Enhancing Students' Enabling Competencies: Student Perspectives and Recommendations for Educators*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Employers continue to express concern that accounting graduates lack the necessary competencies when they enter the workplace. These concerns have been addressed in part by periodic revisions to Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada's (CPA Canada) CPA Competency Map, which is used to define competencies for entry into the profession. The CPA Competency Map has recently been revised to include a new set of enabling competencies (often called generic or soft skills). However, the accounting literature highlights a concern that time and resources spent on the expanding set of enabling competencies could take valuable resources away from teaching technical accounting skills. In addition, the education literature indicates that student motivation plays a key role in learning. If students are motivated to learn enabling competencies, then educational efforts could be more efficient and effective. Conversely, a lack of student motivation could reduce student engagement and learning. To address these concerns, we investigated the student's perspective on the importance of enabling competencies as well as on how and where enabling competencies should be learned. We surveyed 380 students enrolled in the CPA Canada Professional Education Program (PEP). We investigated the three new enabling competencies that are most distinct from the previous set of competencies and that may be the most difficult for accounting educators to teach: adaptability and resilience; creativity and innovation; and active listening. We asked students about the importance of these new enabling competencies for their future careers and whether the competencies should be taught in PEP or in the workplace. Our results indicate that students believe that the new enabling competencies are important and should be learned in both the classroom and the workplace. Moreover, student responses to open‐ended questions provide educators with suggestions on how to incorporate enabling competencies into the classroom by blending activities that could simultaneously enhance enabling competencies with technical competencies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".