemological beliefs; Transfor-mative learning; Pedagogy; Praxis; Ways of knowing

1. Introduction

Many papers in this journal, and elsewhere, have discussed ways to develop teaching andlearning practice within the critical accounting project. More recently, this has been rep-

E-mail address: [email protected].

1045-2354/$ see front matter 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.cpa.2006.09.004

384 U. Lucas / Critical Perspectives on Accounting 19 (2008) 383403

resented by a growing emphasis on how we teach (for example, McPhail, 2004; Thomsonand Bebbington, 2004) rather than on what we teach. This paper seeks to contribute tothat developing discussion of how we teach by focusing on one particular aspect of edu-cation: critical reflection. It considers the ways in which students epistemological beliefsmay frame, and potentially limit, their ability to fully engage in a dialogical approach toeducation. Drawing on this exploration, the paper identifies some characteristic features ofpedagogic approaches that may be used effectively within a dialogical approach to educa-tion. These approaches aim to pull up short both teachers and students and create momentsof surprise and possibility within learning and teaching.

The development of the ideas in this paper, although presented in traditional academic for-mat, arose from an iterative process arising from reflection on my practice as an educator andas an educational researcher. The aim was to transform my teaching, and hopefully studentslearning, of auditing. In other words it arises as a form of praxis (Freire, 1970)reflectionand action upon the world in order to transform it. Whilst the context for this reflection is thelearning and teaching of auditing, it is assumed that this is relevant to accounting generally,and the wide range of subjects taught within accounting degrees.

The paper is organised as follows. Firstly, it discusses what is expected from studentsas they engage in critical reflection and whether all students are equally receptive to theexpectation of critical reflection. In particular, it discusses the role that epistemologicalbeliefs (or ways of knowing) play in this receptivity. Secondly, it discusses the difficultiesencountered by students in becoming aware of, and possibly changing, their epistemo-logical beliefs. Based on this discussion it proposes certain principles that may underpinsupportive pedagogic approaches. Thirdly it describes five learning activities developedwithin an undergraduate auditing course that enact these supportive approaches. Finally,the paper concludes with the proposal that it is an engagement in the eros of teachingand learning that provides the opportunity for such moments of surprise and possibility tooccur.

2. Critical reection and the move towards critical being

2.1. What is meant by critical reection?

A major problem in the teaching of auditing and other subjects is that students findit difficult to identify, and question, taken-for-granted assumptions. My aim, within theauditing course, is that they will start to question what appears to be a straight-forwardseries of auditing techniques. This questioning can take place at a number of levels as theybegin to appreciate that techniques are actually grounded in certain assumptions aboutthe nature and function of financial statements and evidence itself. This emphasis on ques-tioning assumptions comprises critical reflection and is that which Mezirow (1991, p. 223)describes as transformative learning: the transformation of beliefs, attitudes, opinions,and emotional reactions that constitute students meaning schemes. This involves reflectionon presuppositions or the assessment of assumptions implicit in beliefs, including beliefsabout how to solve problems. Mezirow takes a wide-ranging view of assumptions, coveringpsychological, epistemic and sociolinguistic issues.

U. Lucas / Critical Perspectives on Accounting 19 (2008) 383403 385

Clearly not all learning within auditing is envisaged as being transformative. Mezirowacknowledges that much learning simply adds knowledge to existing meaning schemes orinvolves the learning of new meaning schemes, for example, the learning of audit techniques.However, this paper is primarily concerned with the development of critical reflection sincethis supports students in coming to question and critique those techniques.

The process of perception and transformation is not straightforward. Mezirow (1990, p.1) points out the powerful influence of our frames of reference and the assumptions implicitwithin these. He terms these habits of making meaning and argues that they play a cardinalrole in learning. It is this emphasis on such habits and frames of reference that distinguishescritical reflection from the cognitively-based notion of critical thinking skills. The formerembraces the affective (emotion and identity), as well as the cognitive. Brookfield (1987)points out that the development of a reflective scepticism a key attribute for an auditor isa major affective outcome of critical reflection. It involves a readiness to test the validity ofclaims made by others for any presumed givens, final solutions, and ultimate truths againstones own experience of the world. (Brookfield, 1987, p. 22, emphasis added). Reflectivescepticism means that, even when a commitment is made to a particular way of viewingthe world, or set of values, it is an informed commitment and the student remains criticallyaware. In so doing, the student has to take a stand, to question authority and to develop hisor her own voice. Critical reflection thus places great expectations on the students capacitynot only to think critically but to move towards critical being, which will ultimately involveaction (Barnett, 1997, p. 1).

2.2. Variation in the capacity of students to engage in critical reection

A course may expect students to engage fully in a dialogical approach to educationbut there is a substantial body of research that provides evidence that students vary intheir capacity to engage in critical reflection. Over several decades research has shownthat students vary in their beliefs about knowledge (epistemology) and that this affects theway in which they learn and make judgments (Baxter Magolda, 1992; Belenky et al., 1986;Perry, 1970). Sometimes these are referred to as stages of intellectual development (Perry,1970) or more recently, ways of knowing (Baxter Magolda, 1992; Belenky et al., 1986).This paper will focus on the work of Baxter Magolda, since this involves the synthesis offindings from earlier research through her large-scale empirical studies.1 As she asserts:

understanding college students intellectual development is at the heart of effec-tive educational practice. Students interpret, or make meaning of, their educationalexperience as a result of their assumptions about the nature, limits, and certainty ofknowledge. Such assumptions, referred to by researchers as epistemic assumptions(Kitchener, 1983), collectively form ways of knowing. (Baxter Magolda, 1992,p. 3)

1 It is not possible, within this paper, to engage in a detailed discussion of the nature of these research findingsor of their emergence. However, readers are recommended to a special issue of Educational Psychologist, 2004,39(1), Personal epistemologies: paradigmatic approaches to understanding students beliefs about knowledgeand knowing for a comprehensive overview.


