Consistency in teaching accounting in the light of Professor Jan Winieckis considerations

M. Garstka
{"title":"Consistency in teaching accounting in the light of Professor Jan Winieckis considerations","authors":"M. Garstka","doi":"10.5604/01.3001.0016.2905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The goal of this article is to verify if the observations of different views described by Jan Winiecki in the article Reflections on teaching economics: some observations and some proposals are also present in the teaching of accounting. It also investigates whether the proposals for developing a uniform way to present content are applicable in this area. Methodology/approach: The study was carried out based on the assumption that accounting plays a central role in a rational economy and used the critical analysis of the literature and student surveys.Findings: The answers to the questions lead to the conclusion that most students expected their lecturers views to be uniform, although, in reality, there are minor differences. Conclusions regarding the reasons for the expectation of uniformity focus on the ease of understanding, examination and graduation considerations, opportunities to broaden awareness, and to make accounting choices independently. Research limitations: A limitation is the number of respondents. Another limitation is that this research presents only the view of one group students.Originality/value: In accounting, different views can be presented. The main differences at the macro level relate to the purpose and objective of reporting, while at the micro level, they appear in the areas of valuation, simplification, and disclosures. To formulate and achieve learning outcomes, it is necessary to decide whom, what, and for what purpose a university teaches.","PeriodicalId":53342,"journal":{"name":"Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowosci","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowosci","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0016.2905","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The goal of this article is to verify if the observations of different views described by Jan Winiecki in the article Reflections on teaching economics: some observations and some proposals are also present in the teaching of accounting. It also investigates whether the proposals for developing a uniform way to present content are applicable in this area. Methodology/approach: The study was carried out based on the assumption that accounting plays a central role in a rational economy and used the critical analysis of the literature and student surveys.Findings: The answers to the questions lead to the conclusion that most students expected their lecturers views to be uniform, although, in reality, there are minor differences. Conclusions regarding the reasons for the expectation of uniformity focus on the ease of understanding, examination and graduation considerations, opportunities to broaden awareness, and to make accounting choices independently. Research limitations: A limitation is the number of respondents. Another limitation is that this research presents only the view of one group students.Originality/value: In accounting, different views can be presented. The main differences at the macro level relate to the purpose and objective of reporting, while at the micro level, they appear in the areas of valuation, simplification, and disclosures. To formulate and achieve learning outcomes, it is necessary to decide whom, what, and for what purpose a university teaches.
从Jan Winieckis教授的观点看会计教学的一致性
目的:本文的目的是验证Jan Winiecki在《经济学教学反思:一些观察和一些建议》一文中所描述的不同观点的观察是否也存在于会计教学中。本文还研究了开发统一的方式来表示内容的建议是否适用于这一领域。方法/方法:该研究是基于会计在理性经济中起核心作用的假设进行的,并使用了对文献和学生调查的批判性分析。调查结果:从问题的答案可以得出这样的结论:大多数学生希望他们的讲师的观点是一致的,尽管实际上存在微小的差异。关于期望统一的原因的结论集中在易于理解,考试和毕业的考虑,扩大认识的机会,以及独立做出会计选择。研究局限:局限在于调查对象的数量。另一个限制是,这项研究只展示了一组学生的观点。独创性/价值:在会计中,可以提出不同的观点。宏观层面的主要差异与报告的目的和目标有关,而微观层面的主要差异则表现在估值、简化和披露方面。为了制定和实现学习成果,有必要决定大学教谁、教什么、教什么目的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信