An exploration of student failure on an undergraduate accounting programme of study

Aounting Eduation 11 (1), 93 107 (2002) An exploration of student failure on an undergraduate aounting programme of study LOUISE GRACIA* and ELLIS JENKINS University of Glamorgan, S Wales, UK Reeived: July 2001 Revised: Otober 2001 Aepted: November 2001 Abstrat Aademi failure reates nanial and emotional issues for students, with assoiated resoure and performane impliations for higher eduation institutions. The literature reveals that muh of the work on student performane is quantitative, restriting understanding of the deeper feelings and pereptions of students towards their studies. This paper explores undergraduate student performane from an experiential perspetive, reognising the omplexity and subjetivity of aademi performane. Findings appear to highlight: the negative fous of reasoning underlying the hoie of study; the impat of affet; the importane of the role of the tutor; the tutor expetations gap; levels of ontrol and personal responsibility for learning; and patterns of partiipation as possible signi ant and important fators in understanding aademi performane. Finally, the impliations of the ndings are disussed and further researh outlined in terms of developing a preditive model that ould offer early identi ation of students who are suseptible to aademi failure and establishing appropriate, proative support strategies for suh students. Keywords: Aademi performane, aounting eduation, experiential perspetive, semistrutured interviews, student re etions on failure Introdution Aademi suess is of primary importane to students, their teahers and the higher eduational institutions (HEIs) at whih they study. Aademi failure reates a major nanial and emotional burden for students as they struggle to ome to terms with failure in both a personal and eonomi sense. It also has resoure and performane impliations for the HEIs, the relative performanes of whih are monitored and published in annual league tables. Aademi failure impats upon degree results and retention rates, both of whih are used as key performane indiators to evaluate HEIs. Moreover, the problems of student failure are likely to be exaerbated by reent and urrent Government initiatives to inrease partiipation rates and widen aess, whilst at the same time reduing the nanial support offered to students via grants. This paper explores undergraduate aademi performane through student experiene. It seeks to understand the meaning and emphasis that students plae on different aspets of their learning experiene and hene provides an understanding of how experiential fators in uene aademi performane on the seond and nal years of study. In addition, by * Address for orrespondene: Mrs. Louise Graia, Business Shool, University of Glamorgan, Llantwit Road, Treforest, S Wales, CF37 1DL, UK. E-mail lgraia@glam.a.u k Aounting Eduation ISSN 0963 9284 print/issn 1468 4489 online 2002 Taylor & Franis Ltd http://www.tandf.o.uk/journals DOI: 10.1080/0963928021015329 0

94 Graia and Jenkins adopting a qualitative approah, it attempts to address the de it of deeper understanding of student experiene on aademi performane within the existing aounting eduation literature. Literature review The researh that has attempted to identify and analyse the fators that explain differenes in aademi performane tends to be quantitative in nature and presents a variety of on iting and ontraditory onlusions. The impat of prior aounting knowledge on aademi performane in rst year university aounting studies ontinues to be one of the most widely researhed fators. Despite its frequeny of study no onsensus exists on its in uene or otherwise on aademi performane. Baldwin and Howe (1982) found no differene between the overall performane of students irrespetive of their level of prior aounting knowledge. Bergin (1983) on rms this nding, onluding that overall ourse performane is unrelated to prior high shool aounting exposure. This view is further supported by Shroeder (1986), who also found no differene in the overall ourse performane of students with prior high shool aounting exposure and those without. Bartlett et al. (1992,1993) arried out a longitudinal study of students speializing in aounting over the period 1989 1992. They arried out tests of the relationship between aademi performane and a large range of explanatory variables inluding age, gender, region, prior study and eduational attributes. They onur that the prior study of aounting has no signi ant effet on aademi performane, onluding that only the prior study of eonomis has a signi ant effet on performane. Further studies offer different ndings. Studies by Mithell (1985,1988) found that students with prior aounting or A level mathematis perform better statistially, in the omputational and quantitative aspets of ourses. Gul and Fong (1993) on rm the signi ane of the prior study of aounting and mathematis as well as personality type, in prediting aademi performane. Similar results by Tho (1994) found the prior study of high shool aounting, mathematis and grades ahieved in studies of high shool eonomis to be signi ant in explaining aademi performane. The signi ane of prior study of aounting and mathematis as preditor variables of aademi performane is also onsistent with the ndings of others inluding Eskew and Faley (1988), Farley and Ramsey (1988), and Naser and Peel (1998). Other ommentators inluding Doran et al. (1991) produe on iting onlusions onerning the impat of prior aounting knowledge on aademi performane in two aounting ourses Aounting Priniples I and II (API and APII). They found prior study of high shool bookkeeping to be positively related to performane in API but negatively related to performane in APII. The impat of gender is also widely studied, but the researh ndings are often ontraditory and hene inonlusive in nature. Fraser et al. (1978) and Muthler et al. (1987) found that female students outperform their male ounterparts. Findings by Tyson (1989) support this view and onlude that female students outperform male students in all setions of an introdutory aounting lass. However, Lipe (1989) failed to nd any evidene of a gender effet. Similarly, Auyeung and Sands (1994) found no differene between the performane of male and female students. In ontrast, Koh and Koh (1999) found gender, previous working experiene, aademi aptitude and age to be signi ant preditors of aademi performane. Doran et al. (1991) produed further on iting

