Introduction

We believe that there has never been a more exciting time to study accounting. Accounting tools and techniques are embedded in our daily lives and can help society address some of the largest global challenges.

Despite this, many have a stereotypical image of accountants and view the discipline as purely technical. This is often compounded by university accounting programmes that seek to mirror the requirements of professional institutes’ training programmes.

We suggest that, in a world where technology is increasingly sophisticated and accountants are increasingly engaged in assessing societal impact, education in our discipline must instead focus on a holistic definition of accounting and its role in society. More than ever, learners need to be critical thinkers who are comfortable with ambiguity and different contexts. They must learn to evaluate knowledge contextually and develop the judgement to evaluate it qualitatively.

Calls for change in accounting education are not new, with concerns being raised as far back as the 1980s.1 There have been past attempts to reform accounting education, yet they have not been impactful.2

What makes our Principles of Accounting textbook different from prior initiatives?

First is the timing. The accounting profession is facing continued criticism for its involvement in high-profile corporate failures and ethical breaches.

Second is the broadened scope it implies; financial reporting now seeks to incorporate sustainability reporting. This is already driving changes to the curriculum and considerations beyond profit motivation. We reflect that fact in this work.

Third, Accounting Streams, the global group of accounting educators and researchers that has devised Principles of Accounting, has taken on the challenge at a grassroots level across a wide range of institutions to develop materials to support practical change in the accounting curriculum.

Principles of Accounting adopts the definition of accounting as

a technical, social and moral practice concerned with the sustainable utilisation of resources and proper accountability to stakeholders to enable the flourishing of organisations, people and nature.3

We add to the momentum that has been created through the emerging body of research that draws on this wider conceptualisation.4

We embrace the enhanced definition throughout the textbook, questioning assumptions commonly made in introductory courses to include a broader view of organisations, ethics and sustainability. We encourage learners to question the status quo, consider alternative perspectives and become independent thinkers.

As a result, we seek to engage learners with the inherent dilemmas and tensions that are often overlooked in introductory accounting courses. By doing so in the introductory accounting course, we aim to build learners’ engagement, critical thinking and communication skills, positioning them as lifelong learners equipped with the skills to excel in their careers and make a meaningful contribution to society.

Accounting Streams publications are open to anyone, anywhere, who wants to use them. They are an international production, with a large group of contributors investing their time and expertise to develop the materials. We are building a community of passionate learners and educators who will share their ideas, experiences and knowledge with us. This means we are continually enhancing the materials so that they meet the needs of our community. The ‘Streams’ in our name, Accounting Streams, stands for ‘Sharing, Transparency, Reporting and Ethics accounting for Management and Society’. We think that reflects what accounting should be about.

Susan Smith, Richard Murphy and Jennifer Rose
Principles of Accounting editorial team
November 2024

References

  • Accounting Education Change Commission (AECC). (1990). Objectives of education for accountants: Position statement number one. Issues in Accounting Education [online]. (Fall), 307–312.
  • Albrecht, W. S., & Sack, R. J. (2000). Accounting education: Charting the course through a perilous future. Accounting Education Series (No. 16). American Accounting Association.
  • American Accounting Association Committee on the Future Structure, Content and Scope of Accounting Education. (1986). Future accounting education: Preparing for the expanding profession.
  • Arthur Andersen & Co, Arthur Young, Coopers & Lybrand, Deloitte Haskins & Sells, Ernst & Whinney, Peat Marwick Main & Co, Price Waterhouse, & Touche Ross. (1989). Perspectives on education: Capabilities for success in the accounting profession.
  • Bedford, N., Bartholomew, E. E., Bowsher, C. A., Brown, A. L., Davidson, S., Horngren, C. T., & Wheeler, J. T. (1986). Special report – Future accounting education: Preparing for the expanding profession. Issues in Accounting Education, 1(1).
  • Behn, B. K., Ezzell, W. F., Murphy, L. A., Rayburn, J. D., Stith, M. T., & Strawser, J. R. (2012). The Pathways Commission on Accounting Higher Education: Charting a national strategy for the next generation of accountants. Issues in Accounting Education, 27(3), 595–600.
  • Carnegie, G. D., Gomes, D., Parker, L. D., McBride, K., & Tsahuridu, E. (2024). How accounting can shape a better world: Framework, analysis, and research agenda. Meditari Accountancy Research, 32(5), 1529–1555.
  • Carnegie, G., Parker, L., & Tsahuridu, E. (2021). It’s 2020: What is accounting today? Australian Accounting Review, 31(1), 65–73.
  • DEET (1990). Report of the Review of the Accounting Discipline in Higher Education. Australian Government Publishing Service.
  • PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2003). Educating for the public trust: The PricewaterhouseCoopers position on accounting education.
  • Solomons, D., & Berridge, T. M. (1974). Prospectus for a profession. Advisory Board of Accountancy Education.

  1. See, for example, the reports of the Accounting Education Change Commission during the early 1990s, as well as Arthur Andersen et al., 1989; Albrecht & Sack, 2000; Behn et al., 2012; DEET, 1990; PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2003; Solomons & Berridge, 1974. ↩

  2. For example, Accounting Education Change Commission, 1990; Bedford et al., 1986; Behn et al., 2012; Solomons & Berridge, 1974. ↩

  3. Carnegie et al., 2021 ↩

  4. See, for example, a recent special issue Carnegie et al., 2024. ↩