Progression to intermediate level courses; is a “pass” enough?

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to test the impact of a rule that affects tertiary students progressing from an introductory level finance course to intermediate level. The rule restricted students from progressing until they achieved a higher grade than just a “pass” mark.

Design/methodology/approach

Archival data were gathered from 11 semesters regarding student performance pre and post the rule being introduced.

Findings

Results show that the rule was associated with an increase in the chances of success at intermediate level for those students enrolled after the rule was introduced.

Practical implications

This paper’s main contribution regards the evidence that increasing prior learning at an introductory level has a positive follow-on effect for students learning at intermediate level. This has a practical implication for educators, as the rule has shown to increase the chance of success for knowledge development in the first year of studies.

Originality/value

The setting for this paper is unique and could potentially be replicated elsewhere. In 1980, Schaffer and Calkins called for an evaluation of the pre-requisites necessary for finance education at the tertiary level, and this paper answer this call stating that pre-requisites can contribute to the academic success of finance students.

Citation

Beatson, N.J., Berg, D.A.G., Smith, J.K. and Smith-Han, C. (2019), "Progression to intermediate level courses; is a “pass” enough?", Pacific Accounting Review, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 275-287. https://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-03-2018-0025