An exploration of student failure 95 results in their study of the impat of gender on performane in two aounting ourses (API and APII). They found that men outperform women in API, but not in APII. Other studies have foused on the impat of entry quali ations on aademi performane. 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 signi ant and negative effet on progress by inreasing the rate at whih modules are failed. The literature review reveals that muh of the work on the fators affeting student performane is quantitative in nature, fousing mainly on rst year students. In addition muh of this quantitative researh demonstrates the weak and often on iting relationships that exist between student performane and bakground harateristis. One explanation for the on iting ndings of UK studies may be that results are outdated due to the hanging eduation environment in the last ten years spei ally the downward drift of A level standards; the expansion in higher eduation; widening and inreasing partiipation rates; inreasing ost pressures on institutions; and the replaement of student grants with loans. Other studies from outside the UK may produe ndings that are ulturally spei and the lessons may not be readily transferable to the UK. Despite their different ndings, all these studies have one thing in ommon they are positivisti and the primary researh approah is quantitative. Eah attempts to establish a statistiallyvalid ause-effet relationship, fousing on the statistially measurable whih are largely bakground fators. The disparate results of these studies may suggest that aademi performane is not a simple phenomenon that an be predited on the basis of a seletion of demographi data, a view supported by Bartlett et al. (1993). It seems likely that there are more ative and subjetive fores at work in determining performane that are not aptured by statistial studies. Reliane on quantitative data alone preludes a deeper understanding of the pereption and feelings of students towards their studies and their impat on aademi performane. Some ommentators have foused on this experiential perspetive of learning. Boud (1988) argues that students with a higher level of personal responsibility may beome more atively involved and engaged with the subjets studied and stresses the entral importane of autonomy in student learning. Others, inluding Barnett (1992) support this argument. Candy et al. (1994) identify a wider spetrum of learning skills inluding personal skills and attributes as important for effetive learning. These issues of personal responsibility and the role of personal skills have long been linked to effetive eduation. Carl Rogers (1969) founded the person-entred approah to ounselling whih plaes self-awareness, personal responsibility and re etion at its ore. He extended his humanisti ideas beyond the ounselling arena and into eduation and onludes that partiipative learning, where the learner takes personal responsibility for his learning, is most effetive. Kluever and Green (1998) also emphasize the role of personal responsibility in learning and reated a Responsibility Sale assessment for use with students. Other researhers in the eld also fous on self-direted learning. Knowles (1975) onludes that self-direted learning is more in line with an adult s natural proess of psyhologial development and reates better learners. He maintains that learners who enter eduational programmes using more open and independent learning regimes (suh as higher eduation) need to be self-direted in their approah and held that if suh skills