She identifies four qualitatively different ways of knowing. Firstly, an absolute wayof knowing assumes that knowledge exists in an absolute form: it is either right or wrong.Students, in this case, will interpret differences in opinion between authorities as differences,not about the facts, but about detail arising from inappropriate application, misinformationor misunderstanding. This way of knowing assumes that all problems are well-structured andthus evidence is not needed to reach a conclusion. Secondly, a transitional way of knowingaccepts that knowledge is certain in some areas but uncertain in others. Disagreementsbetween authorities in areas of uncertainty are considered to arise because the facts are notyet known. It is assumed that in due course better evidence, techniques or theories willproduce accepted facts. Thirdly, an independent way of knowing represents a shift to anassumption that knowledge is mostly uncertain. This is accompanied by a recognition thatauthorities are not necessarily the sole source of knowledge. Thus a students opinion maybe regarded as valid as that of an authority and there tends to be an anything goes attitude.In this context the role of evidence is diminished. Fourthly, a contextual way of knowingalso assumes that knowledge is uncertain. However, the anything goes attitude is replacedby a belief that knowledge is contextual and one judges knowledge on the basis of evidencein context. Thus knowledge claims can only be understood in relation to the context inwhich they arise.

Baxter Magoldas research, a large-scale interview study with 101 students across avariety of subjects, was conducted in the United States (on 4-year courses). She found thatthe absolute way of knowing was most prevalent in the first year of college (68% of students)declining over the next 3 years to 46%, 11% and 2%, respectively. Transitional knowingincreased in the first 3 years of college (32%, 53% and 83%) and declined slightly in thefinal year (80%). Independent knowing was scarcely evident in the first 3 years of collegeand represented 16% of students in the final year. Contextual knowing was rarely evidentcomprising just 2% in the final year. It can be seen that, based on Baxter Magoldas findings,we might assume that in the final year of a degree course most students will fall into thetransitional category. Yet the development of critical reflection and exercise of reflectivescepticism would be best supported by an independent or contextual way of knowing.

Each way of knowing provides a lens through which the learning environment is viewed.Thus the task of the educator is not straightforward. A student with an absolutist or tran-sitional way of knowing will not necessarily react positively to a dialogical approach toeducation. The teacher will be deemed to have all the answers and the role of that instructorwill be considered to be that of conveying those answers to the student. Thus, for example,Gwen likes teachers who will give you as much as you need and not just leave you witha little small idea and try and have you talk it out. (Baxter Magolda, 1992, p. 31). Wherethe teacher attempts to encourage discussion about different ideas or theories, the studentmay become impatient and wait for the right idea to be conveyed. A student might referto discussion as being useful, but it might, in fact, transpire that the purpose of discus-sion is to help the student remember the facts rather than to evaluate different theories.This student is unlikely to be receptive to a dialogical approach to education and is likelyto provide poor feedback on the teacher in a course evaluation questionnaire (Clouder,1998).

The development of critical reflection may thus be an aim of higher education but,dependent on a students way of knowing within accounting, receptivity to this aspiration is


likely to vary. If a student possesses an absolute way of knowing, then he or she is unlikelyto either cope well with problem-solving in conditions of uncertainty or react positivelyto challenges to deeply held assumptions. By way of contrast, a student who possesses anindependent or contextual way of knowing is likely to feel more confident, and be moreeffective, in such a situation.

2.3. Do accounting students vary in their ways of knowing?

Research into ways of knowing has been conducted with students in a wide vari-ety of subjects. However, to date there is a limited amount of research that has beenconducted with students of accounting. Certainly, it has been recognised that this is anarea for enquiry. Wyer (1984) identified Perrys (1970) framework of stages of intel-lectual development as being a fruitful theoretical framework for resolving the tensionbetween procedural and conceptual approaches to accounting within upper-level collegecourses. She asserted the important dichotomy is between a dualistic, authority-basedexistence and the richer, freer world of commitment in relativism (p. 17). Francis et al.described this as a prophetic article and highlighted Wyers suggestion that accountingfaculty should consider developmental level and growth as well as content in planningaccounting courses. This means knowing where students are then finding ways to helpthem make progress in their development. (1995, p. 28, emphasis added). Unfortunately,there appear to be no published studies on accounting students ways of knowing since thatdate.

However, prior work on ways of knowing in other subject areas is indirectly supportedby two studies within accounting. Shute (1979), in a US-based study, drew on the workof Piaget2 (Inhelder and Piaget, 1958) to identify levels of cognitive development withincohorts of accounting students. He focussed on the two levels most relevant to college stu-dents: concrete and formal-operational, stressing that formal-operational thought involvesthinking about thinking and the ability to consider possibilities rather than being limitedby observable realities (Shute, 1979, p. 6). Using three levels of cognitive development(concrete, transitional and formal) he found that, over 5 years within a freshman to graduatesample of 179 students, the mean cognitive level for each sub-population was transitional.The proportion of students within the formal mode in the senior (final) year was only justover a third.

More recently, in a large-scale study (n = 1211) within accounting, Lucas and Meyer(2005) confirmed original phenomenographic research (Lucas, 2000, 2001) within intro-ductory accounting. They identified, firstly, significant variation in students epistemologicalbeliefs about learning and accounting and secondly, found that these beliefs are related tothe ways in which students approach learning. Beliefs that knowledge is discrete and factual,that learning is fact-based and that accounting is about the study of numbers (i.e. relatedto an absolute way of knowing) were identified and found to be related to the adoption ofa surface approach to learning accounting. The latter involves an emphasis on memorisingbefore understanding, a sense of detachment and a focus on passing the exam, rather than

2 The work of Perry (1970), Belenky et al. (1986), and Baxter Magolda (1992) built on, and developed, Piagetsfindings (in school-age children) within higher education.


on understanding. By way of contrast, beliefs that accounting is relevant to business, thatlearning is about seeing things differently and involves relating ideas to new contexts (i.e.related to a contextual way of knowing) were also identified and found to be related to theadoption of a deep approach to learning. The latter involves a focus on understanding andon intrinsic personal relevance.

Whilst it seems reasonable to assume that qualitatively different ways of knowing willbe evidenced within accounting students, further research is needed in this area.

2.4. Ways of knowing incorporate the notion of self-authorship

Within the discussion so far there have been references to the terms intellectual devel-opment, levels of cognitive development and epistemic beliefs. However, ways ofknowing, based on Baxter Magoldas findings, embrace a wider view than might havebeen implied by the use of these terms. She points out that solely academic (cognitive)skills of thinking are not likely to support students in the development of an independentor contextual way of knowing. Rather, in describing the goal of learning, she refers tothe work of Kegan (1994) and uses his term of self-authorship. The latter is the abil-ity to reflect on ones beliefs, organise ones thoughts and feelings in the context of, butseparate from, the thoughts and feelings of others, and literally to make up ones ownmind.

self-authorship extends beyond critical thinking or making informed judgementsbecause it is not a skill; it is, rather, a way of making meaning of the world and oneself.This concept is inextricably linked to [] students epistemological development.(Baxter Magolda, 1992, p. 6).

