Critical Perspectives on Accounting (2001) 12, 471499 doi:10.1006/cpac.2000.0444 Available online at http://www.idealibrary.

com on

THE DIALECTIC OF ACCOUNTING EDUCATION: FROM ROLE IDENTITY TO EGO IDENTITY

K EN M C P HAIL
Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Glasgow, 6571 Southpark Avenue, Glasgow, G12 8LE, U.K.

Within the critical accounting literature interest in accounting education appears to be growing (see, for example, Amernic, 1996; Chua, 1996; Davis & Sherman, 1996; Dillard & Tinker, 1996; Galhofer & Haslam, 1996; Neimark, 1996; Paisey & Paisey, 1996; Reiter, 1996). However, as yet the discussion does not appear to be grounded within the well-established critical education literature. Little critical analysis has been provided of the specic ways in which power may operate through accounting education, or the forms that a more critical education might take; or of the theoretical problematic of the dialectical tension that exists between both possibilities (that is between emancipation and domination). Given the signicant and perhaps even primary role that social theorists have ascribed to education in the reproduction of social structures, and the maintenance of forms of subordination, this seems surprising (see, for example, Althusser, 1971). This paper draws on some well-established critical education theory in order rstly to explore the hegemonic operation of power within accounting education and secondly to use these insights as a basis for developing some thoughts on what a more critical accounting education might look like in practice. c 2001 Academic Press

Introduction Within the critical accounting literature interest in accounting education appears to be growing (see, for example, Dillard, 1991; Lewis et al., 1992; Gray et al., 1994; Owen et al., 1994; Amernic, 1996; Chua, 1996; Davis & Sherman, 1996; Dillard & Tinker, 1996; Galhofer & Haslam, 1996; Neimark, 1996; Paisey & Paisey, 1996; Reiter, 1996). However, as yet there seems to be little application of the wellestablished critical education literature to the analysis of the political and powerful nature of accounting education (although see Lehman, 1988 and Power, 1991 as two notable exceptions). Other areas of accounting research, for example, nancial accounting, management accounting and origanizational research, appear to be characterized by quite a sophisticated level of theoretical analysis which draws on
Received 1 July 1997; revised 18 June 2000; accepted 25 November 2000

471
10452354/01/040471+29/$35.00/0 c 2001 Academic Press

472

K. McPhail

the work of Ricource (Llewellyn, 1993); Giddens (MacIntosh & Scapens, 1990), Foucault (Miller & OLeary, 1987) and Marx (Armstrong, 1985, 1987). However, this level of theorization seems to be missing from accounting education research. Given the signicant and perhaps even primary role that social theorists have ascribed to education in the reproduction of social structures, and the maintenance of forms of domination, this seems surprising (see, for example, Althusser, 1971). Althusser (1971) for example claimed that, schools in advanced capitalist societies have become the dominant institution in the ideological subjugation of the work force. He says, one ideological state apparatus certainly has the dominant role, although hardly anyone lends an ear to its music; it is so silent! This is the school, (Althusser, 1971 in Giroux, 1983, see also, Foucault, 1977). The analysis that has taken place has tended to present accounting education as a source of subjugation and control (see, for example, Lehman, 1988; Zeff, 1989; Gray et al., 1994; McPhail & Gray, 1996) and/or as having the potential to empower (Dillard, 1991; Gray et al., 1994)1 . However, little critical analysis has been provided of the specic ways in which power may operate through accounting education (although see, Chua, 1996), or the forms that a more critical education might take; or of the theoretical problematic of the dialectical tension that exists between both possibilities (that is between emancipation and domination). Without a more detailed understanding of the ways in which power operates through accounting education, how can we begin to develop more critical forms of accounting education? The paper is split into two sections. The rst section presents a hegemonic model of the ways in which power may operate through accounting education and the second section draws on this model to present some thoughts on what a critical accounting education might look like in practice.

Theoretical Perspectives Adornos notion of, constellation, provides the structure for the analysis and Gramscis notion of hegemony provides the cohesive idea that links the various strands of the analysis together. Constellations Adornos notion of constellation relates to the idea of a constellation of stars all shedding light on a particular issue from different angles. It is assumed that the totality of perspectives coalesce into a whole which contributes towards the understanding of the issue. In the rst section of the paper accounting education is studied from four different perspectives: rstly, Bowles and Gintiss Correspondence Theory; secondly, Althussers essay on Ideological State Apparatus; thirdly, Basil Bernstiens linguistic codes; and nally Pierre Bourdieus work on cultural capital. The section has been arranged so that there is a progression from socio-structural theories which provide a macro-perspective on the operation of power within accounting education to cultural-linguistic theories which provide more of a micro-perspective on the exercise of power within accounting education. However, it is important to point out that the section has been structured in this linear fashion in an attempt

The dialectic of accounting education

473

to aid understanding and not to prioritise any particular position. The rst section presents an Adornian constellation rather than a Cartesian line. Thus, while certain aspects of some theories are criticised, this is not carried out with the intention of disregarding a particular argument so we can progress onto some truer position, rather, the criticisms provide a link connecting one theory to the next. As such, it is the totality of the combination of arguments that is important and not any single argument in particular. Adornos notion of the constellation has therefore been used to convey the incompleteness of any single perspective when taken on its own. When taken together, multiple perspectives may potentially inform each other and perhaps reveal their respective blind spots (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991). Hegemony Secondly the analysis draws on the work of Antonio Gramsci (see Gramsci, 1971; Smart, 1994). Gramscis notion of hegemony provides the cohesive idea that links the various perspectives in this constellation together. The perspectives combined in the rst section of the paper are not contradictory, inconsistent or arbitrary. Although the analysis is primarily based on Marxist theory, structuralist and Foucauldian perspectives are also introduced and are viewed as complementary extensions of this basic position (see Neimark, 1990). The work of Mark Poster (1984, 1989, 1990, see also, Dreyfus & Rainbow, 1994 and Smart, 1994) would support this interpretation of Foucaults work in particular. Poster interprets Foucaults position as a consistent development of ideas originally articulated by the early Critical Theorists2 (see also Wolin, 1992). Indeed, Foucault made the association between his own work and that of the early Critical Theorists himself. At one point he argued that we must embrace, critical thought that will take the form of an ontology of ourselves, on ontology of the present. He went on to say,
it is this form of philosophy that, from Hegel, through Nietzsche and Max Weber, to the Frankfurt School, that has founded a form of reection in which I have tried to work. (Foucault, in Wolin, 1992)

The idea that links Marx, the Critical Theorists and Foucault is their concern with the hegemonic operation of power (see, Poster, 1984, 1989, 1990, Dreyfus & Rainbow, 1994 and Smart, 1994). The main idea behind Gramscis hegemonic model of power is that ideological subordination is achieved primarily through acquiescence and consent rather than overt political oppression3 . Hegemony refers to the ways in which the beliefs of subordinate groups are manipulated until they hold a particular view of the world to be true or common sense when in fact it works in the interest of others. Gramsci contended that hegemony was accomplished by moral and intellectual persuasion rather than overt forms of control (Joll, 1977). Williams (1977) conveys the pervasiveness of the notion of hegemony when he says,
Its a whole body of practices and expectations, over the whole of living: our senses and assignments of energy, our shaping perceptions of ourselves and our world. It is a lived system of meanings and values, which, as they are experienced as practices, appear as reciprocally conforming. It is, that is to say, in the strongest sense, a culture.

The analysis of accounting education developed in this paper thus starts from the observation that while power does not operate through accounting education in an

474

K. McPhail

overt way it nevertheless subjugates accounting students and serves a particular set of interests4 .

1.

Education as a Form of Control

This section draws on four prominent critical education theories in order to explore how power may operate hegemonically within accounting education. Firstly, Bowles and Gintiss Correspondence Theory is used to investigate the nature of the interests served by accounting education. Secondly, Louis Althussers essay on Ideological State Apparatuses is used to discuss the broader structural context within which accounting education is situated and which may consequently inuence how these interests are served. Finally, Basil Bernstiens work on linguistic codes; Michel Foucaults work on discourses; and Pierre Bourdieus work on cultural capital and are used to explore the specic detail of the hegemonic ways in which interests are served through accounting education. The section concludes by considering the limitations of the perspectives discussed. The nature of the interests served by accounting education The rst perspective in this constellation is provided by Bowles and Gintiss Correspondence Theory. This theory provides some insights into the nature of the interests that accounting education serves. Correspondence Theory draws heavily on Marxs notion of reproduction. In Capital Marx states that, every social process of production is, at the same time, a process of reproduction. . . . Capitalist production, therefore . . . produces not only commodities . . . , but it also produces and reproduces the capitalist relation: on the one side the capitalist, on the other the wage-labourer. Thus, according to Correspondence Theory, the nature of accounting education (as well as politics, religion and all other forms of education) is determined by the economic conditions of life as they are represented in the relationship between the economic base5 and the institutional superstructure6 (Bowles & Gintis, 1977; Gibson, 1984). In essence, it represents a model of social reproduction where the determining characteristics are provided by the structure, relationships and patterns of the workplace (Bowles & Gintis, 1977). OTool (1977) captures the essence of the theory when he criticises the American education system for not producing the required types of individuals for the economy, he says,
Because of the American school systems commitment to mobility and equality, there is now a shortage of working class people, individuals socialised for an environment of bureaucratic and hierarchical control and of strict discipline. Employers are correct in their observations that schools are failing to provide enough men and women who are passively complaint, who seek only extrinsic rewards for their labours and who have the stamina and stoicism to cope with the work technologies and processes developed during the industrial revolution. (OTool, 1977, in Giroux, 1983)

Thus, from a Correspondence Theory perspective, accounting education would be perceived as part of a broader pedagogic system that provides the economy with a labour force equipped with the requisite knowledge, personalities and attitudes to make it work7 (Gibson, 1984). Indeed Duane (1970) infers that accounting education