96 Graia and Jenkins were laking this auses anxiety, frustration and often failure. Others onnet self-direted learning with personal hange. Brook eld (1988) stresses the importane of ritial re etion and the reation of personal meaning in the ontext of effetive learning. The learning proess itself also reeives a signi ant amount of researh attention, espeially in relation to ognition. Others inluding Goleman (1995) and Boler (1999), have raised the pro le of emotion as a omponent of intelligene. Goleman maintains that self-awareness, self-responsibility and empathy are important determinants of generi intelligene, neessary to maximise intelletual potential. Learning is learly a omplex phenomenon involving hanges in knowledge, understanding, skills and attitudes brought about by experiene and re etion upon that experiene. A large part of the researh on learning fouses on the issues of ognition, and within aounting eduation on demographi data. Whilst the importane of these areas is aknowledged, inreasingly the signi ane of other aspets of learning, suh as personal responsibility, personal meaning and an individual s subjetive experiene are being reognized. It is these areas that this study onsiders Researh method Exploratory researh requires open-ended methods of data gathering and analysis and hene qualitative researh methods have been employed. The qualitative approah adopts a grounded theory perspetive. Grounded theory is... one of the interpretative methods that share the ommon philosophy of phenomenology that is, methods that are used to desribe the world of the person or persons under study, (Hussey and Hussey, 1997, p. 70). It omprises a series of in-depth semistrutured interviews with students from the seond and nal year ohorts enrolled on the BA (Hon) Aounting and Finane at a University Business Shool in the aademi year 1999/2000. The interviews were taped and transribed. This permitted a detailed omparative analysis of the similarities and differenes between students. The analysis foused upon the impat of experiential fators on individual aademi ahievement. Sample seletion A random sample of 42 students was seleted to ensure a mix of aademi pro les. A simple measure of aademi pro le was used whereby students who passed all modules in their previous year, at the rst sitting, were plaed in a rst subgroup (50 students), and those who had failed one or more modules at the rst sitting were plaed into a seond subgroup (46 students). Equal numbers of students were then drawn randomly from these two subgroups. Suh sampling attempts to adequately apture the heterogeneity in the population and provide a fairer representation of the ohorts under investigation. Within the sample there was an even balane of students in terms of aademi pro le, gender and year of study, inreasing on dene in the data olleted and its subsequent analysis. Students were approahed via a standard letter that explained the purpose of the researh and requested partiipation in the study. All seleted students agreed to be interviewed. Data olletion This primarily omprised 18 individual, in-depth interviews. Prior to these being undertaken, four group interviews were onduted with the remaining 24 students from the

An exploration of student failure 97 sample. The representative random balane aross the individual and group interview lusters was maintained. The purpose of the preliminary group interviews was to expose a ontextual piture of student experiene and permit students themselves to identify meaningful areas of that experiene. These areas were used to diretly inform the individual interview design, inreasing the relevane of its ontent to the partiipants and the researh aim itself (Bogdan and Biklen, 1992). Group interviews were used in the preliminary stage to exploit group interations whih failitate open disussion and thereby inrease aessibility to data (Morgan, 1997). However, it is reognized that dominant individuals may olour the overall group views, but any potential undue in uene is mitigated by the individual interview ontent also being informed by the literature searh. The subsequent individual interviews were used to explore student failure by providing an in-depth insight into the student experiene, apturing data rih in its experiential ontent. As suh, it is this deep individual data that is analysed to explore any differenes between the experienes of students with differing aademi pro les against the broad ontext. Maxwell (1996) reommends suh ontextualizing of qualitative data, to augment understanding by identifying oneptual linkages between emergent ategories and their surrounding ontext. The individual interviews were undertaken by the same interviewer, in the same interview room reognizing the value of ontext and setting. They were semistrutured and onduted using nondiretive and re etive tehniques throughout, allowing exploration of the issues via open questioning and enouragement to expand responses. Re etive tehniques provide partiipants with an opportunity to orroborate or larify responses. This permits the interviewer to test his/her understanding of partiipant meaning and serves as a strong hek on the integrity of the data as it is olleted. The ontent of the individual interviews omprised potentially in uential experiential areas identi ed from the existing eduation literature and the evaluation of the group interviews as follows: Reasons for hoie of institution and subjet and motivation to study. The learning experiene. The soial dimension of learning. Control in the learning proess. Expetation and experiene of staff. Student rights and responsibilities. Experiene of, and re etion on, assessment and module failure. Personal re etions. Suf ient exibility was maintained to enable the order and phrasing of questions to be varied, if neessary. Eah individual interview was 55 65 minutes in length and taped with interviewee permission in its entirety to allow omplete data apture and subsequent transription. Whilst it is reognized that audiotape only aptures the spoken onversation, omitting the visual aspets of faial expressions and body language, it was felt that videoreording interviews would intrude on the interview proess and hene impinge upon data olletion and ompromise its validity. Data analysis The semistrutured nature of the interviews allowed some struturing of the data prior to data olletion. This preliminary struturing generated a series of ategories within whih