Baxter Magolda thus argues that self-authorship simultaneously comprises three aspects:cognitive (how one makes meaning of knowledge), interpersonal (how one views oneself inrelation to others) and intrapersonal (how one perceives ones sense of identity). Develop-ment in all these three areas does not necessarily go hand in hand. Thus students can learncognitive enquiry skills, yet not be able to use them to decide what to believe because theyhave no internal sense of identity or belief system (Baxter Magolda, 1992, p. 10). This viewsupports Brookfields and Mezirows assertions that critical reflection involves an affectivedimension and a disposition to engage in a process that may challenge ones deeply-heldviews. This means that it is by no means a straightforward process for a student to becomeaware of, and possibly change, such views particularly where the way of knowing isabsolute or transitional. The next section will consider what this requires of students andhow teaching might respond.

3. Responding to variation in ways of knowingmoments of surprise and beingpulled up short

Students have to become aware of their own ways of knowing, or meaning-makingstructures, before they can come to question, and then maybe accept or change them. Yetthis can make great demands on students and is likely to lead to denial or resistance,


particularly where ways of knowing are absolute or transitional. This section of the paperwill consider the nature of those demands and then discuss a possible teaching response.It should be borne in mind, during the discussion that follows, that it applies equally tolecturers who will also vary in their epistemological beliefs and associated conceptionsof teaching. There is a considerable body of work on the latter (for a review of this, seeLucas, 2002, p. 186f; and Pajares, 1992) qualitatively different ways of knowing will alsobe evident in lecturers.

Brookfield observes that making the attitudinal shift to reinterpret as culturally inducedwhat were initially held to be personally devised value systems, beliefs, and moral codes canbe highly intimidating. (1987, p. 17). Thus there may be denial, or defensive responses,before other belief or value systems are considered (if at all). Freire conceptualises thissituation as a fear of freedom (1970, p. 18): the process of conscientization (learningto perceive social, political and economic contradictions) is threatening and individualsconfuse freedom with the status quo (Freire, 1970, p. 18). Identifying, questioning andthrowing over assumptions involves several stages (Brookfield, 1987, p. 24f). Firstly, thereare perceptions of anomalies or contradictions (perspective transformation according toMezirow, 1977). This involves discrepancies between ones expectations and ones percep-tions of an experience and a trigger event is needed. Secondly, there is a stage of appraisal.This may involve, on the one hand, a minimisation or denial or, on the other, an openingup to unknown possibilities. The third stage involves exploration. This might involve thedevelopment of new identities and role models, a public declaration of a change of state, andthe testing of new ways of thinking and acting. The fourth stage requires the developmentof alternative perspectives. Those perspectives that are selected might initially be thosewhere the assumptions and activities seem most satisfactory and congruent with currentrelationships and ways of living. However, for there to be movement away from this therewill be a transition stage, a wrenching experience. Finally there is a process of integrationwithin which attitudes and assumptions may be transformed or existing stances confirmed.This may require the integration of conflicting feelings and ideas and becoming comfortablewith the new situation.

Both cognitive and affective domains are implicated throughout all of these stages. Thismakes great demands on students who may be immersed in absolutist or transitional waysof knowing. Accordingly, Baxter Magolda (1992, p. 227) points out that the need for asupportive and caring environment: development requires a balance of confirmation andcontradiction that enables the student to constantly re-evaluate ways of knowing in theface of new experiences (Kegan, 1982; Piaget, 1932). Consequently great care should beexercised in considering how to respond pedagogically to variation in ways of knowing.Baxter Magolda (1992, 1999) adopts what she describes as a constructive-developmentalpedagogy. This, in many respects, has much in common with a dialogical approach toeducation (for example, see the description in Thomson and Bebbington, 2004). It has threeaims: to validate students as knowers, to situate learning in students own experiences andto define learning as mutually constructing meaning. Validating students as knowers, inpart, requires that educators become more aware of the way in which students experiencethe world. However, this is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition. Students themselveshave to become aware of their own meaning-making structures before they can come toquestion them.


Stimulating this moment of awareness thus becomes an important issue within teaching.However, there has been relatively little discussion of the phenomenon within the literature.What is the nature of the dawning awarenessis it a gradual or a sudden occurrence andwhat stimulates it? Brookfield (1987, p. 24) proposes that a trigger event is needed to ini-tiate the first stage described above. He refers to DAndreas (1986) description of the firstattention phase of reflective learning as one in which an unanticipated surprise is causedby discrepancies between ones expectations and ones perception of an occurrence. Thisphenomenon has been described in a variety of different ways. Bruner (1979, p. 18) usesthe term effective surprise to describe an everyday phenomenon where the unexpectedhas the quality of wonderment, obviousness and the surprise of recognition. This is similarto Kerdemans (2003a) use of the term pulled up short, drawing on an idea articulated byGadamer (1993, p. 268). Acknowledging that Gadamer introduced this phrase in relation tothe reading of texts, she argues that it encompasses other experiences in which our expec-tations, assumptions and desires are denied, life being full of everyday kinds of shattering.However, Kerdemans account of Gadamer emphasises the quality of negation involved ina radical transformation of worldview, it being not solely a disappointment of expectationbut involving an acceptance that such a process is a never-ending existential condition.

In a subsequent essay Kerdeman (2003b) contrasts being pulled up short with Schlef-fers term cognitive surprise. She sees the latter as sharing features with being pulled upshort: central beliefs are challenged in an unexpected manner and this leads to an admissionof limitation, i.e. that what happens does not always comply with our beliefs or expectations.However, she points out they differ in relation to the nature of the limitation involved. Withcognitive surprise the limitation relates to our beliefs about the nature of the evidenceinvolved and involves a cognitive response. However, being pulled up short involves arecognition that limitation is part of being humana recognition of human finitude. It maybe helpful here to refer to our earlier discussion of Mezirows recognition of the wide-rangingnature of assumptions that underpin beliefs: psychological, epistemic and sociolinguistic.Clearly, the more deep-seated the assumptions, the more likely this is to imply a profoundtransformation that may carry negation with it.

