Integrating concepts from accounting, American history and English literature: A cluster course approach

Journal of Accounting Educofion, Vol. 7, pp. 69-82, 1989 Printed in the USA. All rights reserved.

Copyright

0 1989 Maxwell

0748-5751189 $3.00+.00 Pergamon Macmillan plc

INTEGRATING CONCEPTS FROM ACCOUNTING, AMERICAN HISTORY AND ENGLISH LITERATURE: A CLUSTER COURSE APPROACH Michael L. Fetters James Hoopes Martin ‘lkopp BABSON COLLEGE Abstract: Using the common themes of (1) value assessment, and (2) interpretation of reality, the authors present a cluster course model to better integrate liberal arts and business courses. This approach enables students to achieve a depth of knowledge in the primary course for which they are enrolled while achieving breadth of knowledge in other areas by exploring connections among academic disciplines. The cluster course model also promotes analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application of knowledge gained in one area of study to different disciplines. The authors encourage experimentation with this model as a means of improving students’ abilities to integrate knowledge from different disciplines, promote curriculum coordination, and encourage a faculty’s professional growth.

As teachers we continually struggle with the issues of integration and extrapolation of knowledge. Can and will our students apply in other courses what they have learned in ours? How many times, for example, do we need to teach present value concepts before the students understand and freely apply these techniques in marketing or business policy courses? How many grammatical errors must we correct before the errors will not be repeated? In sum, how do we encourage our students not to learn within the tunnel vision of a course or a discipline, but to learn with visions of applications in other courses or disciplines? This article discusses an innovative program, termed Cluster Courses, which addresses these issues. With an American history, English literature and financial accounting cluster (ALH) as a basis for discussion, the authors explain the cluster concept, discuss the preparation necessary for its implementation, and make recommendations for future cluster efforts.

LEARNING THEORY AND LEARNING STYLE THEORY Based on a study that found accounting majors to have a variety of learning styles, Baker, Simon, and Bazeli (1986) recommend that “ . . . faculty should make sure that a variety of learning opportunities are presented to students” (Baker, Simon, & Brazeli, 1986, p. 11). They further concluded “ . . . a goal of each student should be towards improving his or her weaknesses so s/he will be able to learn from the large variety of different 69

70

M. L. Fetters, J. Hoopes, and M. Tropp

environments that will be faced in the business world” (p. 11). In other words, both students and teachers have a responsibility to expand as well as to improve teaching and learning styles in order to enable an optimal learning environment, Such an optimal learning environment can be developed within the taxonomy of educational objectives developed by Benjamin Bloom and his colleagues (Bloom, 1956). The six hierarchical learning objectives are: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Knowledge, the initial step in the hierarchy, is defined as remembering ideas, facts or phenomena in a form close to that originally encountered. Synthesis means the ability to draw upon elements of many sources and communicate these elements in a newly developed thought structure. Evaluation is defined as synthesis with a value dimension. Successful teachers must create a learning environment in which students can grow from the knowledge acquisition outcome level to synthesis and evaluation levels. Students learn using a variety of learning styles. Teachers must be sensitive to different learning styles and the interaction between learning and teaching style preferences. Learning style differences between teacher and students may diminish the effectiveness of the teacher-student relationship. A variety of instructional methods should be employed by a teacher to help create an optimal learning environment for the greatest number of students (Plovnick, 1975; Sadler, Plovnick, & Snape, 1978). THE CLUSTER COURSE MODEL The Cluster Course model was developed and piloted in order to create a learning environment which encourages students to integrate material from one academic discipline into another (Bloom’s analysis, synthesis and evaluation); to create a variety of learning opportunities for students; and to encourage faculty to consider different teaching methods. Two college-wide objectives also fostered the development of this model: better integ~tion of the liberal arts and business curricula and reinforcement of high quality written and oral communication throughout the curriculum. The college set the goal of integrating the liberal arts and the business curricula to impress upon our students how important the knowledge and skills gained in Iiberal arts courses are to their personal and professional lives. Clear analytical thinking may not only be gained in business and quantitative courses, but also may be gained in philosophy, English literature, and other liberal arts courses. Historical analysis gained in a history elective may also help a student understand corporate culture and its importance in policy decisions. The college addressed the goal of high quality communication by encouraging writing assignments in most courses. Termed ~‘Communication across the Curriculum,” attainment of this goal has been aided by speech and