The dialectic of accounting education

475

is a, systematically ruthless conditioning of children for adult roles geared to the production of material wealth for a section of our society rather than for the extension of civilised standards to all. In his own particular interpretation of Correspondence Theory, Harris (1979) implies that accounting education, in a capitalist society, actually engenders a misrepresentation of reality (in Gibson, 1984) and as such is fundamentally ideological. Harris argues that the information conveyed under the auspices of education literally distorts students views of the world and promotes a false consciousness. Education, in his opinion, acts, as a perception-altering drug, which distorts the consciousness of both teachers and pupils. He asserts that, capitalist economic structures pervade and pervert our education system, working through the curriculum to produce a consciousness in students that accepts and hence maintains the economic inequalities on which capitalism is based, (Gibson, 1984). Correspondence Theory thus suggests that accounting education serves the interests of capital because the economic base determines the kind of knowledge conveyed to accounting students and the kinds of uncritical attitudes engendered during this process. Evidence from the literature would seem to suggest that accounting education ts Correspondence Theory ominously neatly. There is a well-established argument within the critical accounting literature that accounting serves capitalism because of the role it performs in society (see, for example, Yamey, 1949, 1964; Tinker et al., 1982; Weber, 1983; Tinker, 1985; Miller & OLeary, 1987). Accounting education, perhaps more than many other kinds of education, corresponds to the requirements of the economic base because it provides students with the knowledge of how to perform an essential function within free-market economies (see, for example, Tinker et al., 1982; Lehman, 1988; Zeff, 1989; Mahoney, 1990; Gray et al., 1994). Unlike the majority of academic disciplines, a signicant portion of the knowledge conveyed to accounting students is determined by a body of professional institutions. Given the lobbying by large companies during the development of accounting SSAPs and FRSs by these institutions (see, for example, Hope & Gray, 1982), it seems reasonable to conclude that powerful multinational companies directly determine at least part of what accounting students are taught. From the literature, it would seem that accounting education also provides students with a shallow uncritical attitude towards accountancy and the function it performs so that accounting students seem unwilling or unable to critically analyse the function of accounting within society or take such critiques seriously (see Gray et al., 1994; Dillard & Tinker, 1996; McPhail & Gray, 1996). However, the relationship between the economy and accounting education is too simplistic if it is only viewed through Correspondence Theory. It provides little detailed analysis of the kind of knowledge conveyed to students (is it practical, theoretical or ethical?) or the kinds of attitudes engendered within students. It seems to run contrary to evidence that suggests that accounting students do not possess the knowledge and skills that employers would like them to have and it also provides little help in explaining the many examples of resistance within accounting education. In an article on the historical development of Americas education system published the year after Schooling in Capitalist America. Bowles and Gintis

476

K. McPhail

seem to elaborate on and revise their view of the relationship between the economic system and the education system within capitalist societies and these revisions go some way towards addressing some of the concerns mentioned above. Firstly they suggest that the historical development of the schooling system in the US was characterized by conict, struggle and accommodation, rather than a smooth correspondence with the requirements of capital. They say, for substantial periods, the school system has been organized along lines which, far from corresponding to the structure of economic life, appear bizarre and anachronistic8 , (Bowles & Gintis, 1977). Secondly, Bowles and Gintis (1977) contend that the education system served capitalism by helping to manage the dialectic between the accumulation of capital and labour rather than by providing labour with specic skills9 (Katz, 1971; Lazerson, 1971; Greer, 1973; Kaestle, 1973; Karier et al., 1973; Tyack, 1974). They argue that the expansion of mass education was related to the demographic changes that accompanied the industrial revolution and contend that, schools were promoted rst and foremost as agents of social control for an increasingly heterogeneous and poverty stricken urban population in an increasingly unstable and threatening economic and political system10 . The picture that emerges from Bowles and Gintiss history is that education helped to resolve the dialectical tension between the accumulation of capital and the reproduction of the capitalist relations of production by disciplining the, new proletaria (Bowles & Gintis, 1977). As such, Bowle and Gintiss work might suggest that accounting education could be part of a broader pedagogic system whose historical function has been to help manage the dialectical tension between the accumulation of capital and labour by disciplining accounting students and ensuring they do not become a threat to capital11 . From a hegemonic theory perspective, the work of Bowles and Gintis thus helps elaborate on the nature of the interests that accounting education serves. Accounting education would be seen to serve the interests of capital by disciplining labour and mitigating the dialectical tension between the accumulation of capital and the concentration of labour. However, while this perspective is helpful, it is still too simplistic. Bowles and Gintiss analysis is neither sufciently detailed at the macro or micro level. At the macro level it is at least questionable whether the education system alone is solely responsible for managing the tension between capital and labour, are there no other institutions involved in this process? At a micro level they provide little detailed explanation of the processes by which students are subjugated and disciplined (Giroux, 1983). This is because correspondence theory objecties the objects and subjects of its analysis. Applying it to accounting education would involve objectifying universities, accounting departments, students and the economy. The work of Bowles and Gintis provides us with the basis for making the hegemonic link between accounting education and the requirements of capital. However, it provides little help in understanding either the broader structural context that impinges upon accounting education or the detail of how power operates within accounting education. The work of Louis Althusser provides some help in addressing these deciencies in Correspondence Theory and is considered in the following section.

The dialectic of accounting education

477

The broader structural context within which accounting education is situated In his essay Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses (1971), Louis Althusser contends that the school performs two functions similar to those discussed above. Firstly it transmits a body of technical knowledge required by the capitalist system of production; and secondly it disciplines students to respect the system of production: the law, time, honesty, loyalty and private property12 (Erben & Gleeson, 1977). Like Bowles and Gintis, Althusser views education as an ideological system for managing the conict between capital and labour. However, he provides a more detailed macro and micro analysis that contributes towards understanding both the nature of the relationship between accounting education and the economic base; and how the mechanisms of ideological reproduction may actually work themselves out within accounting lectures and seminars. Althusser begins to explore the mechanics of the process of reproduction and contributes towards our understanding of the superstructure by adding a second dimension to the conventionally accepted Repressive Apparatuses of the state (Erben & Gleeson, 1977). Althusser argued that the subtle Ideological State Apparatus of education worked together with religion, family, communications and culture to supplement and complement the more overtly oppressive State Apparatus of government, the army, the police, the courts and the prisons13 (see MacDonel, 1986). Althussers comprehensive analysis of the social structures within which education takes place seems altogether more plausible than the exclusive focus on education in Correspondence Theory. Two points are important here for this analysis. Firstly, the passivity and docility of accounting students is not just attributable to their accounting education but is the product of the combined operation of a suite of ideological state apparatuses including the family and organized religion. Accounting education is part of the process that contributes to the continued subjugation of accounting students and we need to appreciate the impact that these other institutions have on the practice of accounting pedagogy. Secondly, despite this there would seem to be something peculiar about accounting education in particular because although accounting students seem unable to think critically about accounting they can critically appraise issues which are not presented using accounting language (McPhail & Gray, 1996). Althusser also contributes towards our understanding of how accounting education, as part of the ideological state apparatus, may actually operate hegemonically. While Althussers work is Marxist, it is also structuralist and as such represents quite a fundamental re-theorization of the notion of ideology. While orthodox Marxism limits the study of ideology to issues of consciousness and false consciousness (see Gibson, 1984) Althusser (1971) contended that ideology was unconscious and emerged from underlying structures materialized in language, practice and social structures (see Giroux, 1983). Thus, according to Althusser, ideology is more a matter of lived relations than true or false representations of reality. Althusser suggested that ideology exists materially in the language, practices, routines, techniques and architecture of education. He viewed ideology not in terms of consciousness or passive acceptance, but rather as a system of representations, carrying meanings and ideas that structure the unconsciousness of students (Giroux, 1983; see also, MacDonel,

478

K. McPhail

1986). Or as Eagleton (1996) explains, Althussers notion of ideology is located in the individuals practico-social, lived relations to the world, rather than in the theoretical knowledge they posses. Althusser contended that ideology neither produces consciousness nor a passive compliance, instead, he suggested that it functions as a system of representations which carriers meanings and ideas that structure the unconsciousness of students and orientates them to their practical task in society (Giroux, 1983; Eagleton, 1996). He says,
Ideology is indeed a system of representations, but in the majority of cases these representations have nothing to do with consciousness: they are usually images and occasionally concepts but it is above all as structures that they impose on the vast majority of men, not via their consciousness. (Althusser, 1971).

For Althusser, an ideology is a specic organisation of signifying practices which constitute human beings as social subjects, it is the stuff that makes us uniquely what we are, constitutive of our very identities; . . . it presents itself as an, everybody knows that, a kind of anonymous universal truth (Eagleton, 1996). This view of ideology represents a signicant change from Kevin Harriss version of Correspondence Theory and his argument that education is a misrepresentation of reality which promotes a false consciousness14 . According to Eagleton (1996), it is the self rather than the world that is misrepresented in Althussers notion of ideology15 . Althussers analysis thus provides some quite fundamental insights into the way hegemonic power may be effected through accounting education in order to manage the tension between capital and labour. Through Althussers re-theorization of ideology we can begin to see how the process of socialization may actually operate within accounting education. Althussers theory of ideological state apparatuses would suggest that the material structures of accounting education: the rituals; practices; social processes; the forms of the lectures that structure the day-to-day running of the university; the architecture and the categorization of subjects all play an important role in the structuring of students unconsciousness and the reproduction of the capitalist relations of production. In a similar vein, the Brazilian theologian Freire (1970), Freire and Romos (1972) suggests that ideology is materialized in education in the teacher/student relationship; in the subjects chosen to comprise the syllabus; in the method of choosing course content; in the way students may or may not feel free to question the curriculum; in the lack of consideration of non-orthodox issues; in the methods of testing students; and even in the physical layout of the classroom. Althusser implies that the subjectivities of accounting students are constructed as they live within, walk through and experience ideology as part of their everyday lives rather than through a cohesive body of knowledge. From personal experience it would seem that ideology operates through accounting education not primarily through the cogent way in which students can defend the prot-maximizing objective of business or articulate the function of accounting within a free-market system of economics but rather in the lack of discussion they can provide for what are quite obviously taken for granted yet lived assumptions. Eagleton (1996) explains,
Ideology is no mere set of doctrines but the stuff which makes us uniquely what we are,

The dialectic of accounting education

constitutive of our identities; on the other hand it presents itself as an, Everybody knows that, a kind of anonymous universal truth.

479

There would also seem to be some intuitive appeal in Althussers claim that the subjectivity being constructed as students live within materialized ideology is to some extend misrecognized in many cases. Perhaps one of the most crystalline observations it is possible to make in accounting education is that students study accounting because of the perceived job prospects it provides, not essentially because they nd it interesting. Yet in reality, for the majority of students the glamorized image they have of accountancy will bare little resemblance to the reality of being an accountant. Thus, it may not just be that accounting education operates hegemonically in providing students with the knowledge and attitudes that will enable them to perform a particular function within a neo-classical system of market economics but that it may also create a supporting, self-image of the kind of individuals who perform this task, thus making it bearable. Eagleton (1996) explains,
The dismal truth of the mater is that society has no need for me at all. It may need someone to full my role within the process of production, but there is no reason why this particular person should be me . . . But for the purpose of social life, these truths must be masked.