The most notable feature of the above discussion is that there is a scarcity of accountsof this phenomenon within education, not least in accounting. My own term moments ofsurprise, which I chose to indicate moments within my own teaching when a learning activ-ity has worked particularly effectively in unexpected ways, resonates with the experiencedescribed by Bruner.3 I have used the term being pulled up short to describe occurrenceswhen students have been exposed to some challenge to their existing beliefs and expec-tations in a way that either starts them on, or encourages them to travel further within, ajourney of questioningor perhaps to realise (with reference to Gadamer) that the journeyhas no end. The next section of the paper provides an account of my reflection of whatseems to be involved in being pulled up short within an auditing course and in creatingmoments of surprise.

3 Obviously, also within my own teaching, there have been many teaching activities that have bombed andthese have equally informed my reflection and affected my teaching, but they are not discussed here. They mostlyrelate to occasions when I have failed to connect with students and this has stimulated me to listen more carefullyto students hopefully leading to further moments of surprise.


4. A reection on moments of surprise and pulling up short within auditingteaching

Over many years of teaching auditing I have gradually developed learning activities thatseem to be particularly effective in propelling some (but by no means all) students into waysof viewing auditing or the world differently than before. The nature of the activities involvedwas such that they halted students in their tracks and propelled them into questioningtaken-for-granted assumptionsabout themselves and the subject. Such activities were notdeliberately designed as such. The learning activities were discovered as moments of myown surprise, emerging through a form of serendipity. Once I realised what was happening, Ifound myself on the alert for ways of developing those activities and for creating conditionsthat might support further moments of surprise.

This led me into a process of reflection: reflection on my expectations, prejudgmentsand reactions: about the nature of what students were experiencing and on the offerings ofeducational research and theory. It is easy to diminish the importance of personal reflectiveaccounts of teaching: to assume that there is nothing special about ones own teaching andto have an understandable reluctance to expose it to public scrutiny. Yet in many respectsteachers feel as vulnerable as students and can feel supported by a more explicit discussionof what goes on behind the classroom door.

What follows represents an evolving account of my experience rather than a laying downof hard evidence. A key issue, in writing this paper was whether it was either possible,or appropriate, to provide evidence for my tentative arguments. Evidence, for me, isexperience supported by reflection that provides an explanatory, but generative framework,for my teaching. A generative framework is one that provides further interesting experienceas a basis for further reflection and so on. The all important anchor for this reflectionis a constant questioning of my own assumptions. This is supported by engaging with,and listening to, students as well as reading the literature. The explanatory framework hasbeen described in the previous sections of this paper and will be further developed withinthis section. I regard it as generative in the sense that it creates possibilities for furtherinteresting interaction, new experiences on which to further reflect and so on. Consequently,my explanatory framework continues to evolve.

The context for these learning activities is an optional module (year long) within a UKnew university BA(Hons) Accounting and Finance degree. Until 2002/2003 this auditingmodule was a final (third) year option but it is now a second year option. The syllabus andassessment constraints are substantial. The learning outcomes are designed to gain exemp-tion from the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants Professional Stage 2.6 Auditand Internal Review Paper. The professional syllabus must be covered and there is a require-ment that the 3-hour examination paper (weighting 70%) contain at least three compulsoryquestions (out of five). The coursework (weighting 30%) comprises one assignment. Thelatter assesses the development of the students critical awareness of key auditing issuesthrough the preparation and writing of a report and a critical reflection on the investiga-tive and report-writing process. Two class contact hours per week (22 teaching weeks)are available in the form of a 1-hour lecture and a 1-hour workshop. Cohort size is usu-ally 75 and workshop class size is 25. Appendix A contains an outline of the moduleapproach.


The learning activities described in this section have certain features in common. Firstly,none of them explicitly relate to the subject of auditing, or another subject is used as a majorstimulus. Second, each one is capable of being related to whatever meaningful experiencethe student chooses to connect it with. Thirdly, the nature of each activity is such that it isplayfulchallenging in a non-threatening way. Fourthly, none are linked to assessment,thus reducing fear of failure. Fifthly, they provide students with a way of contrasting theirown ways of thinking with those of others. Finally, all raise fundamental issues that can berelated to subsequent learning within the auditing course.

4.1. An incident in a store

This learning activity is based on an exercise designed to support students in thinkingabout how they learn (Race, 1995, p. 72f). I came across this activity in a staff developmentworkshop. Although it was introduced as a device for stimulating participants to think aboutlearning, I could see that it might work as a device for shocking students into realising thattaken-for-granted assumptions had led them into misinterpreting a situation. It made a hugeimpact on the students the first time that I used it within an auditing workshop. Since then Ihave gradually integrated it more fully into the auditing course. It is now the first workshopof the year.

Students are presented with what looks like a simple quiz. They are provided with adescription of a situation (A business man had just turned off the lights in a store when aman appeared and demanded money. The owner opened up a cash register. The contents ofthe cash register were scooped up and the man sped away. A member of the police forcewas notified promptly). The students are asked to comment on 18 statements referringto that description, indicating whether each statement is true, false or if they dontknow.

They are asked to complete the exercise individually. As I tour the classroom, I collectdetails of each student responsenoting down the numbers of trues, falses and dontknows. I then write these on the whiteboard. This is an important visual illustration to thestudents of how a group of students can vary widely in their responses. Out of a workshopof 25 students only three or four will identify a large number of dont knows. When I thenwrite up the right answer (13 dont knows) students are visibly shockedhow could somany students be so wrong?

I then ask students to identify what happenedwhere did they go wrong and why? Butthis time they are asked to work in groups of two or three. This immediately invokes a lotof discussion and argument amongst each group of students. After some 10 minutes or so,I give out a copy of the answer so that they can complete the task relatively quickly. Theanswer provides a revised description of the situation: A security firm collected the takingsfrom the store owner to take to the bank. The owner, a businessman, was just closing upand switching off the lights at the time. He rang the police station as a routine procedure.The robbery never happened.

