Abstract
Traditional Accounting curricula include instruction on the preparation of audit documentation, however, experiential instruction for students on the process of review-both as a reviewer and reviewee-is often scarce or missing. This study investigated a classroom intervention that engaged undergraduate students in peer-review activities to gauge how peer review and feedback impacted student performance and their perceptions of being able to engage in interpersonal risks. Using a case-method approach, students developed audit workpapers that were later peer-reviewed through a digital system utilizing adaptive comparative judgment (ACJ). Students’ achievement scores were collected, and students also completed a pre/post survey on psychological safety. Our results indicate that student psychological safety increased over the course of the semester; however, the peer review process through ACJ did not significantly improve student performance within the class. The students responded positively to the intervention as an engaging learning process and effective in teaching real-world skills. Thus, this intervention provides an example of how peer review activities could enhance the learning experience for students.
Highlights
1.1 The Accounting Review ProcessAuditing Standards require that auditors maintain sufficient documentation to support their conclusions
Our results indicate that student psychological safety increased over the course of the semester; the peer review process through adaptive comparative judgment (ACJ) did not significantly improve student performance within the class
We created the main effect of Case and another main effect of ACJ Group
Summary
1.1 The Accounting Review ProcessAuditing Standards require that auditors maintain sufficient documentation to support their conclusions. Standards require that all audit documentation be reviewed by at least one other audit team member (PCAOB 2016, AS 1201.05). In the case of failed audits, the finalized audit documentation is the key evidence in auditor negligence trials (Backof, 2015). This audit documentation is prepared by all members of the audit team, and some team members with limited experience will be given significant reviewing responsibilities. After only 5 years of experience, auditors may spend as much as 50% of their time reviewing audit workpapers prepared by other audit team members (Bamber and Bylinski, 1987; Asare and McDaniel, 1996; see Sweeney, Suh, Dalton, & Meljem, 2017). Recruiting incoming auditors with review experience could be a competitive advantage, but insurance against forms of auditor negligence
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