Finally, Althusser would also suggest that accounting education operates hegemonically through the linguistic systems of representations that carry meaning and which structure the unconsciousness of students. Accounting education may therefore be seen to provide students with a subconscious structure of linguistic representations, and corresponding grammars. Yet while Althusser contributes to an understanding of how accounting education operates hegemonically, some questions remain. Althusser argues that the aim of education is to transmit a body of knowledge to students, however, he fails to seriously address how knowledge is produced and transmitted (Erben & Gleeson, 1977). The structures which are so prominent in Althussers work seem to be overpowering and the processes which characterize men and women as active producers of knowledge and agents of social change seem to be ignored (Erben & Gleeson, 1977). Althusser fails to analyse how knowledge is transferred to students and how meanings are constructed through this process. The following subsection draws primarily on the work of Basil Bernstein and Pierre Bourdieu in order to explore this process in more detail. The detailed ways in which interests are served through accounting education Basil Bernstein and Michel Foucault The work of Basil Bernstein provides further detail on the hegemonic operation of power within accounting education. Bernstein focuses specically on the way knowledge is transferred to students through linguistic structures which are predicated upon social structures. His theory starts from the assumption that because language is a social phenomenon there is a correlation between linguistic structures and social structures and because different social structures exist side by side, so different linguistic codes exist side by side16 , 17 (Bernstein,1976; Hasan, 1973). According to Bernstein, codes determine the generation of meaning and this subsequently delimits behaviour18 (Hasan, 1973). He says,

480

K. McPhail
Social structure transforms language possibility into a specic code which elicits, generalizes and reinforces those relationships necessary for its continuance. These codes determine perception, experience and identity, and correspondingly reproduce culture and social structure.

Bernstein contends that codes display specic syntactical, lexical and phonological characteristics that delimit the individuals experience of a particular situation (Hasan, 1973). Hasan (1973) explains,
Orientation to a particular code implies a particular kind of experience and attitude on the part of the speaker, making him sensitive to just those aspects of social relationships which underlie the use and the origin of the code. Thus the code of communication created by a particular form of social relation also perpetuates this same form of social relation by sensitising the speakers to just these particular social meanings.

Bernstein argues that working and middle class language are based on two fundamentally different grammatical systems and vocabularies (Holly, 1977). He contends that class structures and their attendant inequalities are reproduced by the education system because the system promotes the linguistic codes of the dominant class (Hasan, 1973; Holly, 1977). Giroux (1983, see also, Gibson, 1984) explains,
Bernstein attempts to illuminate how curriculum, pedagogy and evaluation constitute message systems whose underlying structural principles represent a mode of social control rooted in wider society. In investigating the question of how the structure of education shapes both identity and experience, he [Bernstein] develops a theoretical framework in which he claims that schools embody an educational code, (Giroux, 1983).

Bernstein thus locates the operation of power deep within the linguistic and cognitive codes that are generated by social structures19 (see Giroux, 1983). From Bernsteins perspective, power would be seen to operate hegemonically within accounting education through the way in which knowledge is transferred to accounting students. This process would be seen to be mediated by a specic linguistic code. Within the accounting literature researchers have already made the connection between accounting and language. Laovie (1987, see also, Belkaoui, 1978; Morgan, 1988) for example suggests that accounting is literally a language with corresponding grammatical rules. Philips (1991) suggests that, conventionally, accounting education initiates students into the values and language of the profession, a rhetoric of scientism and positive epistemology (Love, 1992). A vocabulary characterized by a sense of objective truth (Love, 1992; see also, Hooper et al., 1987). A language of numbers (Chua, 1996). Accounting education provides students with a body of knowledge which they subsequently draw on to make sense of their actions within specic contexts (Dingwall, 1987; see also, Perks, 1993). Dingwall (1987) calls this body of knowledge, a, special rhetoric, a vocabulary of motives and justications and a distinct methodology which is used for ascertaining facts. Within accounting education, this, frame of reference, serves to distinguish the profession and legitimate its professional status (Power, 1991; Perks, 1993). According to Bernstein, the language of accounting would be seen to serve a specic function within the subjugation of accounting students and in managing the dialectic between capital and labour. Bernsteins work would suggest that the linguistic code of accounting, communicated through accounting education, is based on the linguistic code of the dominant class (see Chua, 1996). This perspective

The dialectic of accounting education

481

may go some way towards explaining two observations in accounting education. Firstly, the majority of accounting students who nd social, critical and environmental courses difcult to engage with may have difculties because they are based on a linguistic code they are not familiar with. Secondly, however, and perhaps more signicantly, the contention that the examination process measures students grasp of the predominant class code rather than their intellectual ability may effectively regulate entry to accounting degree programs and exclude students with threatening intellectually substandard perspectives. Students who nd it difcult to make sense of accounting concepts such as prot, assets or accountability may therefore not be, unintelligent, rather it may be that they come from social backgrounds that do not possess the requisite grammar that helps them to see situations in a particular way. However, by examining and labelling them as ignorant, and encouraging them to see their view of the world as intellectually inferior rather than alternative and politically threatening, the education process may help medicate the tension between capital and labour in a hegemonic way. Foucaults micro analysis of power might provide further clarication of how power may operate hegemonically through accounting codes (Hoskin & Macve, 1986, 1988, 2000). Foucault contends that power operates through the discourses of education in a creative rather than a restrictive manner20 . He suggests that students subjectivities are constructed through educational discourses (McPhail, 1999) and as such, his work contains a re-theorization of the issue of knowledge so prominent in all the perspectives discussed so far. He contends that power is exercised within education through the knowledge that it provides individuals with about themselves rather than knowledge of skills and processes (as in Correspondence Theory) (McPhail, 1999). Foucault contends that subjects make themselves known by answering the questions set in the examination21 (Foucault, 1977; Hoskin & Macve, 1986, 2000; Hoskin, 1992). Ball (1992) explains, surveillance, observation and classication normalize children . . . but the developing child is an object produced by those very same practices. Through the process of examination, the truth about the individual is revealed to themselves as well as to others, (McPhail, 1999). Thus through the examination, individuals come to see themselves in a particular way as healthy or unhealthy, intelligent or unintelligent, normal or abnormal and discipline themselves accordingly. From this perspective it is clear how the objective examination and classication of pupils can serve a political and ideological function. Objective intelligence testing, for example was used in the 1920s to construct immigrants and social deviants as intellectually inferior (Bowles & Gintis, 1977). Marks (1974) for example reports that,
. . . in Albany, New York, for example it was reported that eighty-eighty per cent of the citys prostitutes were feeble minded; sixty-nine percent of white inmates and ninety per cent of the black inmates in a Kansas prison were found to be morons; a study revealed that ninety-eight per cent of unmarried mothers were found to be feeble minded (Marks, 1974). Immigrants, tests showed, were particularly prone to low intelligence.

Similarly, a study by Professor Heny Goddard in 1912, sponsored by the United States Immigration Service, found that,
. . . eighty-three per cent of Jews, eighty per cent of Hungarians, seventy-nine per cent of Italians, and eighty-seven per cent of Russians were feeble minded (Kamin, 1974, in

482
Bowles & Gintis, 1977)

K. McPhail

The power of the examination can also be seen in this quote by Terman in Karier (1974),
At every step in the childs progress the school should take account of his vocational possibilities. Preliminary investigations indicate that an IQ below 70 rarely permits anything better than unskilled labour; that the range from 70 to 80 is pre-eminently that of semi-skilled labour, from 80 to 100 that of skilled or ordinary clerical labour, from 100 to 110 or 115 that of semi-professional pursuits; and that above all these are the grades of intelligence which permit one to enter the professions or the larger elds of business.

When Foucaults insights are combined with the work of Bernstein it becomes clear how power could operate through accounting education in a surreptitious and hegemonic way as individuals are constructed and construct themselves as intelligent or unintelligent depending on their grasp of the linguistic codes of capitalism. Accounting examinations are use to ensure that only those with the clearest grasp of the dominant cultural capital and therefore least likely to disrupt are allowed to proceed. Those individuals deemed intelligent by the accounting education process leave subconsciously equipped with a training in how to exam and therefore discipline others (Hoskin & Macve, 1986, 1988, 2000). Thus, accounting may be seen to manage the dialectic between capital and labour not only by constructing docile accounting students but also by subconsciously providing them with the techniques to subsequently manage labour and ensure their docility. However, despite the insights that Foucault and Bernsteins work provides for understanding the hegemonic nature of accounting education, Bernsteins analysis in particular is based on an inadequate concept of class which lacks theoretical support (Holly, 1977). He also presents a stereotypical view of the working class and the language they use. Holly (1977) suggests that, a thorough attempt to analyse the relationship between class and language would require us to examine the relationship of the dominant culture of our society to the culture of the dominated. The kind of analysis that Holly calls for can be found in the work of Pierre Bourdieu and the following section discusses his work in more detail. Pierre Bourdieu Pierre Bourdieus Theory of Symbolic Violence focuses on the ways capitalist societies reproduce themselves and provides the basis for a more detailed analysis of the way power operates hegemonically within accounting education in order to manage the dialectic between capital and labour. Like Althusser, Bourdieu contends that schools are quite autonomous institutions which are only indirectly inuenced by economic and political power (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1986). Indeed, he contends that it is the autonomy of schools that enable them to perform an important function within capitalism. This is because their impartiality enables them to serve specic interests yet simultaneously appear independent and neutral (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1986). Bourdieus work provides one of the clearest delineations of Bowles and Gintiss basic contention that the education system manages the dialectical tension between capital and labour by providing a docile workforce. Bourdieu contends that education

The dialectic of accounting education

483

provides students with the cultural capital that legitimises both economic and social systems and their place within them. Aronowitz and Giroux (1986) explain,
Rather than being linked directly to the power of an economic elite, schools are seen as part of a larger universe of symbolic institutions that do not overtly impose docility and oppression, but reproduce existing power relations more subtly through the production and distribution of a dominant culture that tacitly conrms what it means to be educated, (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1986).

Bourdieu views schools in terms of a dialectic between human agents and dominant structures and his perspective is based on two important notions: cultural capital and symbolic violence. According to Bourdieu, each child inherits from their parents a set of symbols: meanings and values, or cultural capital, associated with their particular class. However, the education process promotes specic ways of speaking, kinds of knowledge and ways of seeing the world that are only familiar to families with specic class backgrounds. Thus, some students are specically disadvantaged. He says,
The culture of the elite is so near that of the school that children from the lower middle class . . . can acquire only with great effort something which is given to the children of the cultivated classes, (Bourdieu, 1974).