A Cluster Course Approach

71

writing centers. The purpose of these centers is to help generate better communication in two ways. First, the writing and speech centers work with faculty in the development of writing and speaking projects. For instance, a practice introduced by these centers was to encourage faculty to incorporate enough time for multiple student drafts of assignments. This enabled faculty to better guide student projects and receive more focused papers. The students get used to the writing and/or speaking process and receive help from the centers during the process. Second, the centers work directly with students to improve their speaking and writing. This review reinforces what the students learned in their composition and oral communication courses and makes it much easier for the faculty to read or listen to the final product. It is also reasonable to tell a student that a poorly written paper will not be graded until it has been reviewed by the writing center staff. Within this academic environment, the cluster course model has evolved with the following seven elements: 1. Autonomous courses from distinct disciplines must be involved in the cluster. This model allows the instructor to stay primarily in his or her discipline while promoting integration across disciplines. Students are assisted in seeing the common themes, not in one course or discipline (typically the team teaching model), but within three disciplines. Because students are doing assignments using different disciplines but for specific course requirements, the students must be active participants in the integration of the subjects. 2. There must be common themes, issues, problems or historical periods studied in the cluster. The clustering cannot be forced. If no commonalities exist, then the cluster may harm the educational experience. However, this constraint should not hinder initial discussions of possible course combinations. Rather, after initial explorations, common themes should be clearly and easily stated. If this cannot be done, the cluster is not feasible. 3. There must be common reading materials among courses. This element actually reinforces the preceding element and helps to insure strong connections made by the clustering faculty. 4. Faculty seminars are used in the critical planning stage. Cluster courses were developed to integrate the undergraduate curriculum. Early faculty seminars are necessary to coordinate the various clusters and to allow faculty to share ideas on how they will implement the cluster model. Since most cluster assignments deal with oral or written communication, the seminar helps the faculty develop and evaluate written and oral assignments.

M. L. Fetters, J. Hoopes, and M. Tropp

72

There must be comm5n sessions or the students should enroN in ail of the cluster courses. Our initial development of the cluster concept required enrollment in all of the cluster courses. However, as we expanded the cluster experiences, good cluster ideas could not be operationalized because our students could not or would not enroll in the three courses that made up a particular cluster. Rather than reducing the number of clusters, we dichotomized the cluster into “tight” and “loose” clusters. Loose clusters were defined as courses linked with common themes and common meetings. Tight clusters were defined as all students taking all three cluster courses during the semester. 6. There must be e~mm~n writing and/or speaking assignments. Assignments requiring the students to make the interdisciplinary connections are an important part of evaluating the cluster experience as well as reinforcing the linkages students make among the disciplines, This also reinforced our secondary objective of teaching communication across the curriculum. 7. Regular cluster-fact&y meetings must accompany the teaching of the cluster. Control over the clusters, immediate evaluation of student reactions, and possibilities for expanded connections make regular cluster-faculty meetings necessary. The faculty must be well coordinated in their cluster efforts if the students are to receive the maximum benefits of the integration. 5.

In this pilot work, initial clusters were developed because of faculty interest in the cluster concept and possible links between courses shared by those faculty. The accounting-history-literature cluster was formed because the historian needed accounting help to study the railroad industry in the 19th century. Once that help began, the common themes of interpreting reality from data presented by others and assessing values became clear to both the accountant and the historian. The cluster model was a way to encourage the students to make such linkages and encourage movement from the base of Bloom’s hierarchic~ educational objectives to the pinnacles of synthesis and evaluation. The literature portion of this AHL triad was explored for two reasons: (1) the college objective to promote the teaching of communication across the curriculum, and (2) the interpretational aspects of any literature course. As we discussed the cluster possibilities, the literature professor talked about teaching students to assess the values of various authors and about what 19th century American writers were doing during the rise and fall of the railroads. Thus links were formed among courses from different disciplines; in this case, financial accounting, history and Iiterature. The common themes in