98 Graia and Jenkins data for eah interviewee was transribed and heked by the researhers. Suh selftransription with repeated reading of the transripts allowed fuller immersion in the data, enhaning understanding and also providing transription validity and reliability. Data was analysed using open oding tehniques to establish the emergent themes and sub-themes. Codes were initially established independently by both researhers. The researhers then ompared and rigorously disussed these independently derived odes as part of an iterative proess of data interpretation, ontinuing until onsensus of data oding and analysis was ahieved. This enouraged a more objetive and detailed exploration of the individual data. Results and disussion of ndings To protet the on dentiality of the partiipants in this researh the Pass students are denoted P1 9 and the Fail students F1 9, in the analysis that follows. The fous of the investigation is to seek to understand, through student experiene, why some students pass and others fail even though they are subjeted to the same teahing and learning environment. To this end it is the areas of differene between the experiene of pass and fail students that is of interest as possible areas of explanation. The analysis of the data revealed a number of interesting differenes as follows: When re eting on their own aademi failure(s), F students ite a myriad of underlying reasons and explanations. Common rationales inlude a poor memory; lak of adequate revision, attendane, time-management, motivation, enouragement or interest in a subjet; poor teahing 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 lasses 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 beause I didn t like them. F7 F students almost invariably expressed failure as a personal failing regardless of the reasons underlying their failure, whih learly demonstrates the potential personal impat that failure has on students. This aeptane of failure at a personal level may indiate that failure is internalized by students reating their view of failure as some form of personal de ieny. 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 ourse notes are all over my bedroom oor I don t know where to start. F6 I failed beause of my lak of appliation I m really bad at getting down to work. F8 I nd it hard to onentrate I always have done. F9 These initial rationales for failure were subsequently explored at a deeper level with students, whih revealed a series of possible explanatory fators as follows:

An exploration of student failure 99 1. The impat of affet A number of F students stated that their initial deisions to enter university and study aounting were not driven by personal desire, or were unlear as to how these deisions had arisen: I ame to university, well I wasn t going to ome beause I ouldn t nd a ourse that I liked, my mates were saying that I ought to go to university, so I thought OK I d apply. I wanted to do Law, but I didn t get the points. F1 There wasn t a partiular reason... I always wanted to be an arhitet. F2 I felt under pressure to ome... peer pressure mainly... I had no intention of oming. F3 I didn t want to do aountany. I wanted to do Art and Design but I m not very good at drawing. My friend was doing aountany so I thought I would try it. I d rather be at a different university; this university is too lose to home really. F4 To some extent F students may be seen as providing negative reasons to support their hoies. In ontrast, most P students provide positive reasons to support their hoies of where and what to study. These P students frequently relate their initial deision to study at university to some form of enouragement, from family and friends and linked their hoie of aounting to an af nity or omfortable assoiation with numeray, or a prior study of aounting. I felt that this university was more exible to the needs of mature students. P1 I had friends studying here and they reommended it. The ourse has a sandwih year and you an get a year s work experiene whih means you ve got more hane of getting a job at the end of it. P2 My Dad has a business and from a young age I ve sat with my Mum when she was doing the aounts. As I got older she gave me aounting jobs to do. I ve always wanted to do aountany. P3 I ve had an interest in gures all along and my parents were very enouraging when I wanted to ome. P7 I hose aountany beause I had studied it on my Aess to Eduation ourse and deided that I really liked it. P4 This raises the possibility that the vague or negatively foused patterns of reasoning of F students may olour the longer-term attitude of students towards their studies, in a way that somehow adversely affets aademi performane. One possible mehanism through whih this in uene might be exerted is affet i.e. mood and general outlook. There is inreasing evidene that shows that affetive states have a powerful in uene on an individual s thought and behaviour patterns. Affet has a profound in uene on the memories we retrieve and the information we notie and learn (Ciarrohi et al. 2001, p. 47). Furthermore, Ciarrohi et al. hold that affet in uenes both the proess of thinking and the ontent of thinking, judgements and behaviour. They also state that affet infusion inreases when individuals engage in thinking that uses memory-based information, whih is typial of the pattern of learning that predominates in higher eduation. This view of the impat of affet on learning is supported by Adolphs and Damasio (2001) who state that affet in uenes all other aspets of ognitive funtioning, inluding memory, attention

