FACTORS INFLUENCING STUDENTS' INTENTION TO ENROLL IN BACHELOR OF ACCOUNTING DEGREE: AN APPLICATION OF THEORY OF REASONED ACTION

Authors

  • Zainin Bidin Universiti Sains Malaysia
  • Hasnah Haron Universiti Sains Malaysia
  • Yuserrie Zainuddin Universiti Sains Malaysia
  • Ishak Ismail Universiti Sains Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24034/j25485024.y2005.v9.i3.414

Keywords:

Accounting profession, Theory of Reasoned Action, and Decision

Abstract

The accounting profession in Malaysia is facing a dilemma. The demand for accountants in this country is higher than the number of accountants that can be produced. In order to attract more students to this field, factors influencing their intention to choose, must be identified. This study tries to identify the factors influencing student's intention to enroll into a Bachelor of Accounting degree. The Theory of Reasoned Action developed by Ajzen and Fishbein was used as the framework. One hundred and seventy three (173) students from public and private higher learning institutions in Penang and Kedah took part in this study. The results showed that personal beliefs of the students were the main influence his attitude to choose. Pressures from peers and lecturers were also seemed to be important factors that the student considers in making his or her decision

References

Accounting Education Change Commission. 1990. Objectives of Accounting education for Accountants: Position Statement No.1. Issues in Accounting Education 5 (20): 307-313.

Accounting Education Change Commission. 1992. Objectives of Accounting education for Accountants: Position Statement No.2. Issues in Accounting Education 7 (2): 249-252.

Accounting Education Change Commission. 1993. Objectives of Accounting education for Accountants: Position Statement No.3. Issues in Accounting Education 8 (1): 191.

Ahmat, S. 1980. Nation Building and the University in Developing Countries: The case of Malaysia. Journal of Higher Education 9 (6): 721-724.

Ajzen, L, & Fishbein, M. 1980. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour. Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bateman, M., & Spruill, D. 1996. Student Decision-Making: Insight from the College Choice Process. College Student Journal 30 (2): 182-187.

Bebko, C.P. 1994. Awareness, Timing and Reasons for Choosing Marketing as a College Major. In Proceeding of Academy of Marketing Science annual Conference, 1994: Developments in Marketing Science 17: 123-127.

Becker, E.A., & Gibson, C.C. 1998. Fishbein and Ajzen's Theory of Reasoned Action. Accurate Prediction of Behavioural Intentions for Enrolling in Distance Education Cources. Adult Education Quarterly 49 (1): 43-56.

Cebula, R.J., & Lopez, J. 1982. Determinants of Student Choice of UndergraduateMajor Field. American Educational Research Journal. 19 (Summer): 303-312.

Chang, A. 1995. Setting Accounting Standards in Developing Countries-A Discussion on Importance of structures Employed. Paper presented at National Accounting Seminar, Selangor, organized by School of Accountancy. Institut Teknologi Mara, Malaysia.

Chiou, J.S. 2000. Antecedents and Moderators of Behavior Intention: Differences Between U.S and Taiwanese Students. Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs. 126 (1): 105-125.

Enthoven, A. 1981. Accounting Education in Economic Development Mangement. North-Holland Publishing: Amsterdam.

Harvey, M.G. 1995. The Contribution of Accountancy to Economic Development. Paper presented at National Accounting Seminar, Selangor, organized by School of Accountancy. Institut Teknologi Mara, Malaysia.

Hassan, H. 2000. Students' Choice Intention of a Higher Learning Institution: An Application of Theory of Reasoned Action. Unpublished MBA Dissertation. Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Hossler, D., Braxton, J.,& Coopersmith, G. 1989. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research. Agantha Press: New York.

Hossler, D.& Gallagher,K.S. 1987. Studying student College Choice. A Three Phase Model and Implications for Policy Makers. College and University 2 (3): 207-221.

Jackson, G.A. 1982. Public Efficiency and Private Choice Higher Education. Eduactional Evaluation and Policy Analysis 4 (2): 237-247.

Lau, B.T. 1995. The Role and Challenges of Professional Accounting Bodies and Educators by the Year 2000. Paper presented at National Accounting Seminar, Selangor, organized by School of Accountancy. Institut Teknologi Mara, Malaysia

MapIe,S.A., & Stage, F.K. 1991. Influences on the Choice of Math/Science Major by Gender and Ethnicity. American Educational Research Journal 28 (Spring): 37-60.

Mohd Hanefah, Mustafa. 1996. Accounting Curriculum: A Comparative Analysis. Paper presented at National Accounting Seminar, Selangor, organized by School of Accountancy.Institut Teknologi Mara, Malaysia

Newell, S.J, Titus, P.A. 1996. Investing the Undergraduate Student Decision-Making. Journal of Marketing Education 18 (3): 57-68.

Nunnaly, J.C. 1978. Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Paulsen, M.B. 1990. College choice: Understanding student Enrollment Behavior. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report 6.

Ram, U., & Devi, I. 1996. Accounting Education in Malaysia at the Crossroads. Paper presented at National Accounting Seminar, Selangor, organized by School of Accountancy. Institut Teknologi Mara, Malaysia.

Seweell, W.H., & Shaw, V.P. 1968. Social Class, Parental Encouragement, and Educational Espirations. American Journal of Sociology 73: 559-572.

Swanson, J.L., & Tokar, D.M. 1991. College students' Perceptions of Barriers to Career Development. Journal of Vocational Behavior 38 (1): 92-106.

Tony Seah. 1997. The Role of MIA in Promoting Accountancy Profession with the Institutions of Higher Learning in Malaysia. Paper presented at Seminar on Accounting as an Academic Profession, Selangor, organized by School of Accountancy. Institut Teknologi Mara, Malaysia

Trower, J.K., Willis, G.W., & Dorsett, D. 1996. An Evaluation of Factors Influencing Intentions to Major in Information Systems. Journal of IS Education 6 (4).

Turner, S.E., & Bowen, W.G. 1999. Choice of Major: The Changing (Unchanging) Gap. Industrial and Labor Relations Review 52 (2): 289-314.

Published

2018-09-25

Issue

Section

Artikel