Bourdieu contends that the kind of knowledge that provides a stepping stone to a professional career is one example of a dominant knowledge. Aronowitz and Giroux (1986) explain,
high-status knowledge often corresponds to bodies of knowledge that provide a stepping stone to professional careers via higher education. Such knowledge embodies the cultural capital of the middle and upper classes and presupposes a certain familiarity with the linguistic and social practices it supports.

Thus, capital comes to dominate but this time it is a particular kind of capital: cultural capital. Aronowitz and Giroux (1986) dene cultural capital as, the different set of linguistic and cultural competencies that individuals inherit by way of the classlocated boundaries of their families. Bourdieu contends that capitalist, class-based societies are reproduced through, symbolic violence, in other words through the imposition of a denition of the social world that is consistent with the interests of the dominant class. He contends that the culture inculcated by the school reafrms the culture of the ruling class while at the same time, deligitimising other cultures. Bourdieu argues that social life contains a number of different elds, each with its own internal logic and institutions. He suggests that individuals strive to attainment a level of, symbolic capital, that will enable them to legitimate themselves within each eld (Eagleton, 1996). Within the context of education, Bourdieu contends that power operates through the students perception that the teacher is in possession of the cultural capital that they require to legitimate themselves (Eagleton, 1996). Bourdieu concludes that the educational system operates ideologically by regulating the distribution of this cultural capital. Bourdieu thus claims that students play an active role in subjugating themselves. His notions of habitat (positions) and habitus22 (dispositions) are important for understanding this part of his argument. Bourdieu (1981) describes habitat as,

484

K. McPhail

the history which has accumulated over the passage of time in things, machines, buildings, monuments, books, theories, customs and the law. He explains that the habitus is, a system of durably acquired schemes of perception, thought and action, engendered by objective conditions but tending to persist even after an alteration of those conditions. He contends that it is these internalized systems rather than a conscious set of rules that regulate individuals behaviour (Eagleton, 1996). Habitus rules out other modes of behaviour as unthinkable without thinking about it. Aronowitz and Giroux (1986) call habitat objectied history and habitus embodied history. The habitus becomes deeply embedded within the individuals psyche as needs and dispositions. Bourdieu claims that power and domination operate within education through the correlation between the set of dispositions, needs and expectations (or ideology) that form the individuals habitus and the ideology objectied in the educational institution (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1986). Bourdieus work would thus imply that within accounting education there is a close correlation between the expectations and needs that have become embedded within accounting students habitus and the decades of history and ideology objectied within accounting institutions. From a cultural capital perspective, the reason why accounting education is so powerful may not essentially be because of the information and techniques communicated to accounting students but because that body of knowledge meets the needs and expectations embodied in their habitus. In addition because it meets their expectations they enthusiastically participate in their own subjugation. Bourdieus theory may also help us to understand why challenging accounting students views in critical, social and environmental courses has proved difcult. If individuals experience a form of educational institution that challenged their embodied ideology and their expectations, in other words if there is a mis-match between habitat and habitus, then one could understand how this could, and in some cases has, engendered a sense of incomprehension and even crisis within accounting students. Taken together, the perspectives above indicate some of the ways in which power may operate in a hegemonic way through accounting education. Accounting education, as part of a broader system of ideological and repressive state apparatuses, controls the dialectic between capital and labour through the linguistic codes used to convey accounting knowledge to students and the extent to which this process corresponds to their habitus. The knowledge conveyed to students through didactic forms of lecturing; structures and practices of accounting education, linguistic structures and the examination process all coalesce to subjugate accounting students. The limitations of the perspectives discussed However, while these perspectives provide important insights into the hegemonic power of accounting education, almost all of them (perhaps with the exception of Foucault (see McPhail, 1999)) differ from the hegemonic model in one important respect: Gramscis notion of hegemony is not as totalizing and allows room for resistance. Bowles and Gintiss Correspondence Theory, Bernstiens codes23 ,24 and Bourdieus work on cultural capital all seem to imply a monolithic view of

The dialectic of accounting education

485

the power of accounting education (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1986). They present individuals as inordinately acquiescent and overly determined (Giroux, 1983 see also, Gibson, 1984). Indeed, the relationship between the economic system and the education system is almost presented as a social law25 . Althusser is perhaps most at fault here. Like many structuralists, he views human being simply as role-bearers and precludes the possibility of human agency and critical consciousness26 ,27 (see Erben & Gleeson, 1977; Giroux, 1983; Eagleton, 1996). These perspectives however simplify the complexity of educational institutions, presenting them as totally ideological structures which have the sole purpose of promoting the interests of the dominant culture28 . They fail to appreciate that while accounting education serves the interests of capitalism, it also serves other interests, for example race and gender (Lehman, 1989; Roberts & Coutts, 1992; Kirkham & Loft, 1993; Eagleton, 1996; Bebbington et al., 1997). Erben and Gleeson (1977) conclude that Althussers position may in the end be, quietist because its message not only leaves teachers attened and speechless, but it is likely to reinforce the idea that radical change is beyond their frames of reference. In contrast to these positions, Gramscis notion of hegemony allows room for resistance29 . Williams (1977, see also, Entwistle, 1979; Smart, 1994) for example explains,
the reality of hegemony, in the extended political and cultural sense, is that while by denition it is always dominant, it is never total or exclusive. . . it does not just passively exist as a form of dominance. It has to be continually renewed, recreated and modied. It is also continually resisted, limited and challenged by pressures not all its own.

Both personal experience and empirical evidence suggests that economic and social reproduction within accounting education is a contested, and at least potentially dialectical, process and as such would support Gramscis position30 (Williams, 1977; Giroux, 1983; Gibson, 1984; Marcuse, 1991). The logic and values of capitalism are resisted by some accounting educators (see, for example, Laughlin et al., 1986; Lewis et al., 1992; Gray et al., 1994) and some students31 (see Power, 1991). However, while many educational studies have indicated that we might expect these examples of resistance to emanate from clashes between different cultures (class, religious or national) (Hargreaves, 1967; Sharp & Green, 1975; Willis, 1977; Corrigan, 1979; Giroux, 1983), this does not appear to be the case in accounting education32 . Resistance seems to emanate from the actions and beliefs of specic individuals. The disruptive potential of alternative classes and cultures appears to be mitigated by hegemonic capitalist structures and discourses that make the logic of resistance illogical and the conicts between the capitalistic base of accounting and other belief systems consonant. Despite the lack of conict between cultures, examples of purposive, conscious and self-understanding actions of some individuals within accounting education challenge any notion of an all-encompassing system of ideological reproduction that is neatly and imperiously accomplished33 (Gibson, 1984; see Williams, 1977; Giroux, 1983). It is this observation that suggests that a more sophisticated model of consciousness is required than is presented in the perspectives discussed above. Gramscis (1971) theory of hegemony provides a more sophisticated model

486

K. McPhail

of consciousness. He extends the analysis of the operation of ideology beyond questions of false consciousness to a consideration of what consciousness is and how it is constituted (Giroux, 1983). He contends that ideology is not mediated entirely in the sphere of consciousness as orthodox Marxism proposes, or purely in the realm of unconsciousness as Althusser seems to suggest, but rather argues that it is affected through a combination of unconsciousness and common sense that contains the possibility of critical consciousness (Giroux, 1983). Unconsciousness Gramsci (1971) presents a notion of unconsciousness which, unlike Bernstien, Bourdieu and Althussers (1971) deterministic and complete domination, is articulated in terms of a dialectic which has both critical as well as subjugating potential (Giroux, 1983; see also, Marcuse, 1991). He contends that it is not inconsistent to accept both a view of ideology that places the exercise of control deep within the unconsciousness, and the possibility of critique, if we still hang on to a belief in human agency. Gramsci implies that students can and should be encouraged to critically interrogate their own personal, inner histories, and feelings in order to understand how their individual experiences are,
reinforced, contradicted and suppressed as a result of the ideologies mediated in the material and intellectual practices that constitute education, (see Giroux, 1983).

Common sense In Bourdieus theory of cultural capital, the dominant culture becomes accepted by students as common sense. However, while Gramsci accepts that ideology does operate through common sense he contends that it is often characterized by disorder and contradiction and suggests that students can be challenged to interrogate their own set of common sense assumptions (Giroux, 1983). He proposes that it may be possible to use these inconsistencies to uncover the interests served by a particular set of beliefs and to engender a form of critical consciousness. So far this section has explored how power may be seen to operate through accounting education in a hegemonic way. In section 2, Gramscis interpretation of consciousness is used as a basis for developing a broader understanding of how the hegemonic operation of power within accounting education might be resisted.

2.

Education and the Possibility of Empowerment

Within the accounting literature, Lewis et al. (1992; see also, Misgeld, 1985; Gray et al., 1994) imply that education is a potentially liberating activity. They quote Dillard (1991) who says,
we [educationalists] can no longer be satised with only interpreting the world we must behave as an active catalyst for change.

The emancipatory potential of education in general is a fairly well-established argument. Educationalists (Williams, 1977; Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991), economists (Galbraith, 1972) environmentalists (Goldsmith et al., 1972) and critical theorists

The dialectic of accounting education

487

(Gramsci, 1971) have all argued that education can be used to counter the spread of hegemony. Marcuse (1991) for example argued,
It is precisely the preparatory character {of education} which gives it its historical signicance: to develop, in the exploited, the consciousness (and unconsciousness) which would loosen the hold of enslaving needs over the existencethe needs which perpetuate their dependence on the system of exploitation. Without this rupture, which can only be the result of political education in action, even the most elemental, the most immediate force of rebellion may be defeated, or become the mass basis of counterrevolution.

However, despite these exhortations the question remains how can accounting educationalists be an active catalyst for change? This section uses the hegemonic perspective of accounting education delineated above to develop some theoretically grounded answers to this question (Galbraith, 1972). It draws on the work of Freire and Romos (1972) in order to present some thoughts on both the objectives and practice of critical accounting education. The objectives of critical accounting education: the process of becoming From the literature it would appear that the practice of new radical democratic and critical education is based on two objectives: rstly conscienceization and secondly self-actualization. Conscienceisation In many cases the practice of accounting education is characterized by a rather spurious bank account metaphor where a static world of accounting objects are deposited within students34 (Freire & Romos, 1972; Freire, 1987; Freire & Faundez, 1989; Zeff, 1989). Freire argues that within conventional modes of education,
. . . Instead of communicating, the teacher issues communiques and makes deposits which students patiently receive, memorize and repeat. . . . In the banking concept of education, knowledge is a gift bestowed by those who consider themselves to be knowledgeable upon those they consider to know nothing. The more students work at storing the deposits entrusted to them, the less they develop the critical consciousness which would result from their intervention in the world as transformers of the world, (Freire, 1970, in Tadeu da Silva & McLaren, 1996).

