IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/acctfi/v46y2006i5p697-713.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Australian evidence on student expectations and perceptions of introductory business finance

Author

Listed:
  • Balasingham Balachandran
  • Michael Skully
  • Kevin Tant
  • John Watson

Abstract

This study examines the differences in perceptions and expectations between students at the Caulfield and Peninsula campuses of Monash University with different entrance criteria and degree availability to determine whether two different introductory finance subjects should be offered rather than one. Results reported in this study suggest that students at the Caulfield campus are interested in studying a challenging introductory finance subject, whereas students at the Peninsula campus perceived that introductory finance is ‘difficult’. Capital structure and cost of capital topics are statistically significantly ranked higher by Caulfield students than Peninsula students. The results reported in this study revealed that two different introductory finance subjects would be more effective. The core subject at the finance major campus (Caulfield) follows a traditional structure with more emphasis on finance theory, whereas the new subject at the non‐finance campus (Peninsula) places greater emphasis on applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Balasingham Balachandran & Michael Skully & Kevin Tant & John Watson, 2006. "Australian evidence on student expectations and perceptions of introductory business finance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 46(5), pages 697-713, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:acctfi:v:46:y:2006:i:5:p:697-713
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-629X.2006.00193.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-629X.2006.00193.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-629X.2006.00193.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rosina Mladenovic, 2000. "An investigation into ways of challenging introductory accounting students' negative perceptions of accounting," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 135-155.
    2. Eisenbeis, Robert A, 1977. "Pitfalls in the Application of Discriminant Analysis in Business, Finance, and Economics," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 32(3), pages 875-900, June.
    3. Andrew Worthington & Helen Higgs, 2003. "Factors explaining the choice of a finance major: the role of students' characteristics, personality and perceptions of the profession," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21.
    4. John Marangos, 2002. "How University Students Were Planning To Study Introductory Microeconomics? Were Their Study Plans Realised?," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 21(2), pages 45-60, June.
    5. Paul Azzalini & Sandra Hopkins, 2002. "What Business Students Think Of Economics: Results From A Survey Of Second Year Students," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 21(1), pages 11-17, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hunjra, Ahmed Imran & Rehman, Kashif-Ur- & Ahmad, Abrar & Safwan, Nadeem & Rehman, Ijaz-Ur, 2009. "Factors explaining the choice of finance major: students’ perception towards finance profession," MPRA Paper 40687, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Tiffany Hutcheson & Harry Tse, 2004. "Learning by Students at University," Working Paper Series 136, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.
    3. Beverley Jackling & Claude Calero, 2006. "Influences on Undergraduate Students' Intentions to become Qualified Accountants: Evidence from Australia," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 419-438.
    4. Montgomery, D. & Swinnen, G. & Vanhoof, K., 1997. "Comparison of some AI and statistical classification methods for a marketing case," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 312-325, December.
    5. Lin, Hsiou-Wei William & Lo, Huai-Chun & Wu, Ruei-Shian, 2016. "Modeling default prediction with earnings management," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 306-322.
    6. Kevin M. Baird & Venkateshwaran Narayanan, 2010. "The effect of a change in teaching structure on student performance," Asian Review of Accounting, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 18(2), pages 148-161, July.
    7. Sara Gundersen & Allison Shwachman Kaminaga, 2022. "Presentations To The President: A Role-Play Assignment For A Macroeconomics Principles Class," Journal of Economics Teaching, Journal of Economics Teaching, vol. 7(3), pages 185-199, October.
    8. Martin Vojtek & Evžen Koèenda, 2006. "Credit-Scoring Methods (in English)," Czech Journal of Economics and Finance (Finance a uver), Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, vol. 56(3-4), pages 152-167, March.
    9. En-Der Su & Shih-Ming Huang, 2010. "Comparing Firm Failure Predictions Between Logit, KMV, and ZPP Models: Evidence from Taiwan’s Electronics Industry," Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, Springer;Japanese Association of Financial Economics and Engineering, vol. 17(3), pages 209-239, September.
    10. Chrysovalantis Gaganis & Fotios Pasiouras & Charalambos Spathis & Constantin Zopounidis, 2007. "A comparison of nearest neighbours, discriminant and logit models for auditing decisions," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(1‐2), pages 23-40, January.
    11. Ha-Thu Nguyen, 2016. "Reject inference in application scorecards: evidence from France," EconomiX Working Papers 2016-10, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    12. Harper, Susan D. & Wharton, B. Robert & Traylor, Harlon D., 1985. "A Prediction Of Grain Elevator Bankruptcies Using Linear Discriminant Analysis," 1985 Annual Meeting, August 4-7, Ames, Iowa 278559, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Ibtissem Baklouti, 2014. "A Psychological Approach To Microfinance Credit Scoring Via A Classification And Regression Tree," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(4), pages 193-208, October.
    14. Richard B. Dull & Lydia L. F. Schleifer & Jeffrey J. McMillan, 2015. "Achievement Goal Theory: The Relationship of Accounting Students' Goal Orientations with Self-efficacy, Anxiety, and Achievement," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 152-174, April.
    15. Anthony L. Loviscek & Frederick D. Crowley, 1988. "Analyzing Changes in Municipal Bond Ratings: A Different Perspective," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 25(2), pages 124-132, April.
    16. Karlsson, Per & Noela, Massa, 2022. "Beliefs influencing students’ career choices in Sweden and reasons for not choosing the accounting profession," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    17. Ha Thu Nguyen, 2016. "Reject inference in application scorecards: evidence from France," Working Papers hal-04141601, HAL.
    18. Hussein A. Abdou & John Pointon, 2011. "Credit Scoring, Statistical Techniques And Evaluation Criteria: A Review Of The Literature," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(2-3), pages 59-88, April.
    19. Robert T. Daigler & Bruce D. Fielitz, 1981. "A Multiple Discriminant Analysis Of Technical Indicators On The New York Stock Exchange," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 4(3), pages 169-182, September.
    20. Paolo Angelis & Fulvio Gismondi & Riccardo Ottaviani, 1994. "A non-parametric statistical model for the control of Italian insurance companies," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 17(1), pages 69-84, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:acctfi:v:46:y:2006:i:5:p:697-713. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaanzea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.