I then ask the students to identify the lessons they have learned from this exerciseIfyou were about to advise a group of students in advance of this exercise, what advice wouldyou give them to ensure that they got the right answer? In each year student groups identifymost of the following advice:


Dont make assumptions: Look out for strong or emotive language and be aware of your reactions Look carefully at each statement and compare it carefully with each word in the story Dont take things at face value Be sceptical/questioning

Be prepared to admit to not knowing: Dont be afraid to ask Be prepared to say I dont know

Be prepared to ask for help: Working in a group is often better than working on your own

Be aware of attempts to manipulate your behaviour: Dont feel obliged to complete a task quickly Ask if you need more time Beware of instructions that direct you to a certain course of action or that dont allow

for uncertainties. Long sentences confuse. Break them down into smaller units.All of this is excellent advice, generated by the students themselves. They have discov-

ered this, rather than being told it. Of course, this advice can be re-read in the context ofan audit. It applies just as much to an auditor who wishes to retain a healthy scepticism.

This seems to be a classic example of a playful exercise, carried out in a non-threateningenvironment, where students are prepared to engage. Remarkably, not one student hascomplained that it wasnt fair. Frequently students comment on how interesting andintriguing they found it. Often I am asked for extra copies of the exercise so that studentscan try it out on friends and parents.

Play is very important in psychological development and learning. Playing allows us toindulge, to pretend, and try out new ways of thinking without seemingly to involve risk. Itallows us to be wrong without having much at stake. It is an antidote to what Claxton(1997, p. 7) refers to as D-modeconscious, deliberate, purposeful thinking. It is an activityinvolving humour, imagination, openness and spontaneity. It is not time-pressured. It movesaway from a dualistic split between truth and falsehood towards an embodiment (integratingthe cognitive and affective aspects) of learning. Students are pulled up short as they realisethat what they took to be a robbery was, in fact, normal store closing procedures.

There are ample opportunities in workshops that follow to remind students of this adviceand to support them in following it. It provides a reminder of the importance of not takingthings for granted. The issue of assumptions is addressed more explicitly in the springterm when we consider the social, political and economic contexts of auditing. It is thenthat students might discover that whereas one observer may see normal audit procedurestaking place, another may see some form of robbery taking place instead.

4.2. A Counting in Greenland

For many years, my weekly lecture took place on a Thursday. Some years ago I decidedto give students a poem during my lectures in acknowledgement of National Poetry Day.4

4 In the United Kingdom this takes place on the second Thursday in October.


Usually these poems were unrelated to auditing, but then I hit on the idea of giving them thepoem A Counting in Greenland (Lucas, 1999see Appendix B) and to link it explicitlywith accounting/auditing. A walking and camping trip in Greenland was the stimulus forthis poem. A fortnight with little to read gave me plenty of time to reflect on why the Inuitonly had a small vocabulary for numbers, why much of my own life had been spent eitherproducing or critiquing numbers and to learn how to pronounce the Inuit names for numbers.

The point of this poem lies, in part, in its punning title and the footnote. A Counting inGreenland becomes a meditation on accounting in Greenland. The fact that the numbersare words, and unpronounceable, provide something strange and new.

Within a lecture or workshop, I ask the students: Please read the attached poem anddiscuss the following questions within your group.

What do we need numbers for? What kind of society only needs numbers up to 12?

Questions/responses that commonly emerge include: we need to know how old peopleare, we need to know dates/years, we need to measure things and we need to value things.To which the response can be but why? and the discussion continues. A useful exercise,here, is to ask students why we need to know someones age. Often the response will be:because children have to go to school when they are five but the response could be yes,but not all children will benefit equally at five. Since society cant respond to such varietyand possible exceptions, five becomes a proxy for a readiness to benefit from formaleducation. We then discuss the extent to which numbers are used as proxies.

Eventually some students realise that large numbering systems may not be necessarywithin a simple or subsistence society, where hardly any time interval between needand consumption, exchange systems either dont exist or are very limited, little is storedand everyone, and their activities, are known. Greenland used to be a society where,basically, there was no need to formally account for things or to classify things as asubstitute for knowing them. A useful addendum to this exercise is to let the studentsknow that Greenlanders do use numbers in excess of 12. But the language is Danish andthe numbers were introduced when the Danes colonised Greenland.

What does poetry potentially offer in terms of pulling students up short? Claxton(1997) ventures his view:

The Poet achieves her effect by doing two things at once. She paints a picture thatinvites our interest, our engagement, and our identification. And she does this withlanguage that hampers our habitual ways of construing. We cannot see through ourown system of categories and concerns without grossly violating the poets words andthus we hang motionless for a moment in the presence of something made strangeand new. (p. 177, emphasis added)

I find that most students are rather slow to react to this activity and resistant (supportingthe findings of Hill and Newall, 2004). They find it quite difficult and alien and I findthat I have to prompt students through a series of questions. However, we get there in theend. Although the students struggle with this, it sets up a platform for further discussionlater in the course. It is possible to refer back to this activity during any topic that dealswith classification and valuation (e.g. the risk model, statistical sampling, stock counting,


depreciation rates, etc.). The point being, that all classification and valuation schemes areattempts to model/simplify something that cannot be known in all its detail and variety.

4.3. Valentines Day card

It was Valentines Daygrey and misty. I recall a moment of detachment from mylecture, thinking that my students were more interested in Valentines Day cards than auditreports. So I asked: What is the difference between a Valentines Day Card and an AuditReport? The students woke up, engaged with the question and came up with an amazingrange of responses. I now use this exercise every February since usually as a lectureactivity about two-thirds of the way through the lecture, when we have looked at thebasics of audit reporting. Often students are quite surprised at the formality of the auditreport and this is a good way to be playful with the topic. Students tend to come up with avery humorous list and it generally turns out to be good fun.

I think that, because Valentines Day is near the forefront of their mind, and links directlyto their emotions, this is a good outlet for what they really think about Valentines Day cardsand it gets linked to audit report. My only worry about this is that they may never feel quitethe same way about a Valentines Day card again!

Contrary to my original question (and expectation), typical responses include more com-monalities than differences: Neither are worth the paper they are written on Its better to have one than not Both are coded statements or contain ill-defined terms. (It is probably as unwise, and

discomforting, to attempt a definition of true and fair view as it is to examine closelywhat someone means when they say I love you)

Dont enquire into their meaning too closely, you might not hear what you want to Hopefully the card arrives at the right time, but the audit report may not be timely The card is read more carefully than the audit report. In fact, it is read, whereas the audit

report may not be The audit report is meant for a mass audience, whereas the card is meant just for one

person. With both of these, you dont necessarily know who its from! And so on. . .