100 Graia and Jenkins and deision making (p. 45). The ndings of Suls (2001) also indiate that feelings of negative affet an reate negative thinking and attitudes that impair an individual s ability to manage the situations he/she faes. Given this established impat of affet on learning (amongst other things) this may provide a possible explanation as to why students with negatively-foused patterns of reasoning may not perform as well aademially as their ounterparts. Indeed, responses from F students seem to support the role of affet in interfering with their aademi performane: Sometimes I nd it dif ult to motivate myself. I know I should be doing some work, but I just an t make myself do it if I don t feel like it. F8 It s always been the ase that if I m not in the mood to revise that s it! There s no point in even trying beause I know that I won t take any of it in anyway. So muh of it is just memory work anyway and that s not my strong point. F6 I m here for the soial-life really I d really rather go out with the boys than stay in and study! F9 2. Patterns of partiipation F students are frequently ritial of their own levels of on dene and feel that this adversely impinges on their ability to enter into verbal partiipation in lassroom disussions. I m really quiet in the lassroom and I don t like it if the teaher asks me a question. I an feel people looking at me and I ll say that I don t know, even if I do, just to stop the proess. F8 I m naturally shy I d like to be able to talk more but it just makes me feel really stressed and unomfortable. F6 It depends on how many people you know in the lass. If you don t know people there s not that same sense of seurity about partiipating. F4 I m usually very quiet and I don t say very muh. I m just not on dent enough and I get very embarrassed if I don t give the right answer. F3 I usually keep quiet in ase 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 dif ulty is less amongst the P students: I don t mind partiipating 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 disuss my opinions. It s important that the tutor is not too ritial and is supportive of the student s ideas. P4 Many of the F students appear fearful that their answers will be inorret, stemming from anxious sensitivity towards the reation of others and a lak of on dene in their own abilities. Suh feelings inhibit partiipation, whih may interfere with a student s ability to fully engage with the learning situation and the other partiipants in the learning experiene:

An exploration of student failure 101 I won t go to a lass 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 stuk. I often feel that I am alone on this ourse. F1 I think that the other students don t listen to me they look bored with me or at as if they an t follow what I m saying. F7 Sometimes beause of the leturer I did not feel like going to the lass... some leturers de nitely put up barriers to keep you out I just feel it! F3 Suh impairments may damage students ability to maximize their learning potential by restriting their level of ative engagement. Ative engagement with the ourse an take a variety of forms inluding verbal partiipation. Another broad measure of ative engagement with the ourse is that of attendane at lasses. Attendane reords for the aademi year 1999/2000 show that the reorded attendane rate of P students (P1 P9) ranges from 98% 67%, with an average attendane of 88%, whilst that of the F students (F1 F9) over the same period ranges from 92% 53%, with an average attendane rate of 69%. The lower rates for the F students may indiate that their levels of ative engagement with the ourse are less than that of their P ontemporaries. Another area of engagement for the student is that of establishing a relationship with the tutor. Most students highlight the importane of the tutor as entral ontributors to their best and worst learning experienes. Most felt that the differene between the two extremes is tutor-related. Learning experienes ited inlude: One tutor allowed us to sit down in small groups and disuss our opinions. I started to grow in on dene and I really enjoyed that. F3 One leturer had a really droning voie and just used to give us a handout and then just read from it all the time. Some students atually fell asleep in her lass! F4 It was the leturer s fault. He wasn t at all interesting and he used to teah us with his eyes losed. It seemed that he expeted us to do all the work and provide all the interest. F2 This underlines the pivotal role that tutors have in striking a balane between providing too muh support (whih may ollude with students to strip them of ontrol, enourage passivity and sti e development of autonomous study patterns) and too little support (whih an isolate students, deterring engagement and frustrate their efforts to beome responsible, autonomous learners). The onus is therefore on tutors to provide appropriate levels of support and enouragement. The provision of suh appropriate levels of support and enouragement may be even more neessary for F students who may already be struggling with poor ourse engagement; lower levels of attendane; a greater tendeny to feel anxious about partiipating verbally in the lassroom; and a preferene for abdiating ontrol for their learning into the hands of a willing tutor. 3. Expetation gap There is reognition by some students all P of the distintion between teahing and learning and the ative role that students have to play in the learning proess: It s the student s responsibility to work outside of the letures. P2 It s important to work with the staff, who are there to guide you. P3