This mode of education involves a narrating teacher who attempts to ll students with accounting knowledge which, in many instances, is alien, fragmented, isolated and contradictory to their existential situation. The accounting teacher thus regulates the way the world enters into the student (Freire & Romos, 1972). Freire and Romos (1972) provides the following example by way of explanation,
my desk, my books, my coffee cup, all the objects before meas bits of the world which surrounds mewould be inside me, as I am inside my study right now. This view makes no distinction between being accessible to consciousness and entering consciousness. The distinction, however, is essential: the objects which surround me are simply accessible to my consciousness, not located within it.

Thus, while the bank account approach may provide the student with a consciousness of the world of accounting, it does not make them conscious of this world. The primary objective of critical accounting education must therefore be the resolution of this teacher/student contradiction and the conscienceisation of the accounting world (Freire & Romos, 1972).

488

K. McPhail

Self-actualization The secondary objective relates to the individuals consciousness of the relationship between accounting processes and their own existential situation. Almost all the theoretical perspectives discussed above at least imply that subjectivity is never concluded (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1986). Being is viewed not as a static state but rather as a process of becoming, a continual coming into existence (Freire, 1987; Ferguson, 1995). However, it was contended that when this process of becoming is located within the hegemonic structures of accounting education, individuals adapt to the purposes of dominant power interests and are deprived of the burden to choosing their own purpose (Freire & Romos, 1972; Aronowitz & Giroux, 1986; Freire, 1987; Freire & Faundez, 1989; see also, Ferguson, 1995). More critical forms of accounting education would involve encouraging students to play a more active part in their own becoming (see Atkinson, 1991; Gare, 1995). More specically critical accounting education would involve trying to engender a critical reading of students existential situation which would allow them to develop their own frame of reference while simultaneously being aware of its contingency. Kierkegaard (in Ferguson, 1995) makes this point eloquently when he says, In becoming more and more, itself, it differentiates itself as an individual, (Kierkegaard, in Ferguson, 1995, see also, Harris & Brown, 1990). This objective however is not asocial. Self-actualization is not about individualism, it is about students taking authority and responsibility upon themselves. As Williams (1970) argues, radical new forms of pedagogy should involve, the taking of authority with all its consequent demands on oneself. It would not represent a withdrawal from society, but an increasing inclusiveness within it (Kierkegaard, in Ferguson, 1995). The issue of self-actualization would therefore have to be situated dialectically within the broader discourse of social responsibility and the rights of others (Giroux, 1991). Aronowitz and Giroux (1983) explain that radically democratic education views teaching and learning as part of, the wider pedagogy of public life, and is not against it or a threat to it. Particularly within the accounting profession, the accountant has become a dealer in cult knowledge rather than a, public actor. Students are rarely encouraged to consider the economic and social rationale for learning about accountancy or the concept of a profession (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991; Arrington, 1996). It is therefore imperative for critical accounting educators to predicate the self-actualization of individual accountants on a redenition of accountancy as a moral and public practice (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991; Schweiker, 1993; see also, Arrington, 1990,1996). Perhaps one obvious place to start with this redenition is the educational experience of accounting students, so that students are given the experience of democracy (Hoskin & Macve, 2000). The practice of critical accounting education This concluding section presents some thoughts on how these objectives could be translated into a critical accounting education in practice. From the analysis above, three epistemological issues seem to be important for developing a practice of critical accounting education: rstly, the knowledge students

The dialectic of accounting education

489

have when they come to accounting education; secondly, the knowledge conveyed to students as they study accounting; and nally the way knowledge is conveyed to students. The knowledge students have when they come to accounting education Althusser, Bernstein and Bourdieu all imply that accounting education is located within a broader structural and cultural environment. Repressive state apparatuses such as the law; ideological state apparatus like the family; and culture all impinge upon accounting education and accounting students. This sitatedness raises two issues: rstly being a catalyst for change within accounting education requires action outside accounting education and secondly if critical accounting education is going to be effective, it must commence from the existential situation and aspirations of accounting students. The challenge of Althusser, Bernstein and Bourdieus work is clear. Concerned accounting educators should not conne themselves to accounting education. More critical forms of accounting education require accounting academics to play an active role in the discourses within which the habitus of prospective accounting students is shaped and their expectations of accounting education are constructed. Secondly, and perhaps less obviously, critical accounting education needs to be grounded in the existential situation of individual accounting students. Guidance on how this process could be proceduralized may be provided in Frieres methodology for teaching literacy to peasant farmers in Brazil (Freire, 1987; Freire & Faundez, 1989; Godotti, 1994). The aim of this literacy programme was not only to teach farmers how to read but, starting from their own specic contexts, enable them to generate a critical reading of their existential situation. In preparation for the course, Freire would study the thematic universe of the individuals forming the group in order to identify generative themes (Gadotti, 1994). The thematic universe consists not only of the ideas, concepts and values of the group but also of the antithesis of these ideas. Words would be chosen which represented the way of life of the farmers and the thought-language with which they related to that reality. This initial research provided the words that would subsequently be used as the basis of the literacy project. The themes were used to decode the dialectical tension between the abstract idea and the individuals existential experience. Also at this secondary level, the fragmented themes were related to the groups thematic universe as a whole35 . The approach can be formalized into a three-stage process: rstly an investigation stage; secondly, the thematization stage when themes are developed from the initial investigation. The generative themes then become objects that mediate between the teacher and the student. Finally there is the problematization stage (Gadotti, 1994). The objective of this concluding stage is to present the existential situation of the students back to them as a problem that challenges them and commands a response. Thus, adopting a more democratic approach would not mean that students would decide what they are to be taught, rather it would mean that students would be co-investigators in the search for the thematics to be investigated as well as their subsequent decoding36 . Although accounting students have profoundly different life experiences to peasant farmers, the principle of grounding critical accounting education on an investigation

490

K. McPhail

of the existential situation of students and their families is fundamentally important if critique is not to be rejected as incomprehensible or irrelevant (see Power, 1991). For example, locating a discussion of power and accounting in a students experience of part-time work in order to fund their studies, could be more effective than didactically informing them that accounting helps capital extract surplus value form labour. Applying this approach might go some way towards the apparent inability of students to grasp the relevance of critical interpretations of accounting. Identifying both different groups of students, and themes from the life experiences of those students (perhaps from their national/religious/cultural/class backgrounds) could potentially provide a set of frames across which issues of power and accountability could be mutually explored. It may also go some way towards generating the creative dialectical tension that appears to be missing from accounting education. Knowledge conveyed to students The issue of what to teach has to some extent been addressed above. It is clear from the critical education literature that what is required is not a new deposit of critical or environmental knowledge in students. However, what concerns me here is the question of how knowledge would be conceptualized in a more critical form of accounting education. Within the conventional process of accounting education the body of knowledge conveyed to accounting students provides them with a set of meanings which subsequently gives their actions meaning in a very passive way (Dingwall, 1987; Power, 1991). A more critical form of accounting education would conceptualize knowledge as an active tool that students can use to generate their own meanings and make sense of their life-world, rather than a set of meani ngs or perhaps even just words, that are deposited in the student (Freire & Romos, 1972; Frieri & Faundez,1989). The kind of thematic investigations discussed above would thus strive to create knowledge through an organic process rather than simply transmit knowledge (Giroux, 1991). Teaching knowledge The third issue to be addressed relates to the form that critical accounting education should take (Freire, 1987; Freire & Faundez, 1989; Tadeu da Silva & McLaren, 1996). From the work of Althusser, Bernstein, Bourdieu and Foucault discussed above it is clear that changing the knowledge conveyed to students will have little impact if it is taught in the same didactic way and assessed using the same kind of examination procedures. In many instances accounting education has had sadomasochistic overtones (Freire & Romos, 1972; Freire, 1987; Freire & Faundez, 1989; Aronowitz, 1996). The sadistic domination of the lecturer corresponding to the disciplinary masochism of them student as they regulate their behaviour to maintain the t between habitat and habitus (see Bourdieu, 1981; Aronoxitz, 1986; McPhail, 1999). Freire and Romos (1972), drawing on Fromm elaborates on the nature of this relationship:
the pleasure in complete domination over another person is the very essence of the sadistic drive. Another way of formulating the same thought is to say that the aim of sadism is to transform man into a thing, something animate into something inanimate since by complete

The dialectic of accounting education

and absolute control the living loses one essential quality of lifefreedom. (Freire & Romos, 1972).

491

During their time at university, accounting students are taught by experience that it is normal for other people to organize their lives. Love (1992) explains that the language of accounting education communicates not only the authority of a particular tradition, but also the tradition of authority. Accounting students thus emerge assuming that it is their job to t into the status quo oblivious to the possibility that things could be different (Hunt, 1970). New forms of critical accounting education would therefore require a hermeneutic emancipation of the educational context within which learning takes place (Freire & Romos, 1972). This would involve both students and teachers actively interacting with what is taught in, conditions of mutual respect37 , through the open exchange of ideas and the proliferation of dialogue (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991; Giroux, 1991; Tadeu da Silva & McLaren, 1996; see also, Hoffman, 1982; Colby et al., 1987; Webb, 1996). Critical accounting education would involve providing students with the lived experience of empowerment and this would fundamentally involve the reconstruction of university accounting and nance departments as democratic public spheres. In contrast to the sadomasochistic undertones of prevailing forms of accounting education, more dialogical forms would, according to Freire and Romos (1972) be based on four conditions: love, faith, humility and hope. Critical education would be motivated by a love for, commitment to and faith in people. Rather than projecting ignorance onto others, the participants in the dialogue would be characterized by humility and a commitment to the common task of learning. As Freire and Romos (1972) says, at the point of encounter there are neither utter ignoramuses nor perfect sages; there are only people who are attempting, together, to learn more than they now know.

3.