A Cluster Course Approach

73

these three courses were the concept of value and the interpretation of reality from data presented by others. Students discussed and learned about assessing values within each discipline’s context and also how this concept influences and is viewed by the other disciplines. The students also dealt with interpreting reality from accounting data, 19th century documents, and 19th century literature. Students learned the primary subject for which they were enrolled while being exposed to the other disciplines within the primary subject’s context. For example, history students found that in order to evaluate 19th century reformers such as Henry Varnum Poor, the ability to interpret the accounting data presented by the New York-Erie Railroad was essential. For accounting students, understanding and interpreting the environment and society in which the railroads operated helped the students better understand the accounting policies used and the need for better, generally accepted accounting principles to guide value assessment and financial data interpretation. For literature students, understanding the industrial revolution from a historian’s, as well as from a businessman’s, perspective helped the students understand the values discussed in Whitman’s Leaves of Grass. Cluster courses constructed from the seven elements of the cluster model have the following major advantages: 1. The faculty member remains in his or her primary discipline while diverse disciplines are integrated. 2. Unlike team teaching, two or more faculty are not teaching the same course, thus clustering is not as expensive for the college to implement. 3. Cluster courses achieve depth in the primary area while achieving breadth in other areas by exploring natural connections among academic disciplines. 4. Student comraderie is promoted expecially in tight clusters because they get to know each other in a variety of classes and learning situations. 5. Faculty professional growth in new areas occurs as the cluster assignments develop and faculty interaction increases. 6. Faculty become better coordinated and the students receive more even workloads. Cluster faculty spaced out the workload which was especially helpful for freshmen in making the transition to college.

FACULTY PREPARATION The preparation for clustering was accomplished in several stages. Initially, an exploratory workshop was held for those interested in clustering courses. During this time, the seven elements of the cluster model were delineated, interpreted and refined by the participants. In all, about 20 faculty participated in the exploratory workshop. During the next three

74

M. L. Fetters,

J. Hoopes,

and M. Tropp

months, the clusters were formalized and a small amount of time (< 10 hours) was spent formulating each particular cluster’s objectives. A second, three-day workshop provided a concentrated period of time for the various cluster participants to share ideas and discuss the processes used to formulate their cluster’s agenda. The people who guided this workshop were two professors of communication. Communications professors were perfect for this task. They facilitated communication among participants and helped each of the clusters develop student communication assignments to foster students’ integration of disciplines. As the workshop progressed, each cluster’s statement of purpose improved and the student requirements became clearer. In summary, this second workshop accomplished several objectives. 1. During the workshop, faculty from diverse disciplines grew comfortable working together. Barriers to communication because of ignorance about another’s discipline were substantially reduced during this threeday period. This not only helped the current cluster groupings but expanded visions of other possible clusters. 2. Faculty listed and discussed the difficulties of clustering encountered to date. This was extremely helpful in promoting frank discussion and in the development of procedures to minimize the realized, as well as the projected difficulties. 3. Part of the workshop attempted to develop student assignments to meet the cluster objectives. Concentrated faculty time to accomplish this assignment was critical to a good start for the cluster planning. 4. Faculty discussed writing and oral communication projects. Individuals were videotaped and had their own writings critiqued as part of the procedure to learn how to prepare better communication assignments. This experience was critical as it made faculty formulate exactly what type of assignments to give the students. The educational goals of each course, the objectives of the cluster, student workload and faculty workload were considered when developing these assignments. The remainder of the preparation was cluster specific. Each group of professors established its own cluster’s methods and timetable to develop and deliver the cluster courses. For our cluster, we decided on the number of joint sessions (3), a case approach, and basically outlined the case. Planning sessions focused on sharing of specific course materials. Each of the three professors in the cluster thoroughly outlined his course, including objectives, content, timetable, typical assignments and teaching style. Professors then exchanged assigned reading material. The accounting professor read Walt Whitman’s Leaves of Grass (Wilbur, 1969) and Alfred Chandler’s The Visible Hand (Chandler, 1977). The literature professor read Financial Accounting (Flamholtz, Diamond, & Flamholtz, 1986) and The Visible

