Jurusan Akuntansi - Accounting Department



SEMESTER LESSON PLANAccounting Profession ProgramAccounting Department Faculty of Economics and Business, Brawijaya UniversityCourse CODECORE SUBJECTCREDITSSEMESTERRevisedAccounting TheoryT = P = Ganjil / GenapAUTHORIZATIONCourse DirectorCore Subject DirectorHead of Study Program(Signature)(Signature)(Signature)CompetenceStudy ProgramLearning Outcomes of Accounting Theory in Accounting Profession Program consist of several following components:LEARNING GOALSCritical and Integrative ThinkingLEARNING OBJECTIVEAble to prepare consolidated financial statements of an entity by applying accounting principles to transactions in accordance with financial accounting standardsCourseFinal Course CompetenceAfter taking this course, students are expected (at least) have the ability to evaluate and criticize and formulate new accounting theories and standardsSub CompetencesAble to understand accounting theory and its formulation process.Being able to understand the concepts of financial accounting theory.Able to evaluate accounting theories and practices and be able to criticize and formulate new accounting theories and petence Mapping130683015557500Course DescriptionThis course discusses the formulation of accounting theory, the structure of accounting theory, the usefulness of accounting information, the process of setting accounting standards, the economic consequences and concepts of financial accounting theory and setting standards. Critical evaluation is also carried out on the role of accounting in creating better social and environmental conditions. The ethical issues of the accounting profession and harmonization of accounting standards as well as differences in cultural aspects that affect accounting characteristics between countries are also important topics. Also discussed are contemporary issues related to accounting theory such as conceptual framework and measurement - fair value.ReferencesMain: Deegan, C. (2004). Financial Accounting Theory. McGraw-Hill, Australia. (CD)Gaffikin, M. (2008). Accounting Theory: Research, Regulation and Accounting Practice. Pearson Education. Australia. (MG)Scott, W.R. (2009). Financial Accounting Theory. Prentice-Hall, Toronto, Canada. (Scott)Artikel-artikel dan bahan-bahan lain yang tertera pada tabel rancangan perkuliahan.Additions:American Accounting Association (1977). A Statement of Basic Accounting Theory (ASOBAT).Belkoui, A. R. (2000). Accounting Theory, Business Press, Thomson Learning, London, UK.Evans, T.G. (2003). Accounting Theory-contemporary accounting issues. Thomson Learning USA.FASB. (1991). Original Pronouncements Accounting Standards. Vol. ll. 1991/1992. Irwin, Homewood, Illinois, USA.Hendriksen, E.S. & M.F, Van Breda. (1992). Accounting Theory, Irwin, Homewood, Illinois, USA.Schroeder, R.H, M.W Clark and J.M Cathey. (2009). Financial Accounting Theory and Analysis: Text and Cases. John Willey & Sons. USA.Watt, R.L. dan J.L. Zimmerman. (1986). Positive Accounting Theory, Prentice-Hall International, Inc, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA.Wolk, H.I., J.R. Francis, dan M.G. Tearney. (1991). Accounting Theory: A Conceptual andinstitutional approach, South-Western Publishing Co, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.Media PembelajaranSoftware:-Hardware:-Team TeachingCoordinator : Members :Prerequisite courseWeekLearning outcomesLearning materialsMethods/Learning strategies (estimated time)AssessmentIndicatorFormScore1SyllabusCooperative Learning: The lecturer presents the theory in (90 minutes)The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)The lecturer clarifies the answer (30 minutes)The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes) The accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2) Short answer testAssessment rubric on Short answer testShort answer test (2%)2CD Bab 1; MG Bab 1 & 2.Watts & Zimmerman. 1979. The demand for and supply of accounting thoeries: The market for excuses. The Accounting Review. LIV, 2: 273-305.Cooperative Learning: The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes) The ability to manage team workThe accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)Presentation on case studyAssessment rubric on case studyShort answer testAssessment rubric on Short answer testAssessment rubric among the membersPresentation (1.5%)Participation (1.7%)Short answer test (2%)3CD Bab 5; MG Bab 5.FASB. (2008). PRELIMINARY VIEWS: Conceptual framework for financial reporting: The reporting entity. Financial Accounting Series.IASB. (2006). Framework for the preparation and presentation of financial statements, London, UK.FASB. Statements of financial accounting concepts No. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 & 8.IAI. (2009). Kerangka dasar penyusunan dan penyajian laporan keuangan.Cooperative Learning: The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes)4Scott Bab 3, 5 & 6.Ball, R. & Brown, P. (1968). An empirical evaluation of accounting income numbers. Journal of Accounting Research, 6 (2): 159–177.Collins, D., Maydew, E. & Weiss, I. (1997). Changes in the value-relevance of earnings and book values over the past forty years. Journal of Accounting and Economics 24 (1): 39-67.Cooperative Learning: 1. The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).2. The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) 3. The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)4. The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)5. The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes)1. The ability to manage team work2. The accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)3. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)4. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)1. Presentation on case study2. Assessment rubric on case study3. Short answer test4. Assessment rubric on Short answer test5. Assessment rubric among the membersPresentation (1.5%)Participation (1.7%)Short answer test (2%)5Scott Bab 4.Kothari, S.P. (2001). Capital markets research in accounting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31 (1-3): 105-231.Negakis, C.J. (2005). Accounting and capital markets research: A review.Managerial Finance, 31, 2, 1-23.Cooperative Learning: 1. The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).2. The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) 3. The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)4. The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)5. The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes)1. The ability to manage team work2. The accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)3. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)4. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)1. Presentation on case study2. Assessment rubric on case study3. Short answer test4. Assessment rubric on Short answer test5. Assessment rubric among the membersPresentation (1.5%)Participation (1.7%)Short answer test (2%)6Scott Bab 8; CD Bab 7Jensen, M. (1976). Reflections on the state of accounting research and the regulation of accounting, Stanford Lectures in Accounting 1976, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, 11-19.Watts & Zimmerman. (1990). Positive accounting theory: A ten year perspective. The Accounting Review, 65 (1): 131-156.Cooperative Learning: 1. The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).2. The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) 3. The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)4. The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)5. The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes)1. The ability to manage team work2. The accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)3. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)4. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)1. Presentation on case study2. Assessment rubric on case study3. Short answer test4. Assessment rubric on Short answer test5. Assessment rubric among the membersPresentation (1.5%)Participation (1.7%)Short answer test (2%)7Scott Chapter 9Eisenhardt, K. (1989) Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14 (1): 57-74.Wright, P., Mukherji, A., Kroll, M.J. (2001). A reexamination of agency theory assumptions: extensions and extrapolations. Journal of Socio-Economics, Vol. 30, 413–429.Cooperative Learning: 1. The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).2. The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) 3. The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)4. The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)5. The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes)1. The ability to manage team work2. The accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)3. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)4. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)1. Presentation on case study2. Assessment rubric on case study3. Short answer test4. Assessment rubric on Short answer test5. Assessment rubric among the membersPresentation (1.5%)Participation (1.7%)Short answer test (2%)8Midterm testThe student accomplishes the task on essay (60 minutes)The student accomplishes the multiple choice task (90 minutes)The accuracy between the midterm test answer and the question (KK 1 and C3) 2. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)3. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)Assessment rubric on midterm test15%9Scott Bab 11Fields, T.D., Lys, T.Z. & Vincent, L. (2001). Empirical research on accounting choice. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31 (1-3): 255-307.Healy, P.M. & Wahlen, J.M. (1999). A review of the earnings management literature and its implications for standard setting. Accounting Horizons 13 (4): 365-383.Cooperative Learning: 1. The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).2. The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) 3. The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)4. The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)5. The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes)1. The ability to manage team work2. The accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)3. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)4. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)1. Presentation on case study2. Assessment rubric on case study3. Short answer test4. Assessment rubric on Short answer test5. Assessment rubric among the membersPresentation (1.5%)Participation (1.7%)Short answer test (2%)10Scott Bab 12 & 13; CD Bab 3; MG Bab 4Fogarty, T.J., Hussein, M.E.A., & Ketz, J.E. (1994). Political aspects of financial accounting standard setting in the USA. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol.7, No. 4, 24-46.Cooperative Learning: 1. The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).2. The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) 3. The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)4. The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)5. The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes)1. The ability to manage team work2. The accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)3. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)4. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)1. Presentation on case study2. Assessment rubric on case study3. Short answer test4. Assessment rubric on Short answer test5. Assessment rubric among the membersPresentation (1.5%)Participation (1.7%)Short answer test (2%)11CD Bab 8 & 9; MG Bab 9Deegan, C. (2002). The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures–a theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 15, No. 3, 282 – 311.Deegan, C., Rankin, M. & Tobin, J. (2002). An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983-1997: A test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol 15, No 3, 312-343.Cooperative Learning: 1. The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).2. The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) 3. The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)4. The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)5. The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes)1. The ability to manage team work2. The accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)3. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)4. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)1. Presentation on case study2. Assessment rubric on case study3. Short answer test4. Assessment rubric on Short answer test5. Assessment rubric among the membersPresentation (1.5%)Participation (1.7%)Short answer test (2%)12CD Bab 6; MG Bab 6Gray, S.J. (1988). Towards a theory of cultural influence on the development of accounting systems internationally. Abacus. Vol. 24: 1-15.MacArthur, J.B. (1996). An Investigation into the Influence of Cultural Factors in the International Lobbying of the International Accounting Standards Committee: The Case of E32, Comparability of Financial Statements. The International Journal of Accounting, Vol. 31, No. 2, 213-237.Cooperative Learning: 1. The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).2. The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) 3. The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)4. The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)5. The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes)1. The ability to manage team work2. The accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)3. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)4. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)1. Presentation on case study2. Assessment rubric on case study3. Short answer test4. Assessment rubric on Short answer test5. Assessment rubric among the membersPresentation (1.5%)Participation (1.7%)Short answer test (2%)13Barlev, B. & Haddad, J.R. (2003). Fair value accounting and the management of the firm. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, vol.14, 383-415.Barth, M.E., Landsman, W.R. & Wahlen, J.M. (1995). Fair value accounting: Effects on banks’ earnings volatility, regulatory capital and value of contractual cash flows. Journal of Banking and Finance, 19, 577-605.Cooperative Learning: 1. The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).2. The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) 3. The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)4. The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)5. The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes)1. The ability to manage team work2. The accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)3. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)4. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)1. Presentation on case study2. Assessment rubric on case study3. Short answer test4. Assessment rubric on Short answer test5. Assessment rubric among the membersPresentation (1.5%)Participation (1.7%)Short answer test (2%)14Studen’s PaperCooperative Learning: 1. The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).2. The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) 3. The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)4. The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)5. The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes)1. The ability to manage team work2. The accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)3. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)4. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)1. Presentation on case study2. Assessment rubric on case study3. Short answer test4. Assessment rubric on Short answer test5. Assessment rubric among the membersPresentation (1.5%)Participation (1.7%)Short answer test (2%)15Studen’s PaperCooperative Learning: 1. The group presents the task on case study given on previous week (30 minutes).2. The lecturer clarifies the case study along with the discussion in the ongoing meeting (60 minutes) 3. The student answers short answer test (20 minutes)4. The lecturer clarifies the answer in (30 minutes)5. The lecturer presents the case based questions for the next meeting (10 minutes)1. The ability to manage team work2. The accuracy between the short answer test and the question (C1 and C2)3. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)4. The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)1. Presentation on case study2. Assessment rubric on case study3. Short answer test4. Assessment rubric on Short answer test5. Assessment rubric among the membersPresentation (1.5%)Participation (1.7%)Short answer test (2%)16Materials from meeting 9 to meeting 15Final testThe student accomplishes the task on essay (60 minutes)The student accomplishes the multiple choice task (90 minutes)The accuracy between the final test answer and the question (KK 1and C3) The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)The comprehensiveness of concluded main points (C1 and C2)Assessment rubric on final test15%Assessment CompilationAssessment ComponentsScorePercentageTotal score(score x percentage)Participation (13 times @ score x 1,7%)10022%22Presentation (13 times @ score x 1,5%)10020%20Short answer test (14 times @ score x 2%)10028%28Midterm test (1 time @ score x 100%)10015%15Final test (1 time @ score x 100%)10015%15TOTAL SCORE100 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download