Conclusion

This paper has drawn on some well-established critical education theory in order rstly to explore the hegemonic ways in which power may operate through accounting education and secondly to present some thoughts on what a critical accounting education might look like in practice. Section 1 discussed some of the ways in which power may operate in a hegemonic way through accounting education. It was suggested that the knowledge conveyed to students through didactic forms of lecturing; the material structures and practices of accounting education, linguistic structures and the extent to which this knowledge matches their own habitus, all works together to manage the dialectical tension between capital and labour. However, it was also suggested that accounting education and the associated struggle for the incorporation of meaning takes place within a contested arena, and that this gives accounting education a critical potential. Section 2 drew on Gramscis interpretation of consciousness in order to develop some thoughts on both the objectives and the practice of critical accounting education. It was suggested that critical accounting education needs to consider the insights from the critical education literature on the knowledge students have

492

K. McPhail

when they come to accounting education; the knowledge conveyed to students as they study accounting; and nally the way knowledge is conveyed to students. It was suggested that accounting education needs to be hermeneutically detatched from the social context within which it takes place with a view to encouraging students to take a more active part in their becoming and that this would involve (de)constructing accounting departments into democratic public spheres (Giroux, 1991). This paper concludes with a call for more critical research into accounting education (both theoretical and empirical) and calls for accounting academics to take up criticism from within and develop pedagogical practices that not only heighten the possibilities for critical consciousness but also for transformative action (Giroux, 1991).

Acknowledgements Ken McPhail is a lecturer at University of Glasgow. Special thanks to Rob Gray for his help in developing the ideas in this paper. Also thanks to John McKernan, Carol Adams and the rest of my colleges at Glasgow University; the participants at the APIRA conference in Osaka 1998; colleagues at Wollongong University and three anonymous referees for their helpful and insightful comments.

Notes
1. Particularly through instruction in ethics or social and environmental accounting (Lewis et al., 1992; Gray et al., 1994). 2. Wolin (1992) contends that of all the post-structuralist philosophers, Foucaults project seems closest to the early critical theorists. He says, Foucault and the early critical theorists share not only a common set of methodological concerns but share other concerns as well, particularly the mechanisms of domination and power, (Wolin, 1992). 3. Boggs (1976) thus views the Gramscian notion of hegemony as a point of departure form the classical Marxist notion of power which, he suggests, focussed excessively on the role of force and coercion as the basis of ruling class domination. 4. Gramsci contended that education was one of the most signicant sites for the operation of hegemonic power (see Freire and Romos, 1972; Freire, 1987 and more recently Giroux, 1983, 1996). 5. Material and economic factors. 6. Other social institutions such as the legal system, government and organized religion. 7. Education is seen to effect social and economic control by functioning as an agent of legitimation (Giroux, 1983). 8. The picture that emerges from Bowles and Gintiss history of education in America is that the education system developed out the tension between the Labour movements attempts to secure greater security; progressives, who saw it as a way of addressing urban deprivation and capitalists intent on controlling the militancy of workers. 9. They discuss two prominent perspectives on the development of education systems within capitalism, rstly the popular demand theory (Carleton, 1911) which says that the educational system developed in response to demand by the working classes and secondly the technological theory (Trow, 1966; Luff, 1971) which suggests that the educational system developed in response to the skills required by the system of production. Bowles and Gintis (1977) suggest that both of these perspectives are only partially correct. While there is historical evidence of demands for greater access to education in an effort to ensure greater mobility and security, educational reform appears to have been a minor issue in comparison with demands for land reform, co-ops and job security (Bowles & Gintis, 1977). In relation to the technological perspective, the evidence suggests that educated workers were not

The dialectic of accounting education

493

more productive than unschooled workers (Luff, 1971). 10. It would seem that the main periods of educational reform follow periods of political conict (Bowles & Gintis, 1977). 11. As such the discrepancy between the knowledge that students are provided with compared with the requirements of employers may not be signicant for understanding the powerfulness of accounting education. 12. Althusser argued that the relationship between education and the economy could not be reduced to a simple cause and effect relationship. Indeed, his work, amongst other things, is a reaction against the Marxist notion that economic structure is paramount both in constituting society and in effecting change within society (Gibson, 1984). While he still believed that the economic system was the most signicant factor in social reproduction, he nevertheless contended that focusing purely on this relationship was mistaken. Althusser argued that no single cause leads to one particular event but rather that, many paths lead to the same event, that is to say, events are not determined but, over determined. Thus, in his opinion, it was not just the economic system that was important. According to Althusser, accounting education should be viewed as more autonomous than this, it does not simply reect the economic order. This independence seems to imply a certain hopefulness which is not fully developed in Althussers essay. 13. Like Gramsci, he contended that while the state apparatus functioned primarily by overt force and coercion, the ideological state apparatus operated predominantly in a surreptitious way through ideology. Indeed, he argued that the ideological state apparatuses have become the most important factors in social reproduction since the development of industrialized societies and contended that education in particular had taken over as the dominant ideological apparatus (see Giroux, 1983). According to Althusser, education more than any other inuence in society operates to instill the specic values which supports the continued hegemony of the bourgeoisie as the ruling class the corresponding subservience of the proletariat. 14. Althussers perspective can be seen as an attack on rationalistic theories which view ideology as a system of distorting representations that can be empirically proven to be true or false (Eagleton, 1996). 15. The idea is that of the difference between the lived circumstances of the individual and their image of themselves. 16. Bernsteins thesis can be traced back to the Whoran hypothesis that reality is relative and is established by the attributes of the language one speaks (Hasan, 1973). 17. He identies four different contexts within which socialization can take place: the regulative context, the instructional context, the imaginative context and the interpersonal context and he suggests that these different forms of social integration will be characterized by four distinct linguistic systems. 18. His notion of codes can be dened as structures of thought, the fundamental principles which create everyday activity . . . a regulative principle tacitly acquired which generates relevant meanings, the form of their realization and their evolving contexts. 19. Even though Bernstein grounded his notion of codes in class structures and insisted that changing society would involve changing both class culture and class relationship, he also argued that linguistic codes could attain an, autonomy and causal power all of their own, (see Giroux, 1983; Gibson, 1984). He contends that codes and other linguistic constructs take over from socio-economic structures as the most important factor in determining an individuals actions, he says, I believe that the structure of socialization is not a set of roles but classication and framing relationships. It is these, I think, that shape the mental structures by establishing code procedures which are predicted upon distinctive rules. 20. Hoskin (1992) claims that although it may not be immediately apparent from his work, Foucault was a crypto-educationalist, (see, for example, Foucault, 1977). While Foucaults work was not explicitly about educational institutions, books such as Discipline and Punish and The Birth of the Clinic are essentially about educational practice. The etymology of the term discipline reveals the educational bent of Foucaults work. This word is a combination of two Latin words: discipulina and puer/puella, and literally means getting knowledge into the child (Hoskin, 1992). In Discipline and Punish, Foucault contends that the exercise of discipline produces docile bodies. The term docile again has educational connotations being the Latin for docilis or teachable (Hoskin, 1972). 21. In chapter 5 of The Birth of The Clinic, Foucault describes how a new and rigorous way of becoming a doctor was constituted through rigorous examination. Only proper training in properly constituted institutions would do. Doctors would become qualied, by a system of standardized studies and examinations. According to Foucault this mode of examination quickly spread across the human

494

K. McPhail

22. 23.

24.

25. 26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31. 32. 33.

34.

sciences, from psychiatry to pedagogy, from the diagnosis of diseases to the hiring of labour, operating as, a constant exchanger of knowledge, from the powerful (teacher, doctor, employer) to the powerless (pupil, patient, worker.) Bourdieu calls habitus, cultural unconscious. Bernstein seems to present his linguistic codes as social laws which have the force of scientic laws. In one paper for example he suggests that, codes can be specied by the following formula. . . . This has led Gibson (1984) for example, to conclude that his analysis is, shot through with tautologies masquerading as logical or causal connectors. Bernstein does contend that it is possible for a student to assimilate a different code. However, he says this would involve more than simply making the student learn certain aspects of the grammar and lexicon of the language. He contends that it would involve a complete change in their social identication (Bernstein, 1976). Bernstein (1976) contends, A prerequisite of the change in orientation to code is that the member may be enabled by some agency to perceive forms of relevance of meaning other than those to which he is sensitised by his own code orientation. This in turn entails that he should enter into some forms of social relation other than those which underlie the genesis of the code to which he orientated. The relevance of the hypothesis to the entire education system is obvious: education failure may not be as much a result of the pupils inability to master the concepts, as that of the educational system which fails to establish any relevance between these concepts and the pupils living of live. Bowles and Gintis later work goes beyond the rudimentary base superstructure dichotomy. In response to this kind of perspective Kierkegaard eloquently argues (in Ferguson, 1995), system and existence cannot be merged: system and consciousness correspond to each other, but existence is the very opposite. . . . Existence is the spacing that holds apart; the systemic is the conclusiveness that combines. The incompleteness of existence cannot be properly represented far less explained as a category within any system. This may be a little unfair. Gane (1974) for example contends that Althussers essay is an investigation. He says, Their demand to the reader is clear, they are not to be regarded as elements of a completed system, but as systemic interventions into specic conjunctures of theory and ideology. Although he initially presents ideological state apparatuses like the school as sites of conict and contradiction this preliminary observation gives way to a functionalist, undialectical and somewhat pessimistic account of ideology (Eagleton, 1996). Off all the perspectives discussed above, Foucault seems to be closest to Gramsci. Giroux (1983) explains Foucaults contention thus, In other words, domination is never total in this perspective, nor is it simply imposed on people. . . as Foucault continually reminds us, power is not a static phenomenon; it is a process that is always in play. Put another way, power must be viewed in part as a form of production inscribed in the discourse and capabilities that people use to make sense of the world. Otherwise the notion of power is subsumed under the category of domination and the issue of human agency gets relegated to either a marginal or insignicant place in educational theorizing. (Giroux, 1983). Herbert Marcuse seems to adopt a similar position, in One Dimensional Man (1991), when he suggests that, One-Dimensional Man will vacillate throughout between two contradictory hypotheses: (1) that advanced industrial society is capable of containing qualitative change for the foreseeable future; (2) that forces and tendencies exist which may break this containment and explode society, (Marcuse, 1991). Myself and some of my friends chose not to go into accounting rms but to engage with accounting through academia. This was a direct result of my own education. Educational research suggests that groups who resist the dominant culture often draw on their own alternative culture as a resource to sustain their opposition. While I believe that Girouxs perspective is correct, research by Williams (1977, in Power, 1991) for example, has shown that resistance is often compromised. This adds to the complexity of the whole educational process. In his studies of the educational experiences of working class teenagers, Willis (1977) identies a sense in which some students acquiesce and are content to play the, qualications game. Here, generalized attitudes of irony towards the knowledge content coexist with the recognition that self-interest requires a commitment to play the game and pass. Likewise Power (1991), in his analysis of accounting education, found that although some students reacted with a certain amount of resistance and cynicism towards the examination system, they nevertheless submitted to and became increasingly colonized by its values (see Power, 1991). This propensity may be related to the fact that contemporary pedagogy seems to cultivate a strategic