All of these comments, whilst appearing flippant, identify key issues and problems withthe audit report. Consequently, in the workshop that follows this lecture, these issues canbe addressed in a livelier context.

With hindsight, I can see that this idea emerged from a very relaxed moment whatmight be termed the eros of learning and teaching (Beckett, 2000):

Humour, anecdote, negotiation and spontaneity are the hallmarks of this type oflearning, and this sort of teaching. Putting out spotfires, seizing the moment, catchingthe nuance and making something unique out of human sensibilities as they areinevitably revealed is all part of this too. You have to be there! (p. 73)

For example, Shaw (2001), in reflecting on what may be achieved within a lecture, quotesJohn Coltrane:


It seems to me that the audience, in listening, is in an act of participation, you know.And when you know that somebody is maybe moved the same way you are, its justlike having another member of the group. . . It is for this reason that we do not haveperformers and listeners, but performers and participants.

So he calls for more improvisation in lectures, responding to happenings, news events, toact creatively within the structure we have set for ourselves. And above all, he calls for theperformer to be a sensitive, empathetic participant. In this sense teaching can be regardedas an aesthetic experiencea mode of knowing that allows us to participate vicariously insituations beyond our practical possibilities (Eisner, 1985, p. 28).

4.4. A story: we stood together, looking down into the valley below. . .

This activity generally takes place in the spring term. It is given out just as the moduletextbook (Gray and Manson, 2005) introduces ideas contained within The Audit Society(Power, 1999). It precedes a workshop where we look at practical examples of how thingsare made auditable.

Students are asked to read Financial Accounting: In Communicating Reality, We Con-struct Reality by Hines (1988). It comprises a story with the academic content consignedto footnotes. Students are requested to read the article: You are not expected to read thenotes to this article, unless you have a burning interest to do so. Please jot down yourthoughts about the article below. I shall collect these in during next weeks lecture. Whatam I interested in?your reactions to the article. What did you find interesting, annoying,difficult, intriguing.. . .? Did you find it difficult or easy to read.. . .? Just think what yourreactions are and write them down!

I have more than 100 student responses to these questions covering the 5 years ending2004/2005. It is possible to identify responses that are indicative of the four ways of knowing.They range from:

It is frustrating to read as it doesnt appear to answer any questions but respondswith more questions. (Absolute)to. . .. We should not interpret things at face value as there might have hidden infor-mation behind it. It also depends on what method you are using to interpret it and atwhich angle you are looking at. You may find there will be different problems andsolutions at different times. (Transitional)to. . .. Really made me think that what people first think isnt always the right ideaand that there isnt always a straightforward answer to questions and ideas. One hasto really look at the complications behind issues. Would be a good article to read anddiscuss in a workshop, so that it could really be pulled apart and understood withmaybe other students and tutors points of view. (Independent)and finally. . .. What I think the message is, is that representation doesnt just mean toshow evidence but to construct it. Evidence is not clear and accountable as generallythought. The most part of our valuations are based on ideas, which in accounting areframeworks, that do not give a measurable proof of things but show a path of how tothink about these items of account. (Contextual)


The frustration and annoyance felt by the first student was a common response. Thisoccurs where a student with an absolute way of knowing is challenged by a learning activitywhere that view will not work! What such a student wants is the answer, not a successionof uncertainties. Other responses included:

The annoying thing is that the master never gave his pupil a straight answer. Insteadseveral questions and answers took place before the apprentice came to an answer infull.

The article is written in a childish way, the constant reference to the master isannoying as the underlying content is very good. [] Overall, I think the problem is,someone who hasnt studied auditing, or has just started, would not see the referencesto auditing issues. Those who would notice the issues would already be aware of themand hence I dont see that this article adds any value to its reader.

The article was easy to read and kept my interest throughout. However, some of thepoints were difficult to get your head around, because they were totally new in thenature of their argument.

However, many other students expressed positive emotions: surprise, excitement, enlight-enment. Responses included:

The article gave me a clear, revolutionary insight into the task and power of theaccountant [] One of the best articles Ive ever read!I found this a really, really, really, really good article! I know for sure that I will keepthis article with me for the rest of my life. In the last few years I have developed a wayof thinking which is quite close of (sic) the way of thinking in this article. I like toconvince people that the world is more than people think it is. [] The article reallyexplains things which are impossible to explain and understand, in a very good andclear way.

Intriguing the different perspectives of look (sic) at accounting. Very interestingsome of the examples, such as pollution were used. Really made me think. . ..

One student linked it to an activity in the previous weeks workshop:

Last weeks activity with the inverted commas5 made me take more notice of thewords such as goodwill and finished which I had previously taken for granted. Ihave begun to realize that accountants are able to some extent to construct reality.

Annoying so many questions, no real answers. More confused now than I wasbefore. Shows how easy it is to create a different picture from the same scene. Helpsto explain the expectations gap.!

5 The activity (s)he refers to is one in which I ask students to take a copy of an article that they have been given,and to randomly put quotation marks around words. I then ask them how this affects the reading of the article.This was another spur of the moment lecture activity occurring from my frustration as the students looked morethan usually sleepy.


Certainly this story pulls students up short. What is striking about this story isthe power it exerts in terms of eliciting a strong response from students, regardless ofwhether it is positive or negative. This can be seen in the language, expression and stylein the quotations provided above. Students were more than ready to share their views andfeelings.

Storytelling has the potential to be a powerful learning activity. Alterios research focuseson how formalised storytelling processes can be used to advance professional practice. Shesees storytelling as an ideal teaching and learning tool:

for it takes seriously the need for students to make sense of experience, using theirown culturally generated sense-making processes (Bishop and Glynn, 1999). Story-telling also has the capacity to support and enhance the relationship between studentscreating new knowledge and learning from others. In addition, sharing and reflec-tively processing stories provides students with opportunities to develop authenticrelationships with their peers. (Altiero, 2004, p. 1f)

The involvement of the students in this story acts as an excellent support to subsequentwork on making things auditable. The latter is a concept that students have difficulty inunderstanding and the Hines article acts as an excellent precursor to workshop activitieswhere students identify how things are made auditable.

4.5. Thinking critically: a crib sheet

This title may seem to be a contradiction in termsa crib sheet for critical thinking.However, it is a deliberately playful device. The spring term addresses auditing withinits social, political and economic contexts and students are expected to contribute toworkshop discussion. In the first workshop students are asked to discuss the followingstatement:

The expectations gap is due to public ignorance about auditing.