A Cluster Course Approach

75

Hand. The history professor read the same accounting textbook and Leaves of Grass. One of the major benefits of the cluster model became readily apparent during these planning sessions. It was not merely the readings, but the combining of three experts in three quite different disciplines that made the cluster experience rich from a faculty viewpoint. The accountant did not read accounting history looking for student assignments, but read 19th century documents and analyses of these documents selected by a 19th century historian. The literature professor used accounting and historical readings to better understand the forces that shaped 19th century literature. The structure of the cluster model takes the faculty out of their own discipline into new areas and then back to their discipline with the constant focal point of students and working to improve their learning experiences. The cluster model works because faculty from different disciplines are united for a common purpose around common themes, yet faculty continue to develop expertise within their own discipline and course structure. CLUSTER ASSIGNMENTS The students in our cluster were predominantly freshmen or sophomores enrolled in one of the three courses. There were 20 students in each of the three sections and only two students took more than one of the courses. Thus, the ALH cluster was a loose cluster as defined previously. Financial accounting was a required course for sophomores majoring in a business discipline. The 19th century American history and the English literature courses were electives for freshmen and sophomores. None of the 60 students had previously taken any accounting courses. At the end of the first week of school, we scheduled a joint meeting of our sections. The objective of our first joint session was to open the students’ minds to the possible links between accounting, history, and literature as well as to stimulate their thoughts about the common themes apparent in value assessment and the interpretation of reality. In the context of Bloom’s (1956) Taxonomy of Education Objectives, we wanted the students not only to learn facts within a single course framework (knowledge acquisition) but to apply this knowledge to other disciplines (analysis and synthesis). To do this, each instructor selected an assignment to reinforce the common themes. These assignments were not only appropriate for the common session but also for the sequencing of topics within each cluster course. All 60 students were assigned the three tasks of (1) interpreting a short story by a 19th century feminist, (2) critiquing a position paper by Alexander Hamilton, and (3) deciding when a company should recognize revenue when a complex right of return clause exists. During this first joint session, each professor gave a short introduction to the assignment and then asked for interpretations. For example, the accounting professor discussed the

76

M. L. Fetters, J. Hoopes,

and M. Tropp

concept of revenue recognition. All 60 students had read the conceptual chapters (the first three chapters of an introductory accounting text) and the students then developed different possibilities of revenue recognition, all within generally accepted accounting principles. Central to the discussion were valuing assets and selecting the method which most reasonably represented the situation. The history and literature professors followed the same format. The last 25% of this first joint discussion was spent summarizing and emphasizing common themes. We emphasized that student and faculty are dealing with the same world and face many of the same problems. Consequently, analytical and interpretive skills learned in one discipline generalize to others. The major integrating assignment took place during the eighth week of the semester, at which time case material was covered in each discipline. The case developed by the three cluster professors, centered on the New YorkErie railroad’s (NYER) need for long-term financing during the mid-1800’s. The NYER needed to generate a set of annual reports. The financial data, included in the case was developed from actual annual reports of the NYER and the Baltimore and Ohio. During this time, the financial condition of the NYER was questionable. Henry Varnum Poor, the editor of the American Railway Journal (ARJ) in the mid-1800’s had been attacking the NYER with some success. It was unclear how successful the NYER would be in their attempt to secure funds. Finally, society was beginning to become less enamored with the industrial revolution in general and specifically with the railroad industry. Would the railroad industry continue to prosper or would the difficulties of the NYER be considered an adumbration of trouble? How would society react? What was the societal mood towards the railroads in the mid-1800’s? The case had three analytical components: The financial data and its presentation; the influence of Henry Varnum Poor; and the analysis of the societal mood. Interpretation of reality was required and values had to be assessed. Background reading for this case was a review of basic accounting concepts and financial statement development as well as chapters on accounting for long-term assets (accounting); portions of Chandler’s Visible Hand and ARJ editorials by Henry Varnum Poor (history); and Whitman’s Leaves of Grass (literature). These reading assignments were assigned to all of the cluster students. The final written assignments were different for each course. The history students had to write about Poor and analyze the reform movement. The literature students had to analyze Whitman’s Leaves of Grass and how it reflected American society in the 1800’s. The accounting students wrestled with the level of required disclosure, the lack of depreciation policies and the revenue-capital expenditure controversy. In each subject area, students’ assignments were focused in their portions of the loose cluster, but the students had to incorporate and integrate the

