Author
Abstract
Students’ perceptions of a particular assessment type seems to influence their attitude to preparing for and taking the assessment. The literature suggests that open-book assessment allows a better understanding of the content of a subject area, thus better preparing students for real-life situations. Hence, this study sought an in-depth understanding of taxation students’ perceptions of open-book assessment in the process of qualifying as chartered accountants. Using already published findings on a focus group of taxation students’ perceptions prior to exposure to open-book assessment, an interactive qualitative analysis (IQA) method was again adopted to analyse interviews with taxation students on their perceptions of open-book assessment after exposure to such assessment. The new findings were compared to those for the focus group. The affinities that emerged from the focus group study elicited various comments from the interviewees. One difference between the two groups was that the focus group saw the different approach affinity as the final outcome of the system created by the IQA, while the interviewees regarded this affinity as the system's primary starting point. Secondary differences between the two groups pertained to the affinities encouragement, improved quality of answers, negative environment and time management. The groups agreed on good preparation, back-up, general advantages and negative symptoms of open-book assessment. This study concludes that when students need to be prepared for open-book assessment, the different approach affinity should be a point of departure.
Suggested Citation
Hanneke Du Preez, 2015.
"Taxation students’ perceptions of open-book assessment: a follow-up interactive qualitative analysis,"
South African Journal of Accounting Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(1), pages 84-99, January.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:rsarxx:v:29:y:2015:i:1:p:84-99
DOI: 10.1080/10291954.2015.999457
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rsarxx:v:29:y:2015:i:1:p:84-99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rsar .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.