The trouble with a “No child left behind” approach to ethics education.
As part of an ongoing research project that allows me to speak with certified fraud examiners, auditors and accounting educators around the country, I take an informal survey about progress in areas of education and professional judgment. Respondents have indicated an increase in fraud examinations recently[i], along with general disappointment in both college and continuing professional education programs for their ability to address practical business issues. Additionally, despite the efforts and focus on ethics education, a consensus of accounting professors indicates concern about the ethical judgment abilities of accounting students set to enter the workforce this fall.
The continuing problem with scandals in business have led researchers to question whether the ethics education that our business and accounting students receive is effective, or perhaps even contributes to the problem. Intuitively, increased education would lead to better moral reasoning, but evidence does not seem to support this, even indicating a negative association between business education and moral reasoning[ii]. Some researchers argue that this could be because business education in the U.S. focuses almost solely on shareholder value and not the ways that accounting decisions affect various stakeholders[iii].
Ethics education, now a core requirement in nearly all accounting curricula, is structured through regulatory agencies and influenced by codified standards. The National Association of State Boards of accountancy (NASBA) provides guidance to state boards of accountancy about the proper education requirements for CPA candidates and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) plays a major part as well, due to their role in determining the content of the Uniform CPA Examination. There is a growing condemnation of ethics education for being couched in philosophy rather than considered at the practical business level[iv], and criticized because it takes a “one size fits all” approach by being based upon the codified structure of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct (see endnote iii).
A study published in Issues in Accounting Education[v] found that the context in which an ethical dilemma is considered is paramount, and that accounting students are not able to flexibly transfer their ethics knowledge into different contexts. The study suggests that when the students learn about ethical dilemmas in the context of codification, they then view all problems through the lens of codified ethical principles. These findings are consistent with the suggestion from other research that the “one size fits all” approach to ethics education may not provide the decision-making skills required for the real world[vi]. Another study examined the effectiveness of a capstone course on professional responsibility required for seniors in accounting[vii]. This study showed that fewer students found a dubious accounting adjustment to be unethical than before they took the course. The authors suggested that perhaps this was because the students were exposed to so many scandals they perceived it to be common. This same study indicated that the use of case analyses did not develop a “sense of moral obligation” or “abilities needed to deal with ethical conflicts or dilemmas”; supporting the notion that context is critical to judgment processes.
Parallel criticisms have surfaced between ethics education and the No Child Left Behind Act. This research suggests more emphasis may need to be placed on exploring a topic from multiple perspectives and that a codified structure can act as a distraction to ethical thought processes.
[i] This coincides with larger, formal surveys like the recent report from PricewaterhouseCoopers showing fraud on the rise in the U.S. as well as recent surveys indicating that accountants and auditors believe that the threat of fraud is increasing. See http://www.pwc.com/en_GX/gx/economic-crime-survey/assets/GECS_GLOBAL_REPORT.pdf
[ii] Thorne, L. (2001). Refocusing ethics education in accounting: An examination of accounting students’ tendency to use their cognitive moral capability. Journal of Accounting Education 19(2) 103-117
[iii] Jennings, M. (2004). Incorporating ethics and professionalism into accounting education and research: A discussion of the voids and advocacy for training in seminal works in business ethics. Issues in Accounting Education 19(2) 7-26
[iv] Langdenderfer, H. & Rockness, J. (1989) Integrating ethics into the accounting curriculum: Issues, problems, and solutions. Issues in Accounting Education vol4 58-69
[v] Fleming, D., Romanus, R., & Lightner, S. (2009). The effect of professional context on accounting students’ moral reasoning. Issues in accounting education 24(1) 13-30.
[vi] Hurt, R. (2006). We don’t have ethics here…or do we? Strategic Finance 87(9) 16-17.
[vii] Shawver, T. (2006). An exploratory study assessing the effectiveness of a professional responsibility course. Global Perspectives on Accounting Education Vol. 3 49-66.
Copyright protected by Digiprove © 2012 Toby Groves
Mark E.
Your study seems to be a worthwhile contribution to the effectiveness of ethics education. It just makes sense to me. Perhaps the tendency to focus on a more rigid, codified structure in ethics education is tied more to apprehension (in the sense of being caught or arrested) than comprehension. Is our goal to minimize the impact of our questionable actions or conceal them from stakeholders or is it to confront the possibility of fraud in each of us individually and own up to our deceptions? Adherence to the law is said to be the lowest level of morality. Is it not easier to meet our perceptions of the letter of the law than to strive for the spirit of the higher principle behind the law? Is loyality to an organization more highly valued than honesty and authenticity? If we apply proven principles – there are many we can mostly agree on – to the context of varied scenarios we are exercising our moral muscles and we will be better equipped to prevent fraud and misconduct.