102 Graia and Jenkins Teahing 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 reiproal a partnership approah within whih they work with tutors and reognize that they have to do the work. This presents a realisti view of the teahing proess as something they interat with to maximize knowledge-transfer and ahieve learning outomes. In ontrast, F students tend to view their relationship with tutors in more dependent and reliant terms with a narrower view of the teahing proess as the means by whih they passively reeive knowledge-transfer: They should be doing all they an to help me to get an A. Their role doesn t end when the lass nishes; they should be prepared to help outside the lass. F3 To eduate 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 diret my learning. F2 Tutors should teah 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 teahing proess as knowledge-transfer and indiates a muh heavier reliane on the tutor. From this position it is arguable that P students hold more realisti expetations of the role of tutors whilst an expetation gap is exposed between F students and their tutors. When exploring with F students the existene of suh an expetation gap and its impat on aademi performane, a number of issues arise. Firstly students ite prior study experiene as a possible ontributor to the reation of the expetation gap. Many students ome to university diretly from shool where more diretive approahes to learning have been employed. Some responses seem to indiate that students had assumed that studying in HE would be similar to that at shool: Coming to university straight from shool was quite a shok! In shool you talk through everything, and the teahers will do everything they an to make sure that you pass. F6 I am used to being in shool where everything is done for you the teahers gave you all the notes and you didn t have to read many books! It is very different in university and I found it dif ult to adjust. F3 Seondly, the issue of the redued number of ontat hours, in omparison to students prior study experiene. This requires students to be able to manage their own learning outside of formal ontat hours and some students felt that they needed more help to manage this effetively: In university you see the tutors a lot less than you did at shool, 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 struture my own studying. F2 What F students appear to be desribing is that their tutor-expetations are based on their prior learning exposure and experiene and not on realisti information about the learning

An exploration of student failure 103 approahes employed within HE. However, if these expetations are not met, students are faed with the hallenge of adapting their approah to learning. If students do not effetively manage this transition into HE it may ompromise their learning. As one partiular F student stated: It s not just about the tehnial stuff I also need the tutors to help me to learn how to study. F7 4. The lous of ontrol over learning When onsidering failure the issue of ontrol over learning was raised. Paradoxially, whilst F students were ready to aept the responsibility for their failures they were relutant to take ontrol of their learning. All the F students express dissatisfation with the level of ontrol they have feeling it is too muh and rejet the idea of taking more ontrol for their learning: I need the tutor to organize my learning... I m no good at organizing myself I need more self-disipline. F4 It s easier if everything is deided up front by the tutor I prefer them to be in ontrol it gives me less to worry about. F2 I don t think its pratial to have too muh ontrol. F3 I don t really want to take ontrol of the learning I m not even sure how I ould get ontrol of it. If I had ontrol and then I failed I would feel that it was my fault! F6 In ontrast, P students generally demonstrate some level of ontrol 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 lassroom I feel 100% in ontrol. P1 I have lots of ontrol I an do as muh work as I want outside of the lass. Its up to me to read into it as muh as I like. P4 As suh F students appear to be more ontrol-averse than their P ounterparts and reveal a preferene for the tutor ontrolling their learning. This ould be interpreted as the adoption of a more passive approah to their learning. This desire to be ontrolled or direted suggests that F students within the sample plae the lous of ontrol for their learning with others, whilst P students seem more likely to plae the lous of ontrol with themselves and adopt a more ative approah to their learning. Again the adoption of ontrol-averse or ontrol-aepting patterns of behaviour by a partiular student may be linked to their prior eduational experienes as disussed above, whih may have provided a more direted approah that some students struggle to move away from and towards a more autonomous style of learning. Shared harateristis of F students and support mehanisms The researh reveals a number of broad and ommon experiential features or harateristis amongst the F students. If students exhibit these harateristis it is possible that it may render them more suseptible to failure and hene be useful in understanding the differing levels of aademi performane between students. These features omprise:

104 Graia and Jenkins Negative fous of reasoning and the impat of affet The vague or negatively-foused reasoning underlying the initial study hoies of F students may belie a longer term affetive state whih in uenes the longer-term attitude of students towards their studies, in a way that adversely affets aademi performane. Provision of sustained student support strategies that inlude opportunities for long-term, open disussions of affetive and attitudinal fators may be useful here. Patterns of partiipation F students desribe more retiene to partiipate than P students. Feelings of lak of on dene and anxiety about the reation of peers and tutors if they give an inorret response at as partiipation inhibitors. These negative feelings onerning self may also impair a student s engagement with the ourse in terms of developing supportive study relationships with fellow students and their tutors and may interfere with patterns of lass attendane and subsequent aademi performane. The provision of a non-judgemental lassroom limate that offers open aeptane of students may be useful in fostering student disussion and development and in atively supporting engagement. In addition it may be sensible to monitor attendane as an early-warning indiator of engagement dif ulties. Tutor expetations gap P and F students view the relationship between themselves and their tutors in different ways. F students are inlined to expet the tutor to atively provide learning as an eduational produt, viewing themselves as the passive reipients of the learning produt. Suh an orientation may stem from familiarity and exposure to more diretive forms of learning and the development of a reliane on suh methods. This may make transition into HE troublesome for the student as a result if the shift to more autonomous learning approahes is not effetively managed. P students, in ontrast, are more inlined to view themselves as ative partiipants in the learning proess. Support mehanisms and information exhange that fous on establishing realisti expetations of the roles and responsibilities of tutors and students, together with supported transition into HE may serve to failitate the development of a partnership approah to learning and hene bridge the expetations gap. Taking ontrol of learning P students present as more ontrol-aepting than their F ounterparts who tend to be more ontrol-averse. This links with the emerging view of F students as being more passive in their approah to learning. Suh passivity is an inevitable by-produt of the abdiation of ontrol and a preferene for being direted in their learning. This ould perhaps be interpreted as a form of eduational immaturity, where students who may have developed tutor-reliant forms of learning are unable to adapt their learning strategies to overome their passivity. Again, support mehanisms and information exhange may be useful in enouraging development of ative self-responsibility in the learning proess. Despite its ause, failure appears to be internalized by F students who express it largely in terms of personal de ienies. This strongly demonstrates the personal and emotional ost of failure to students espeially given students dominant assessment-fous. There may be a ase here for re-eduating students and ourselves as tutors in terms of how we pereive failure. Internalizing it as a form of personal de ieny is at one end of a spetrum of responses. An alternative view is that it is a valuable learning experiene in itself that provides a tangible opportunity to understand where improvement and