But, inevitably, they are reluctant to participate or to put their heads above the para-pet. So, again, as a spur of the moment device, I asked students to work in small groupsand to come up with a variety of ways they might respond to someone who makesthis assertion. They were told that they can come up with responses that are flippant,aggressive, friendly, academic, whatever. . . Each group is asked to come up with a listof at least ten responses and then asked to read these out to the class as a whole (orwrite them on a flipchart). As a second activity, I then ask the students to classify thedifferent types of responses that have been produced ideally putting these classifica-tions on to a flip chart so that students can easily see variation in how groups haveresponded.

At the end of the workshop I note down any responses that arent already on my listand I design a handout (see Appendix C) that is distributed to the students at the nextworkshop. I generally print it on yellow paper and ask students to bring it to each futureworkshop. It becomes a very useful teaching aid. For example, if they are having an opendiscussion and it falters, I remind them that they can refer to the crib sheet for help. Atsome workshops, I indicate that I am not going to take responsibility at all for ensuring


the discussion will continue, and that I expect them to use the crib sheet if discussiondries up.

This promotes quite playful activity. Students start to pick up on this and can respond toa line of discussion by choosing, almost at random, one of these responses. An importantissue, here, is that this crib sheet can support the student in role playing. Thus a student whowould not normally change their mind can try it for size. Another student, who wouldntnormally disagree with anyone publicly can, again, try it for size. Another student, whonormally wants to come up with an immediate answer can ask for clarification instead.It gives a student permission to be someone different, to change their identity for a shortwhile. Most important within this is the category of interventions/responses that allows astudent to change his or her mind. Many a discussion has become sterile as students attemptto defend an increasingly indefensible stance. Changing ones mind frees up the discussionand is, arguably, an important audit skill.

In designing and using this, I have been conscious of the need to provide support andstructure within which the students can play and experiment. A clear structure acts as asafety net. I have been particularly influenced in this approach by a paper by Elton (1996)which argues that providing students with such support does not amount to spoon-feeding.Support and structure can be re-conceptualised as minimising understandable anxiety onthe part of the students but of also providing them with opportunities to experiment andgrow.

5. Conclusions

The above description and discussion of the five learning activities draws out charac-teristic features of pedagogic approaches that may be used effectively within a dialogicalapproach to accounting education. These features take account of variation in ways ofknowing and recognise that students require an appropriate balance of confirmation andcontradiction (Baxter Magolda, 1992, p. 27) to support them in identifying, and question-ing, their own meaning-making structures.

Key elements of these approaches support or challenge students during the variousstages identified by Brookfield (1987): perceptions of anomalies or contradictions, appraisal,exploration, developing alternative perspectives and integration. These approaches involveplayfulness, alternative forms of text such as poems and stories and triggers that areimmediately relevant to a students personal world. They also give students permissionto respond emotionally and provide support structures to encourage students to experimentin their approach to critical reflection.

However, a key issue that arises out of this reflection on my own teaching is that theseactivities would not have emerged without a willingness on my part to be pulled up short.As discussed in the previous section, engagement in the eros of learning and teaching(Beckett, 2000) and a willingness to improvise provide opportunities to seize the momentand be surprised. Thus educator and student become true partners in learning (Freire, 1970),both being exposed to being pulled up short. Moreover, the beauty of this mode of engage-ment, which is an aesthetic experience, is that it does not necessarily take up much time,does not require much preparation of learning materials, the drafting of new learning out-


comes, or new forms of assessment. It is achievable even within a curriculum that is heavilyconstrained by external accreditation. It happens.

Appendix A. The module outline

The following is an extract from the module handbook.

A.1. The structure of the coursethe how and the why of auditing

There are two important aspects to this course:

the practicalities of how corporate governance systems operate and how audits are carriedout; and

a questioning of the theories underlying corporate governance and auditing, in particular,a review of their social context

We shall investigate some key questions:1. Why is corporate governance and audit necessary?

What is the social, economic and historic context in which audits are carried out?

2. How are audits carried out?What are current audit methodologies and techniques? What are the concepts of systems,controls and risk?

3. What is an internal control system?Why do companies need internal control systems? What principles should be followed in theirdesign? What are their limitations?

4. How effective are audits?How effective are current audit methodologies and techniques? What is the nature of theevidence produced by audits?

5. What should, and what does, an audit achieve?Is the true and fair view concept meaningful? Should an auditor be responsible for detectingfraud? What are the responsibilities of the directors of a company?

6. What qualities are required of an auditor?Is it realistic to expect auditors to be independent, honest and objective? What is meant by theseterms? What ethical problems confront the auditor?

7. How effectively does the auditor communicate the audit opinion?What is the nature of the expectation gap between auditor and user?

8. To whom does the auditor owe a duty?How wide is the responsibility of the auditor - to society at large or just to the individualshareholder?


Appendix B. A Counting in Greenland (Critical Perspectives on Accounting(1999) 10, 376, Article No. cpac.1998.0352, Available online athttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science? ob=MImg& imagekey=B6WD4-45K163H-8-1& cdi=6756& user=4845034& orig=search& coverDate=06%2F30%2F1999& sk=999899996&view=c&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkzk&md5=1d8c892bf05388b54042628563c79b2f&ie=/sdarticle.pdfon)

B.1. A Counting in Greenland

AtaaseqMarlukPingasutSisamatTallimatArnillitArneq marlukArneq pingasutQulingiluatQulitArqanillitArganeq marluk

Passuit... . .

Ursula LucasNote: the Greenlandic language only names the numbers up to 12. Beyond 12 there is

only passuit.... many.

Appendix C. A crib sheet for critical thinking

If you are not used to taking part in discussions, or in thinking critically about issues,the following might provide some useful pointers to developing a more critical approach.You can do this whilst you are:

reading discussing in workshops listening in lectures

Thinking critically means:

not taking anything for granted not taking things at face value questioning assumptions that underlie certain actions or beliefs


C.1. Ask for clarication. . . either to the lecturer, other students or to the author(if you could!)

What do you mean by. . .. (look at every word being used) Can you expand on that? What are your assumptions? Arent you assuming that. . ..?