The dialectic of accounting education

495

attitude towards education, an attitude which prioritises exam success rather than critical reection on the relationship between education and society (Blundell & Booth, 1988). Blundell and Booth (1988) argue that this preference becomes ever more rmly entrenched as students progress through their courses. Passing exams becomes ever more important in successive years. 35. Gadotti (1994) provides the following example of how the word, wages might be used. Firstly the teacher would develop ideas for discussion. These might be: the value of work and its rewards; the use of wages in maintaining the worker and his family; the minimum wage and a just wage; weekly rest and holidays. Secondly the teacher would encourage the group to discuss their own particular circumstances: for example the value and rewards of their work; the right that each has to a just salary. 36. One technique that has been used in order to facilitate this is the decoding essay where individuals are encouraged to write their perspectives on a specic generative theme. These essays are subsequently circulated and discussed. 37. Freire however does not deny that the educator continues to have authority in these processes. He says, I have never said that the educator is the same as the pupil. Quite the contrary, I have always said that whoever says that they are equal is being demagogic and false. The educator is different from the pupil. But this difference, from the point of view of the revolution must not be antagonistic. The difference becomes antagonistic when the authority of the educator, different from the freedom of the pupil is transformed into authoritarianism, (Freire in Godotti, 1994).

References
Althusser, L., Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses (Notes towards an Investigation), 1970. in Althusser L. Lenin And Philosophy And Other Essays (Trans) Brewster, B. (London: New Left Books, 1971). Amernic, J. H., The Rhetoric Versus the Reality, or is the Reality Mere Rhetoric? A Case Study of Public Accounting Firms Responses to a Companys Invitation for Alternative Opinions on an Accounting Matter, Critical Perspectives On Accounting, Vol. 7, 1996, pp. 5775. Armstrong, P., Changing Management Control Strategies: The Role of Competition between Accountancy and Other Organisational Professionals, Accounting Organisations And Society, 1985, pp. 129148. Armstrong, P., The Rise of Accounting Controls in British Capitalist Enterprises, Accounting Organisations And Society, Vol. 12, No. 5, 1987, pp. 415436. Armstrong, P., The Inuence of Michel Foucault on Accounting Research, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 5, 1994, pp. 2555. Aronowitz, S., Paulo Frieres Radical Democratic Humanism, in P. Mclaren & P. Leonard (eds), Paulo Friere, A Critical Encounter (New York: Routledge). Aronowitz, S. & Giroux, H. A., Education Under Siege, The Conservative, Liberal and Radical Debate Over Schooling (London & Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986). Aronowitz, S. & Giroux, H. A., Postmodern Education Politics, Culture And Social Criticism (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1991). Arrington, C. E., Intellectual Tyranny and Public Interest: the Quest for the Holy Grail and the Quality of Life, Advances In Public Interest Accounting, Vol. 3, 1990, pp. 116. Arrington, C. E. & Fancis, J. R., Letting the Chat Out of the Bag: Deconstruction, Privilege and Accounting Research, Accounting Organizations and Society, Vol. 14, No. 1/2, 1989, pp. 128. Arrington, C. E., On the Moral Education of Accounting Students: Practice and the Dignity of the Practitioner, Draft Paper, February 1996. Atkinson, A., Principles of Political Ecology (London: Belhaven Press, 1991). Ball, S. J., Foulcalt and Education: Disciplines and Knowledge (London: Routledge, 1992). Ball, S., Hull, R., Skelton, M. & Tudor, R., The Tyranny of Devils Mill: Time and Talk at School, in S. Delamont (ed.), Readings in Interaction in the Classroom (London: Melliven, 1984). Bebbington, K. J., Thompson, I. & Wall, D., Accounting Students and Constructed Gender: an Exploration of Gender in the Context of Accounting Degree Choices, Journal of Accounting Education, Vol. 15, No. 2, 1997, pp. 241267. Belkaoui, A., Linguistic Relativity in Accounting, Accounting Organisations and Society, 1978, pp. 97104.

496

K. McPhail

Bernstein, B., A Sociolinguistic Approach to Socialisation: with Some Reference to Educability, II, The Human Context, Vol. II, No. 2 (London: Chaucer Publishing Company, 1973). Bernstein, B., Class, Codes & Control (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1976). Blundell, L. & Booth, P., Teaching Innovative Accounting Topics: Student Reaction to a Course in Social Accounting, Accounting & Finance, Vol. 28, No. 1, May 1988. Boggs, C., Gramscis Marxism (London: Pluto Press, 1976). Bourdieu,, The School as a Conservative Force: Scholastic and Cultural Inequalities, in Eggleston John (ed.), Contemporary Research in the Sociology of Education (London: Methuen, 1974). Bourdieu, Outline of Theory & Practice, in Knorr-Cetina Karin & Cicourel Aaron (eds), Advances in Social Theory and Methodology (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1981). Bowles, S. & Gintis, H., Schooling in Capitalist America Education Reform and the Contradictions of Economic Life (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1976). Bowles, S. & Gintis, H., Capitalism and education in the United States, in M. Young & G. Whitty (eds), Society, State and Schooling, pp. 192228 (Guilford: The Falmer Press, 1977). Brown, B. F., Education for Responsible Citizenship: The Report of The National Task Force on Citizenship Education (New York: McGraw Hill, 1977). Carleton, F. T., Economic Inuences Upon Educational Progress in the U.S. 18201850 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1911). Chua, W. F., Teaching and Learning only the Language of NumbersMonolinualism in a Multilingual World, Critical Perspectives On Accounting, Vol. 7, 1996, pp. 129156. Corrigan, P., Schooling the Smash Street Kids (London: MacMillan, 1979). Davis, S. W. & Sherman, W. R., The Accounting Change Commission: a Critical Perspective, Critical Perspectives On Accounting, Vol. 7, 1996, pp. 159189. Dillard, J. F., Accounting as a Critical Social Science, Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1991, pp. 828. Dillard, J. F. & Tinker, T., Commodifying Business and Accounting Education: The Implications of Accreditation, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 7, 1996, pp. 215225. Dingwall, R., The Certication of Competence: Assessment in Occupational Socialization, Urban Life, 1987, pp. 367393. Dreyfus, H. L. & Rabinow, P., Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics (Sussex: The Harvester Press Ltd, 1982). Dreyfus, H. L. & Rainbow, P., What is Maturity? Habermas and Foucault on What is Enlightenment?, in C. D. Hoy (ed.), Foulcault A Critical Reader (Oxford: Blackwell, 1994). Duane, M., Education in Britain Today, in D. Rubinstein & C. Stoneman (eds), Education For Democracy (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Ltd, 1970). Durkheim, E., Education & Sociology, Trans. Sherwood D. Fox Free Press, 1956. Eagleton, T., Ideology: An Introduction (London: Verso, 1996). Entwistle, H., Antonio Gramsci Conservative Schooling for Radical Politics (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979). Erben, M. & Gleeson, D., Education as Reproduction: A Critical Examination of some Aspects of the Work of Louis Althusser, in M. Young & G. Whitty (eds), Society, State and Schooling pp. 7392 (Guilford: The Falmer Press, 1977). Ferguson, H., Melancholy and the Critique of Modernity Soren Kierkegaards Religious Philosophy (London: Routledge, 1995). Foucault, M., Discipline and Punish, The Birth of The Prison (London: Allen Lane, 1977). Freire, P., A Pedagogy for Liberation (1987). Freire, P., Cultural Action and Conscientization, Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 40, Aug. 1970, pp. 452477. Freire, P. & Faundez, A., Learning to Question: A Pedagogy of Liberation (New York: Continuum, 1989). Freire, P. & Romos, M. B., Pedagogy of the Oppressed (Hamondsworth: Penguin, 1972). Gadotti, M., in J. Milton (ed.), Reading Paulo Friere, His Life and Word (Trans.) (New York Press). Galbraith, J. K., The New Industrial State (London: Penguin Books, 1972). Galhofer, S. & Haslam, J., Analysis of Benthams Chestomathia, or Towards a Critique of Accounting Education, Critical Perspectives On Accounting, Vol. 7, 1996, pp. 1331. Gane, M., Althusser in English, Theoretical Practice, Vol. 1, 1974. Gare, A. E., Postmodernism and the Environmental Crisis (London: Routledge, 1995). Gaustafson, J. M., Education for Moral Responsibility, Moral Education Five Lectures (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1970).