A Cluster

Course

Approach

77

other disciplines into their written assignments. The history students had to analyze the impact of the railroads on society and evaluate reformers such as Henry Varnum Poor. Critical to their analysis was an assessment of Poor’s financial arguments about the NYER, as well as the NYER’s financial data in the case. Whitman’s portrait of society in Leaves of Grass was used by the students to study the railroad’s and Poor’s impact on these huge corporations. The literature students studied Whitman and analyzed Leaves of Grass. Whitman was also a reformer and thus linkages between Poor and Whitman were part of the students’ analysis. Furthermore, the impact these reformers may have had on business and society as encapsulated in the NYER case was also a part of the literature students’ assignment. The accounting students had to develop the annual report as the basis for the NYER’s financing endeavors. They also had to support this report with a five-page explanation to the president of the NYER. The accounting assignment is discussed in more detail in the following section. ACCOUNTING

STUDENTS’ CASE ANALYSIS

The accounting students were placed in a position of deciding whether to capitalize or treat as revenue expenditures a significant dollar amount of cash outflows. They had to prepare an annual report that would form the basis for a $4 million funding request by NYER. The $4 million bond issue was 20% of existing equity. In the early 18.503, Poor was criticai of the management of NYER. As the readership of the ARJ was expanding, evidence existed that his warnings were being heeded by the business community as well as society in general.’ Acting as NYER’s management, students had to decide how to respond to Poor’s criticisms and assess the investing public’s reaction to Poor as well as to the NYER’s proposed bond issue. Too much disclosure as well as too little disclosure could jeopardize the success of the bond issue. The accounting students used their accounting knowledge and previous NYER Annual Reports as support for their revenue-capital expenditure decisions, as well as their disclosure decisions. However, their disclosure decisions also were affected by their study of 19th century history and reformers such as Poor, as well as by their assessment of the level of sophistication of the investing public. The latter assessment was based partially on analysis of Whitman’s “Song of Myself” contained in Leaves of Grass (Wilbur, 1960). In sum, the accounting students had to use material from all three disciplines to analyze the case successfully. Bloom’s hierarchical levels of analysis, synthesis and evaluation across disciplines were required.

IFora morethoroughdiscussionof Poor’simpact, see Chandler,A. D. (1956). Henry Vurnum Cambridge,MA: Harvard University Press.

Poor; Business editor, analyst and reformer

78

M. t. Fetters, J. Hoopes, and M. Tropp

The second joint session focused on the NYER case. During the session, each professor took the lead in discussing his discipline’s connections to the case. Interaction was lively among the three professors as well as among the students. The professors summarized points generally well made and connections missed in the student discussions. We also discussed updated versions of the 19th century railroad tragedies. Society was in awe of the railroads in the early 1800’s and very little scrutiny of the railroads occurred until business turned sour. The students discussed the similarity to the current view of the stock market. Glamour companies and industries shine and are only more carefully studied after disasters. (Real Estate Investment Trusts were given as an example.) The students also noted society’s awe of technological advances in general and space travel specifically. There was little scrutiny of the shuttle project until a disaster-similar to the 19th century railroads when they went unexpectedly bankrupt. These 20th century connections made by students were exciting and we all decided more of these should be explored in future versions of this cluster. After this session, the students had three days to submit their final case solutions. The final session was used to discuss the cluster experience as well as to highlight well-made points contained in the student papers. Examples of the interdisciphnary connections in the accounting assignments were soceity’s awe of technology in the mid-1800’s as America straddled the transformation from an agrarian society to a manufacturing one. Students frequently used quotes from “Song of Myself’ (Wilbur, 1960, pp. 28-93) to highlight this awe as a major reason for society’s continued support of the railroads. The accounting students had more trouble dealing with Poor’s arguments. The students found these arguments to be well balanced and to the point. Many of them thought the NYER might have trouble raising additional funds because of Poor’s persuasive editorials. However, a few students (5/20) argued that Poor was a “reformer” and seen in such light would probably not have the influence to stop the bond issue. This latter point was clearly gained from the history connections made by the students. These points, along with the 20th century connections previously discussed, are excellent examples of Bloom’s synthesis. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS In general, student enthusiasm about their cluster experiences was high. Based on written student evaluations of the AHL cluster and responses to an outside interviewer’s questions,2 students liked the joint classes, the unique

2As part of the NEH grant, a professor of English and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs of the University of Colorado, Dr. Joan Klingel, was hired to evaluate the cluster modef.