An exploration of student failure 105 Table 1. Mapping potential explanatory fators of failure Possible failure fator Negative fous of reasoning and the impat of affet Relutant patterns of partiipation and its impat on engagement Tutor expetation-gap and the impat on transition Internalizing failure personal importane External lous of ontrol over learning and the development of ontrol-averse behaviour Student referenes in body of report (F1 F9) F1, F2, F3, F4, F6, F8, F9 F1, F2, F3 F4, F5, F6, F7, F8 F1, F2, F3, F4, F6, F7, F8, F9 F3, F5, F6, F8, F9 F2, F3, F4, F6 development an be made! It is somewhat ironi that failure itself an be a strong building blok of learning and, as suh, our attitude towards it may warrant hange. Failure is an important and personal event in the life of a student. Table 1 maps the partiular features identi ed above to individual students. Suh mapping demonstrates how the experiene of eah student relates to partiular fators. This is important in that it rstly reognises the individual nature of eah student and the reasons underlying their onsequent failure whilst at the same time establishing areas of ommon experiene and potential rationales for failure aross the student sample. Conlusions and further researh The identi ation of suh ommon features is useful in terms of understanding the fators that may render students suseptible to failure and hene permit the early identi ation of vulnerable students and the development and targeting of appropriate support mehanisms to mitigate any potential impairment to aademi performane. Using the areas of differene derived from the study the authors propose to attempt to develop a preditive model of aademi performane with the potential of ating as an early warning indiator of those students who exhibit the behaviour patterns and attitudes that may render them suseptible to failure at the start of their studies. Suh a preditive tool does have potential ethial issues onneted with it in terms of providing an appropriate response aimed at support and remedy, subsequent to dif ulties being identi ed. It is the intention to develop suh support strategies in tandem with the preditive model to obviate suh ethial issues. Aknowledgements The authors are indebted to the university students who took part in the researh and to the many onstrutive omments of the anonymous reviewer. Referenes Adolphs, R., and Damasio, A. (2001) The interation of affet and ognition: a neuro-biologial perspetive. In J.P. Forgas (ed.) Handbook of Affet and Soial Cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 39 47.