The dialectic of accounting education

497

Gibson, R., Structuralism and Education (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1984). Giroux, H. A., Theory & Resistance in Education a Pedagogy for the Opposition (Massachusetts: Bergin & Garvey, 1983). Giroux, H. A., Fugitive Cultures Race Violence & Youth (New York: Routledge, 1996). Godotti, M., Reading Paulo Freire: His Life & His Work (Albany: State University of New York, 1994). Goldsmith, E., Allen, R., Allaby, M., Davoll, J. & Lawrence, S., A Blueprint for Survival (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972). Gramsci, A., Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1971). Gray, R. H., Bebbington, J. & McPhail, K., Teaching Ethics and the Ethics of Teaching: Educating for Immorality and a Possible Case for Social and Environmental Accounting, Accounting Education, Vol. 3, 1994, pp. 5175. Greer, C., The Great School Legend (New York: Vicking Press, 1973). Grey, C., Debating Foucault: a Critical Reply to Neimark, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 5, 1994, pp. 524. Gross, A. G., Discourse on Method: The Rhetorical Analysis of Scientic Text, Pretext, No. 9, 1988, pp. 169186. Hargreaves, D. H., Social Relations in a Secondary School (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967). Harris, K., Education and Knowledge (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979). Harris, C. & Brown, W., Developmental Constraints on Ethical Behaviour in Business, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 9, 1990, pp. 855862. Hasan, R., Code, Register and Social Dialect, in Bernstein Bazil (ed.), Class, Codes and Control, Volume 2. Applied Studies towards a Sociology of Language (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1973). Hines, R. D., The Sociological Paradigm in Financial Accounting Research, Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1989, pp. 5276. Holly, D., in M. Young & G. Whitty (eds), Education and the Social Relations of a Capitalist Society in Society, State and Schooling, The Falmer Press, 1977. Hooper, T., Storey, J. & Willmott, R., Accounting for Accounting Students, Towards the Development of a Dialectical View, Accounting Organizations of Society, Vol. 12, No. 5, 1987, pp. 437456. Hope, T. & Gray, R., Power and Policy Making: The Development of an R & D Standard, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, Vol. 9, No. 4, 1982. Hoskin, K. F., Under Examination: The crypto-educationalist unmasked, in S. J. Ball (ed.), Foulcalt and education: disciplines and knowledge (London: Routledge, 1992). Hoskin, K. W., Boxing Clever: For, Against and Beyond Foucault in the Battle for Accounting Theory, Critical Perspectives in Accounting, Vol. 5, 1994, pp. 5785. Hoskin, K. W. & Macve, R., Accounting and the Examination: A Genealogy of Disciplinary Power, Accounting Organisations and Society, Vol. 11, No. 2, 1986, pp. 105136. Hoskin, K. W. & Macve, R., The Genesis of Accountability: the West Point Connections, Accounting Organisations and Society, Vol. 13, No. 1, 1988, pp. 3773. Hoskin, K. W. & Macve., Knowing More as Knowing Less? Alternative Histories of Cost and Management Accounting in the U.S. and the U.K., Accounting Historians Journal, Vol. 27, No. 1, June 2000. Hoy, D. C., Power Repression, Progress: Foucault. Lukes, and the Frankfurt School, in C. D. Hoy (ed.), Foucault A Critical Reader (Oxford: Blackwell, 1994). Hunt, A., The Tyranny of Subjects, in D. Rubinstein & C. Stoneman (eds), Education for Democracy (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1970). Illich, I., Deschooling Society (London: Penguin, 1986). Joll, J., Gramsci (London: Fontana, 1977). Kaestle, C., The Evolution of an Urban School System: New York City 17501850 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973). Kamin, L., The Science and Politics of I.Q. (Potomas: Erlbaum Associates, 1974). Karier, C., Ideology and Evaluationin Quest of Meritocracy, in M. W. Apple & M. J. Subkoviak (eds), Educational EvaluationAnalysis and Responsibility (Berkeley: McCutchan, 1974). Karier, C., Spring, J. & Violas, P. C., Roots of Crisis (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1973). Katz, M., Class, Bureaucracy and Schools (New York: Praeger, 1971). King, J. B., Tools-R-Us, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 13, 1994, pp. 243257. Kirkham, L. M. & Loft, A., Gender and the Construction of the Professional Accountant, Accounting Organisations & Society, Vol. 18, No. 6, 1993, pp. 507558.

498

K. McPhail

Laovie, D., The Accounting of Interpretations and the Interpretation of Accounts: The Communicative function of the Language of Business, Accounting Organizations & Society, Vol. 12, No. 6, 1987, pp. 579604. Laughlin, R. C., Lowe, A. E. & Puxty, T., Designing and Operating a course in Accounting Methodology: Philosophy, Experience and Some Preliminary Empirical Tests, The British Accounting Review, Vol. 18, Spring 1986, pp. 1742. Lazerson, M., Origin of Urban Schools: Public Education in Massachusetts (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971). Lehman, C. R., Accounting Ethics: Surviving Survival of the Fittest, in Neimark (ed.), Advances in Public Interest Accounting, Vol.2, pp. 7182, 1988. Lehman, C. R., The Importance of Being Ernst: Gender Conicts in Accounting, Advances in Public Interest Accounting, Vol. 3, 1989. Lewis, L., Humphrey, C. & Owen, D., Accounting and the Social: A Pedagogic Perspective, British Accounting Review, Vol. 24, No. 3, September 1992. Llewellyn, S., Working in Hermeneutic Circles in Management Accounting Research: Some Implications and Applications, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 4, 1993, pp. 231249. Love, H. W., Communication, Accountability and Professional Discourse: The Interaction of Language Values and Ethical Values, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 11, 1992, pp. 883892. Luff, H., New England Textile Labour in the 1840s: From Yankee Farmgirl to Irish Immigrant Mimeograph, January 1971. MacIntosh, N. B. & Scapens., Structuration Theory in Management Accounting, Accounting Organizations and Society, Vol. 15, No. 5, 1990, pp. 455477. Magill, A., Prophets of Extremity Nietzsche Heidegger Foucault & Derrida (Berckley, London: California University Press, 1985). Mahoney, J., An International Look at Business Ethics: Britain, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 9, 1990, pp. 545550. Manicas., Accounting as a Human Science, Accounting Organizations and Society, Vol. 18, No. 2/3, 1993, pp. 147161. Marcuse, H., One-Dimensional Man (London: Routledge, 1991). Marks, R., Trackers, Testers and Trustees, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Harvard University, 1974. McDonel, D., Theories of Discourse An Introduction (Oxford: Blackwell, 1986). McPhail, K. J., The Threat of Ethical Accountants: An Application of Foucaults Concept of Ethics to Accounting Education and Some Thoughts on Ethically Educating for the Other, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 10, No. 6, 1999, pp. 833866. McPhail, K. & Gray, J., Not Developing Ethical Maturity in Accounting Education: Hegemony, Dissonance and Homogeneity in Accounting Students Worldviews. CSEAR/University of Dundee Discussion Paper ACC/9605, 1966. Miller, P. & OLeary, T., Accounting and the Construction of the Governable Person, Accounting Organisations and Society, Vol. 12, No. 3, 1987, pp. 235265. Misgeld, D., Education and Cultural Invasion, Critical Theory And Public Life pp. 77111 (Cambridge: MIT, Mass 1985). Morgan, G., Accounting as Reality Construction: Towards a New Epistemology for Accounting Practice, Accounting Organisations And Society, Vol. 13, No. 5, 1988, pp. 477485. Morrow, R. A. & Brown, D. D., Critical Theory & Methodology (London: Sage, 1994). Muldoon., Henri Bergson and Postmodernism, Philosophy Today, Vol. 34, No. 3/4, Summer 1990. Neimark, M., The King is Dead. Long Live the King! Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 1, 1990, pp. 103114. Neimark, M., Caught in the Squeeze: An Essay on Higher Education in Accounting, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 7, 1996, pp. 111. OTool, Work Learning and The American Future (San Francisco: Jossey Bois, 1977). OTool., Work Learning and The American Future (San Francisco: Jossey Bios, 1997). Owen, D., Humphrey, C. & Lewis, L., Social and Environmental Accounting Education in British Universities, ACCA Certied Research Report 39. 1994. Paisey, C. & Paisey, N. J., Continuing Professional Education: Pause for Reection? Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 17, 1996, pp. 103128. Perks, R. W., Accounting And Society (London: Chapman and Hall, 1993). Philips, N., The Sociology of Knowledge: Toward an Existentialist View of Business Ethics, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 10, 1991, pp. 787795.

The dialectic of accounting education

499

Poster, M., Foucault, Marxism and History: Mode of Production Verses Mode of Information (Cambridge: Polity, 1984). Poster, M., Critical Theory And Post Industrialism: In Search of a Context (London: Cornell University Press, 1989). Poster, M., The Mode of Information: Post Structuralism and Social Context (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1990). Power, M., Educating Accountants: Towards a Critical Ethnography, Accounting Organizations and Society, Vol. 16, No. 4, 1991, pp. 333353. Reiter, S. A., The Kohlberg-Gilligan Controversy: Lessons for Accounting Ethics Education, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 7, 1996, pp. 3354. Roberts, J. & Coutts, J. A., Ferminisation and Professionalisation: A Review of an Emerging Literature in UK Accounting, Accounting Organisations and Society, Vol. 17, 1992, pp. 379395. Robson, K. & Cooper, D. J., Power and Management Control, in W. F. Chua, T. Lowe & T. Puxty (eds), Critical Perspectives in Management Control, pp. 79114 (Basingstoke and London: Macmillan, 1989). Schaeffer, F. A., Escape From Reason (London: Inter-Varsity Press, 1972). Schweiker, W., Accounting For Ourselves: Accounting Practice and the Discourse of Ehtics, Accounting Organisations and Society, Vol. 8, No. 2/3, 1993, pp. 231253. Sharp, R. & Green, A., Education and Social Control (London: Routledge Kegan Paul, 1975). Skorpen, E., Images of the Environment in Corporate America, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 10, 1991, pp. 687697. Smart, B., The Politics of Truth and the Problem of Hegemony, in C. H. Hoy (ed.), Foucault A Critical Reader (Oxford: Blackwell, 1994). Tadeu da Silva & McLaren P., in P. McLaren & P. Leonard (eds), Paulo Friere: A Critical Encounter (New York: Routledge, 1996). Tinker, A. M., Paper Prophets: A Social Critique of Accountancy (Eastbourne: Hoult Saunders, 1985). Tinker, A. M., The Accountant as Partisan, Accounting Organizations and Society, Vol. 16, No. 3, 1991, pp. 297310. Tinker, A. M., Merino, B. D. & Neimark, M. P., The Normative Origins of Positive Theories: Ideology and Accounting Thought, Accounting Organizations and Society, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1982, pp. 167200. Trow, M., in R. Bendix & S. Lipset (eds), Class, Status, and Power (New York: Free Press). Tyack, D., The One Best System: A History of American Urban Education (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966, 1974). Weber, M., in S. Andreski (ed.), Max Weber on Capitalism, Bureaucracy and Religion (London: George Allen, 1983). Williams, R., The Teaching Relationship: Both Sides of the Wall, in D. Rubinstein & C. Stonemen (eds), Education For Democracy (Harmondsworth: Penguin Book Ltd, 1970). Williams, R., Marxism and Literature (London: Oxford University Press, 1977). Willis, P., Learning to Learn (New York: Quatro, 1977). Wolin, R., The Politics of Cultural Criticism: The Frankfurt School, Existentialism, Postmodernism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1992). Yamey, B. S., Scientic Bookkeeping and the Rise of Capitalism, The Economic History Review, Vol. 1, 1949, pp. 99113. Yamey, B. S., Accounting and the Rise of Capitalism: Further Notes on a Theme by Sombart, Journal of Accounting Research, Autumn 1964, pp. 47136. Zeff, S. A., Recent Trends in Accounting Education and Research in The USA: Some Implications for UK Academics, The British Accounting Review, Vol. 21, 1989, pp. 159176.