A Cluster Course Approach

79

cases analysis and the broader picture given them by the exploration of other disciplines. As a measure of this enthusiasm about 75% of the AHL cluster students said they were going to explore other clusters. The writing assignment, which met the school objectives of communication across the curriculum and required the students to work toward synthesis and evaluation, was seen as valuable by the students. When asked to respond to the statement on the course evaluation form, “The paper(s) was a valuable learning experience,” the average response in the accounting section was 1.8 (1 =strongly agree, S=strongly disagree). In contrast, reaction to a similar statement about the accounting exams was 2.8. As evidenced in the interviewer’s report, the mood on campus is to participate in both tight and loose clusters, where possible. From a faculty viewpoint, enthusiasm remains high. Each of the cluster faculty liked remaining in his or her own course but connecting with courses in other disciplines. Cluster faculty were given guided learning tours by experts in other disciplines-an exciting and efficient way to learn. Cluster faculty also shared and experienced different teaching styles and approaches which hopefully benefit the diverse learning styles of the student poputation. Finally, unlike team teaching which lends itself to occasional courses that link different disciplines, the cluster course model seems more plausible as a way to achieve widespread integration of a college’s curriculum. What follows are specific recommendations for further cluster model deveiopment and experimentation. Environmental Variables Critical to any successful teaching innovation is the support of upper-level administration. For our college, this had three important aspects. One, a major college goal is better integration of the liberal arts and business courses. Second, we had financial support for planning and implementation of the cluster course model. All the particip~ts were paid for the workshops attended and received a course release for their initial p~ticipation, Furthermore, class sizes averaged 20 students instead of the college-wide 32, Third, teaching, especially teaching innovation, is a significant part of our college’s promotion and tenure process. Instructors participating in this pilot work were rewarded for their efforts. Cluster Formation In our pilot work, clusters were formed because of initial interest by faculty in another discipline or because clusters were mandated by department chairpersons. From the interview data collected by the independent reviewer, those clusters that were not successful (faculty discontent and student apathy toward clustering) were the mandated clusters. In the AHL cluster, the historian was interested in accounting and after initial explora-

80

M. L. Fetters, J. Hoopes, and M. Tropp

tory talks the common themes of interpreting reality and value assessment were formulated and the literature course added to the cluster. Our recommendation is to develop exploratory workshops among faculty interested in combining different disciplines. From an accounting perspective these disciplines may be chosen in different ways. For initial experimentation, interest by one faculty member in another discipline is probably the best method. From our college’s experience this was far better than mandated clusters. In the future we will develop clusters to meet college-wide or departmental objectives.3 Departmental goals could also be a good source of disciplines to include in an exploratory workshop. For example, if a depa~ment wants to become more systems-oriented, then the computer or quantitative methods group might be invited. If an accounting department is concerned about the communications abilities of its majors, then literature, composition and/or speech instructors might be invited. Clearly, clusters based on school-wide or divisional objectives is the ultimate goal. Wowever, from our experiences, a particular faculty member’s interest in a related discipline is a successful way to initiate a cluster. CIuster Model Application Coordination of the clustering process is critical. The outside reviewer noted that the professors in the less successful clusters met infrequently during the semester. Furthermore, these individuals did little to modify their courses. In our opinion, weekly faculty contact and biweekly meetings are necessary to discuss class maturation, schedule extra office hours or helpsessions for the other disciplines and to capitalize on the dynamics of the cluster process. Once the cross fertilization of the discipline started, the faculty continually made new connections or more thoroughly developed initial common themes and assignments. The regular meetings stimulated and captured this professional growth for our current clusters. These meetings also were helpful in recording thoughts for future clusters. Finally, we made some on-line adjustments. Office hours to establish special times for students in the other disciplines were necessary as the case analysis was progressing. We also had a crash course on melding our teaching styles. In our first joint session of the 60 students, we had difficulty merging the lecture and the case analysis approaches. In our second joint session, in which we covered the case, the discussions were focused more on a case approach although some lecturing was still done. In future clusters,

3For example, a college-wide goal is to teach more ethics in the undergraduate program. Furthermore, during the AHL cluster, the students were quite concerned with the ethical tightrope they were negotiating as a member of the New York-Erie management team. Thus, one cluster we will be expIoring is a philosophy-auditing cluster.