C.2. Challenge. . . (nicely, of course)

Are you sure? What evidence have you to support that statement? Why is that so? Does this apply in all situations? Doesnt it depend on. . .? Is this the real issue?

C.3. Changing your mind (can be a good idea sometimes)

Dont feel that you have to win an argument (this is yet another assumption underlyingmany actions you see in life) Ive changed my mind. . . I can see your point. . . On reviewing this. . .. Thinking again. . .

And move on. . .Please keep this sheet and bring it to all workshops in the spring term.

References

Altiero, M. Using story telling to enhance student learning Article written for members of the ILTHE. AccessedMarch 6, 2004. http://www.ilt.ac.uk/1616.asp.

Barnett R. Higher education: a critical business. Buckingham: SRHE/Open University Press; 1997.Baxter Magolda MB. Knowing and reasoning in college: gender related patterns in students intellectual develop-

ment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1992.Baxter Magolda MB. Creating contexts for learning and self-authorship: constructive developmental pedagogy.

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1999.Beckett D. Eros and the virtual. In: Symes C, McIntyre J, editors. Working knowledge: the new vocationalism and

higher education. Buckingham: SRHE/Open University Press; 2000. p. 6683.Belenky M, Clinchy B, Goldberger N, Tarule J. Womens ways of knowing: the development of the self. New

York: Basic Books; 1986.Brookfield SD. Developing critical thinkers. Milton Keynes: Open University Press; 1987.Bruner J. On knowing: essays for the left hand. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1979.Claxton G. Hare brain tortoise mind: why intelligence increases when you think less. London: Fourth Estate; 1997.


Clouder L. Getting the right answers: student evaluation as a reflection of intellectual development? Teaching inHigher Education 1998;3(2):18595.

DAndrea AL. Teachers and reflection: a description and analysis of the reflective process which teachers use intheir experiential learning. Ontario: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education; 1986.

Eisner E. Aesthetic modes of knowing. In: Eisner E, editor. Learning and teaching: the ways of knowing. Chicago:University of Chicago Press; 1985. p. 2336.

Elton L. Strategies to enhance student motivation: a conceptual analysis. Studies in Higher Education1996;21(1):5767.

Francis MC, Mulder TC, Stark JS. Intentional learning: a process for learning to learn in the accounting curriculum.Sarasota, FL: Accounting Education Change Commission and American Accounting Association; 1995.

Freire P. Pedagogy of the oppressed. London: Penguin; 1970.Gadamer HG. Truth and method. London: Sheed and Ward; 1993.Gray I, Manson S. The audit process. 3rd ed. London: Thomson; 2005.Hill WY, Newall J. I dont think poetry has anything to do with accounting and Changes (A teaching note and

poem). Critical Perspectives on Accounting 2004;15:64954.Hines RD. Financial accounting: in communicating reality, we construct reality. Accounting, Organisations and

Society 1988;13:25161.Inhelder B, Piaget J. The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. London: Routledge and Kegan

Paul; 1958.Kegan R. The evolving self: problem and process in human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press; 1982.Kegan R. In over our heads: the mental demands of modern life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1994.Kerdeman D. Pulled up short: challenging self-understanding as a focus of teaching and learning. Journal of

Philosophy of Education 2003a;37:293308.Kerdeman, D. Pulled up short: Challenges for Education, Philosophy of Education, http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/

PES-Yearbook/2003/kerdeman.pdf, 2003b, accessed August 2, 2006.Kitchener KS. Cognition, metacognition and epistemic cognition. Human Development 1983;26:22232.Lucas U. A Counting in Greenland. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 1999;10:376.Lucas U. Worlds apart: students experiences of learning introductory accounting. Critical Perspectives on

Accounting 2000;11:479504.Lucas U. Deep and surface approaches to learning within introductory accounting: a phenomenographic study.

Accounting Education 2001;10(2):16184.Lucas U. Uncertainties and contradictions: lecturers conceptions of teaching introductory accounting. British

Accounting Review 2002;34(2):183204.Lucas U, Meyer JHF. Towards a mapping of the student world: the identification of variation in students concep-

tions of, and motivations to learn, accounting. The British Accounting Review 2005;37(4):177204.McPhail K. An emotional response to the state of accounting education: developing accounting students emotional

intelligence. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 2004;15:62948.Mezirow J. Perspective transformation. Studies in Adult Education 1977;9:15364.Mezirow J. Fostering critical reflection in adulthood. San Francisco: Josey-Bass; 1990.Mezirow J. Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Josey-Bass; 1991.Pajares MF. Teachers beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational

Research 1992;62:30732.Perry WG. Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years. New York: Holt, Rinehart and

Wilson; 1970.Piaget J. The moral judgement of the child. New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul; 1932.Power M. The audit society. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999.Race P. Who Learns Win. London: Penguin; 1995.Shaw, J. Turn thrifty lectures into jazz recitals. Times Higher Educational Supplement, September 21, 2001.Shute GE. Accounting students and abstract reasoning: an exploratory study. Sarasota, FL: American Accounting

Association; 1979.Thomson I, Bebbington J. It doesnt matter what you teach? Critical Perspectives on Accounting 2004;15:60928.Wyer J. Procedural v. conceptual: a developmental view. Journal of Accounting 1984;2(1):518.

Being "pulled up short": Creating moments of surprise and possibility in accounting educationIntroductionCritical reflection and the move towards critical beingWhat is meant by "critical reflection"?Variation in the capacity of students to engage in critical reflectionDo accounting students vary in their ways of knowing?Ways of knowing incorporate the notion of "self-authorship"

Responding to variation in ways of knowing-moments of surprise and being "pulled up short"A reflection on "moments of surprise" and "pulling up short" within auditing teachingAn incident in a storeA Counting in GreenlandValentines Day cardA story: we stood together, looking down into the valley belowThinking critically: a crib sheet

ConclusionsThe module outlineThe structure of the course-the how and the why of auditing

A Counting in Greenland (Critical Perspectives on Accounting (1999) 10, 376, Article No. cpac.1998.0352,)A Counting in Greenland

A crib sheet for critical thinkingAsk for clarification either to the lecturer, other students or to the author (if you could!)Challenge (nicely, of course)Changing your mind (can be a good idea sometimes)

References

Being “pulled up short”: Creating moments of surprise and possibility in accounting education

Documents

Transcript of Being “pulled up short”: Creating moments of surprise and possibility in accounting education