Toby Groves
Mark, thank you. Your point about apprehension or comprehension is right on point. Codes, laws and regulations make it simple for us to know what is right, just not why. And since it is impossible to cover all situations with legislation, we never learn how to reason this for ourselves. This permeates our culture. I will admit that I used to live in this realm and fell prey to it myself.
Angela Z
I think it was very interesting. I especially see value in the point you make in discussing theoretical versus practical applications for ethics questions. I strongly believe that practical application in education. I wonder, after thinking about your writing, whether you can even really teach ethics in a single course. It seems almost ridiculous to me, as ethics are developed over our lifetime and not something I see easily communicated or altered in a single course. Each individual develops a moral compass based on their own experiences and values. Rather, ethics education lacks any focus on how to handle situations that the individual feels are unethical – how not to get caught up in groupthink, for example. I don’t know, as I haven’t done the research you have, but it seems that formal education on ethics is not effective at all, and that ethics is such a fluid concept in that it is slightly different for each individual, that it would be a challenge to effectively create change in the classroom. I’d be interested in your thoughts regarding how the system could be reformed.
Nina
This is really an interesting study and I must say, Angela, I totally agree with you. Teaching ethics in a classroom, taking an exam (multiple choice..?) and then move on to the next courses doesn’t sound like a working approach.
I don’t think that students don’t get what ethics is all about, on the contrary, I think they all know perfectly well how to be a decent person in their private lives and they also want to be that person. In my opinion the problem starts at the end of Toby’s article:
…This study showed that fewer students found a dubious accounting adjustment to be unethical than before they took the course. The authors suggested that perhaps this was because the students were exposed to so many scandals they perceived it to be common. …
Whatever you learn, you have to perform a reality check afterwards and when it comes to ethics, the results are devastating. Ethics just doesn’t seem to be an important part of everyday business life. It does not seem to be “rewarded” to act ethically, it doesn’t seem to pay off. If you “blow the whistle” (which does not always have to be the ethical thing to do) you are in trouble, especially if you are part of senior management.
And just to be clear: I do think there are a lot of people out there who try to act like the famous “honourable merchant” but we don’t get to hear about them; we hear about the scandals and fraudsters and get the impression that if you want to be successful you have to at least bend the rules and often simply break them.
Toby Groves
Perfectly said Nina. Whether at the national regulatory level, or the corporate “code of conduct” level, people subconsciously react to what they perceive is rewarded because that is what is deemed important in that culture or sub-culture. Research indicates (yet another future article) that these sub-conscious cues hold a much greater control over our automatic reactions than the conscious statements or professed “codes”. Forgive an example that’s overused at this point but Enron had a model code of ethics. Thank you for your input.
Toby Groves
Angela, I sincerely appreciate your comments. Particularly, I agree with you that ethics is a lifelong journey, although I didn’t always realize that fact. The research as well as what we all observe in our daily lives seems to prove your point that formal ethics education is not effective, at least not currently. I also agree that it is impossible to impart ethics in any number of courses, let alone a single course. In spite of this, as to your question about reform, I hold hopeful ideas and do absolutely believe that ethics education could be of great benefit.
Moral reasoning is undeniably an individual issue, but research also shows (to be addressed in a future article) that we are hardwired to subconsciously absorb what our culture indicates is “important”, and what holds meaning. For the business culture in the United States, we accept that protecting shareholder value is the ethical thing to do. We also trust in the law and fundamentally believe that following accepted codes is proper. Intuitively, it seems so right. These fundamental assumptions make it difficult to see how the automatism of codification strip mines our brains of reasoning ability. Reform can result in meaningful change and enriching education. To do so, in my humble (and I do mean humble) opinion we must break free of the framework of codification and even educate students on the danger of such a framework. We must appreciate the importance of all stakeholders, not just shareholders, like they do in Japan (not to suggest they are corruption-free, another future article). Perhaps most importantly in such an individualistic society, we must introduce that that the how outcomes effect all others holds intrinsic value. Until we make that point “important”, improvement in this area will be difficult. I know that this can be accomplished with the right thinkers in education and industry. Principles over rules, and those in positions of influence saying they approve of views valuing things other than shareholder value.