A Cluster Course Approach

81

we will have about a 30-minute lecture from each discipline to better prepare the students for the case. The joint session to discuss the case solutions will then be a basic case approach, focusing on case analysis and case participation Cluster Assignments Critical to the cluster model is the movement of students up Bloom’s hierarchical educational objectives. The students were encouraged to achieve the hierarchical objectives of application, synthesis and evaluation. The students were given a case and reading materials that forced them to use accounting, history and literature in their case solution. The accounting students, in recommending their annual report, had to explain the accounting reasoning for their numbers, Poor’s arguments and how his arguments were considered in the preparation of the annual report, and the expected investing public’s reaction based on Whitman’s writings and Poor’s analysis in the American railway Journal. In learning theory terms, the students had to analyze material from different disciplines, synthesize and evaluate this material and communicate their efforts in a written report. Our recommendation is to keep this written format but to allow time for drafts of the analysis. In general, the students did a sound job of connecting the three disciplines in their case analysis. However, the students would have benefitted from additional teachers’ comments on first drafts. COST/BENEFIT

CONSIDERATIONS

From an administrative perspective, there are planning costs. In terms of the AHL cluster, the three of us were paid for the three-day workshop to formalize our cluster schedule and we each received a course release. The college limited our class size to 20 which for our school translates into one extra section per a three-course cluster. The costs to faculty were a large amount of planning time both before and during the cluster. In the authors’ views, this time would not decline significantly when the cluster is repeated. Furthermore, experimenting with different teaching styles and different student assignments takes a major effort. For the students, the costs were heavier workloads as compared to nonclustered courses. Also, students need to better plan course schedules in order to participate in clusters, especially tight clusters. Student enthusiasm to seek other cluster experiences indicates that the benefits outweigh the costs from the student perspective. The college recognition and the professional growth opportunities for the faculty were benefits that exceeded the costs. In our opinion, the cluster model is an innovative method to help students advance up the hierarchy presented in The Taxonomy of Educational Objec-

82

M. L. Fetters, J. Hoopes,

and M. Tropp

tives (Bloom, 1956), create a variety of learning situations suggested by Baker, Simon, and Bazeli (1986), encourage faculty to experiment with different teaching styles and help our college meet its goals of curriculum integration and teaching communication across the curriculum. We hope this article stimulates other accounting clusters. We currently are exploring clusters of accounting-history-political science and accounting-historyphilosophy as other possible cluster models and more rigorous experimentation with an analysis of teaching models to integrate accounting and various other disciplines. Acknowledgement-The

authors on earlier drafts of this article.

are indebted

to anonymous

reviewers

for helpful

comments

REFERENCES Baker, R. E., Simon, J., & Bazeli F. (1986). An assessment of the learning style preferences of accounting majors. Issues in Accounting Education, Spring, 1-12. Bloom, B. S. (Ed.), (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company. Chandler, A. D. (1956). Henry Varnum Poor: Business editor, analyst and reformer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Chandler, A. D. (1977). The visible hand: The managerial revolution in American business. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Flamholtz, F. G., Diamond, M. A., & Flamholtz, D. T. (1986). Financial accounting. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. Plovnick, M. (1975). Primary care career choices and medical student learning styles. Journal

of Medical Education, 50, 849-855. Poor, H. V. (1853). American Railroad Journal. New York: Schultz & Company. Sadler, G. R., Plovnick, M., & Snape, F. C. (1978). Learning styles and teaching

Journal of Medical Education, 53, 847-849. Wilbur, R. (1960). Whitman. New York: Dell Publishing

Co., Inc.

implications.