Innovative Teaching Practice in Accounting Education

INNOVATIVE TEACHING PRACTICE IN ACCOUNTING EDUCATION1
INNOVATIVE TEACHING PRACTICE IN ACCOUNTING EDUCATION
Name:
Course:
Instructor:
Institution:
City (State)
Date:
INNOVATIVE TEACHING PRACTICE IN ACCOUNTING EDUCATION

INNOVATIVE TEACHING PRACTICE IN ACCOUNTING EDUCATION2
Research Methodology
Introduction
Over the last few decades, there has been an anticipation gap between what accounting education
has brought and what accounting practice has established. Practitioners advocate for university
education to train students for particular tasks and environments to prepare them for the realism
of the work setting. Conversely, academics want university teaching to be comprehensive and
broad and to carry an academic facet. The proposed study will use a novel framework to
understand the gap, in the context of India to make essential contributions to knowledge about
the nature of the gap between accounting education and practice in different regions in the world.
Furthermore, this research is expected to make other contributions concerning theory,
methodology, and practice. The study will employ an abductive approach to explore the why and
what reasons for the gap, illustrate its details, and suggest recommendations for bridging it. It
will be the first of its kind in India to analyze the viewpoints of five main groups of stakeholders
in the accounting system (final year students, accounting educators, fresh employees (1-3 year of
experience), employers and the professional body) qualitatively and compare their viewpoints
regarding the proficiencies of accounting graduates.
Research design
This study will adopt mixed research design to explore the interrelationships between teacher
quality, innovation and graduate employment outcomes. According to Vandenberg (2009),
mixed methods research involves philosophical assumptions in addition to other methods of
inquiry. As a methodology, it is blended research approach entails philosophical assumptions
offer guidelines for collection and analysis of data and the combination of quantitative and
qualitative data in a particular survey or series of studies. As Keightley (2010) explain, the

INNOVATIVE TEACHING PRACTICE IN ACCOUNTING EDUCATION3
central premise of a mixed research design is that the utilization of qualitative and quantitative
methods in combination offers better identification of research problems than either of the
method when used alone. Keightley (2010), also elaborates that qualitative and Quantitative
methods complement each other to enhance complete analysis of a study. Vandenberg (2009)
also notes that employing numerous sources of data and more than one techniques of collecting
data strengthens the results of a survey by supporting their cross-validation.
Briefly, quantitative research entails quantifying the research problem through the generation of
numerical data or data that can be changed to statistics (Dellaportas, 2006). According to
Vandenberg (2009), quantitative research is usually used to quantify behaviors, sentiments,
attitudes, and other defined factors and generalize outcomes from a larger sample population.
Quantitative surveys employ quantifiable data to uncover patterns and formulate facts in research
(Keightley, 2010). According to Dellaportas (2006), quantitative methods of data collection are
more structured compared to qualitative methods of data collection. Quantitative methods of data
collection include the different forms of surveys such as mobile surveys, online surveys, and
paper surveys, telephone interviews, face-to-face interviews, longitudinal surveys, online polls,
systematic observations and website interceptors.
On the other hand, qualitative studies capture the reality in extensive details and are mainly
useful when the emphasis is on a natural or contemporary setting with human as the main subject
of investigation (Keightley, 2010). According to Vandenberg (2009), a qualitative survey can be
used to designate, create or test a theory. Notwithstanding, the qualitative research method has
been disapproved for missing systematic generalizability (Vandenberg, 2009). Nonetheless, it
has been contended that the aim of the qualitative survey is not to demonstrate inferences