106 Graia and Jenkins Auyeung, P.K. and Sands, D.F. (1994) Prediting suess in rst year university aounting using gender-based learning analysis. Aounting Eduation: an international journal 3(3), 259 72. Baldwin, B.A. and Howe, K.R. (1982) Seondary-level study of aounting and subsequent performane in the rst ollege ourse, The Aounting Review 57(3), 619 26. Barnett, R. (1992) Improving University Eduation. Milton Keynes: SRHE and Open University Press. Bartlett, S., Peel, M.J., Pendlebury, M. and Groves, R. (1992) An Analysis of Student Performane in Undergraduate Aounting Courses. ACCA Oasional Paper 13. London: Assoiation of Chartered Certi ed Aountants. Bartlett, S., Peel, M.J. and Pendlebury, M. (1993) From fresher to nalist: a three year analysis of student performane on an aounting degree programme. Aounting Eduation: an international journal 2(2), 111 22. Bergin, J.L. (1983) The effet of previous aounting study on student performane in rst ollegelevel nanial aounting ourse. Issues in Aounting Eduation Vol. 1, 19 28. Bogdan, R.G. and Biklen, S.K. (1992) Qualitative Researh for Eduation, 2nd edn. Boston, MA: Allyn & Baon. Boler, M. (1999) Feeling Power Emotions and Eduation. London: Routledge. Boud, D. (1988) Developing Student Autonomy in Learning, 2nd edn. London: Kogan Page. Brook eld, S. (1988) Understanding and Failitating Adult Learning. San Franiso: Jossey Bass. Candy, P., Crebert, G. and O Leary, J. (1994) Developing Lifelong Learners through Undergraduate Eduation. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Servie. Chapman, K. (1994) Variability of degree results in geography in UK universities. Studies in Higher Eduation 19(1), 89 103. Chapman, K. (1996) Inter-Institutional Variability of Degree Results. London: HEQE. Chapman, K. (1997) Degrees of differene: variability of degree results in UK Universities, Higher Eduation 33 137 53. Ciarrohi, J., Forgas, J.P. and Mayer, J.D. (2001) Emotional Intelligene in Everyday Life A Sienti Inquiry. Philadelphia: Psyhology Press. Doran, B.M., Benillon, M.L. and Smith, C.G. (1991) Determinants of student performane in aounting priniples I and II. Issues In Aounting Eduation 6(1), Spring, 73 84. Eskew, N. and Faley, R.H. (1988) Some determinants of student performane in the rst ollegelevel nanial aounting ourse. The Aounting Review 63(1), 137 47. Farley, A. and Ramsey, A. L. (1988) Student performane in rst year tertiary aounting ourses and its relationship to seondary aounting eduation. Aounting and Finane 28(1) 29 44. Fraser, A.A., Lyttle, R. and Stolle, C. (1978) Pro le of female aounting majors: aademi performane and behavioral harateristis. The Woman CPA, Otober, 18 21. Goleman, D. (1995) Emotional Intelligene: Why it Can Matter More Than IQ. New York: Bantam. Gul, F.A. and Fong, S.C.C. (1993) Prediting suess for introdutory aounting students: some further Hong Kong evidene. Aounting Eduation: an international journal 2(1), 33 42. Hussey, J. and Hussey, R. (1997) Business Researh: a Pratial Guide for Undergraduate and Postgraduate Students. Basingstoke: Mamillan. Kluever, R. and Green, K. (1998) The responsibility sale: a researh note on dissertation ompletion. Eduational and Psyhologial Measurement 58(3), 520 31. Knowles, M. (1975) Self-Direted Learning: A Guide for Learners and Teahers. New York: Assoiation Press. Koh, M.Y. and Koh, H.C. (1999) The determinants of performane in an aounting programme. Aounting Eduation: an international journal 8(1), 13 29.

An exploration of student failure 107 Lipe, M.G. (1989) Further evidene on the performane of female versus male aounting students. Issues in Aounting Eduation 4(1) Spring, 144 52. Maxwell, J.A. (1996) Qualitative Researh Design. California: Thousand Oaks, Sage. Mithell, F. (1985) Shool aounting quali ations and student performane in the First Level university aounting examination. Aounting and Business Researh 15(58), Spring, 81 86. Mithell, F. (1988) High shool aounting and student performane in the rst level university aounting ourse: a UK study. Journal of Aounting Eduation 6(2), 279 91. Morgan, D.L. (1997) Fous Groups as Qualitative Researh. California: Thousand Oaks, Sage. Muthler, J.F., Turner, J.H. and Williams, D.D. (1987) The performane of female versus male aounting students. Issues in Aounting Eduation 1(1) Marh, 63 68. Naser, K. and Peel, M.J. (1998) An exploratory study of the impat of intervening variables on student performane in a Priniples of Aounting Course. Aounting Eduation: an international journal, 7(3), 209 23. Paton-Salzberg, R. and Lindsay, R.O. (1993) The Effet of Paid Employment on the Aademi Performane of Full-Time Students in Higher Eduation. Oxford: Brookes University. Rogers, C.R. (1969) Freedom to Learn. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill. Shroeder, N.W. (1986) Previous aounting eduation and ollege-level aounting examination performane. Issues in Aounting Eduation 1(1), 37 47. Suls, J. (2001) Affet, stress and personality. In J.P. Forgas (ed.) Handbook of Affet and Soial Cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 127 49. Tho, L.M. (1994) Some evidene on the determinants of student performane in the University of Malaya Introdutory Aounting Course. Aounting Eduation: an international journal 3(4), 331 40. Tyson, T. (1989) Grade performane in introdutory aounting ourses. Why female students outperform males. Issues in Aounting Eduation Spring 4(1), 153 60.