1. finance
2. accounting and auditing

J. OF PUBLIC BUDGETING, ACCOUNTING & FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 17 (2), 223-248
SUMMER 2005
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL
ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
Elizabeth A. Murphy*
ABSTRACT. The Bedford Committee (1986) and the Accounting Education
Change Commission (AECC, 1990) have strongly supported, along with
practicing accountants, the use of innovative teaching techniques. Innovations
involve active student participation and focus on development of critical
thinking, communication, and technology skills. This paper extends prior
research and describes how spreadsheet software is used to develop Jeopardy!
boards to teach governmental accounting and enhance non-technical skills.
Student survey results demonstrate support for use of a computer-based
Jeopardy! game as a learning tool and a vehicle to self-assess learning. Written
communication and teamwork skills are emphasized as students develop content
in groups.
INTRODUCTION
The Bedford Committee in 1986 urged faculty to adopt new and
more relevant teaching methods to improve student learning. The
concept of “active learning” was touted in the 1980s, as superior to
passive learning. One of the key outcomes of the American Accounting
Association’s Accounting Education Change Commission (AECC),
created in 1989, was a grant program that supported the development of
teaching innovations. The AECC supported changes in accounting
education that provided students with improved communication skills,
experience in working effectively with diverse groups of people, and the
ability to adapt to new technologies such as computer-based instructional
technologies. A key feature of these curriculum changes is ensuring that
students are active participants in the learning process. This paper
------------------------* Elizabeth A. Murphy, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor, School of Accountancy
and Management Information Systems, DePaul University. Her teaching and
research interests are financial, governmental and nonprofit accounting.
Copyright © 2005 by PrAcademics Press
224
MURPHY
describes adaptations of the TV game Jeopardy! that can be prepared by
faculty and used by students as a computer-based, active-learning and
self-assessment tool. When the content is developed by student groups,
this game also provides students with the experience of working
effectively in a team. Survey results indicate that this computer-based
tool is an effective pedagogic method.
The literature on the impact of games on learning is described first,
followed by a summary of the uses of Jeopardy! in both academic and
professional settings. This paper then describes how Jeopardy! is used to
teach governmental accounting, presents survey feedback from the
students using the Microsoft (MS) Word version of the game, and finally
describes an Excel-based version used as a group project.
GAMES AND LEARNING
Today’s students who are under thirty have grown up in a learning
environment different than that of their instructors. Prensky (2001) notes
that the current generation of students was raised on “Zoom” and
“Sesame Street” – both of which are now 30 years old. Prensky believes
that the differences in the cognitive learning aspects offered by
technology, such as the Internet and video games, have led to changes in
learning preferences of today’s students. They favor rapid speeds,
graphics over text, play over work, instant gratification, and random
access over linear thinking. Takahashi (2000) reports on the widespread
popularity of online gaming, noting that about 19% of Internet users play
games online and that game sites typically rank among the 100 most
heavily trafficked. Takahashi reports that there are thirty times the
number of casual game players in comparison to the hard-core gamers.
These casual players are among the millions who are drawn to the Sony
Corporation site called “The Station,” where games such as “Jeopardy”
are available. Studies have been conducted (e.g., Pillay, Brownlee, J. &
Wilss, 1999) that suggest recreational computer games may have a role
in enhancing cognitive skills and processes used in educational settings.
The lifetime exposure of today’s students to technology-based games
provides a tremendous opportunity for university-level faculty to employ
games as a vehicle for active learning. Active learning involves
situations where students fully participate in the educational process.
Students interact with others and actively process information received,
as opposed to passively listening to lectures. Hermanson (1994) found
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
225
that an active learning method, when compared to a passive learning
strategy, promoted better recall of simple and complex accounting
material. Hermanson’s results were consistent with the large body of
psychology literature that indicates active learning provides substantial
benefits over passive learning. Simms (1993) demonstrates how learning
methods that emphasize active participation are applied in a public
agency setting. Drake Haka and Ravenscroft (2001) use an active
learning strategy to demonstrate the impact of organizational control
features on the use of information derived from ABC costing systems.
Pillsbury (1993) supports use of a “Systems Softball” game as an
effective active learning method for teaching internal control evaluation.
Meadows (1999) describes how games have had a special power to
motivate and instruct during his thirty-five years of professional gaming.
Thatcher (1990) argues that the use of games can significantly contribute
to the “acquisition and practice of new methodologies, new skills, new
attitudes, and new values necessary to live in a world of change.” He
notes that learning comes from experience  an active experience that
generates knowledge, skills, or attitudes that are stored for use in future
experiences.
USES OF JEOPARDY! AS A LEARNING TOOL
The game of Jeopardy!1 (U.S. Copyright Office 1987) has been used
in the classroom  from grade school to the college level for a wide
range of topics. A summary of the areas and the level of education where
a manual version of Jeopardy! has been used in an academic setting other
than accounting for adult learners is presented in Table 1. The majority
of the manual, non-accounting Jeopardy! games use flash-cards. These
manual systems can be cumbersome for classroom use.
TABLE 1
Areas and Level of Education
Topic
Chemistry
Abnormal psychology
Library orientation
Physiology
Level of Education
High school/college
College
College
College
French
Various subjects
College
Adult education
Reference
Deavor (1996), Keck (2000)
Keutzer (1993)
Ury & King (1995)
Moy, Rodenbaugh, Collins & Di
Carlo (2000)
Gaudry-Hudson (2000)
Sternberger (1995)
226
MURPHY
Cook (1997) describes a manual version of Jeopardy! used to teach
tax accounting professionals during a CPE session on the Revenue
Reconciliation Act of 1993. This version of the game requires the
creation of an overhead transparency for each Jeopardy! board:
Category/Value Board, Jeopardy! Answer Board, and Jeopardy!
Question Board. Post-it notes cover the answers for each cell on the
board. As contestants select an answer, the instructor removes the post-it
and reads the answer. A transparency for a question board is not needed
since that information can be handled orally; however, the instructor can
develop transparencies for individual questions or categories as needed
or desired.
Adaptations of TV Jeopardy! have been used for professional
training not only for accountants, but also for librarians (Goulding,
1991), for bank employees (Spragins, 1992), for nurses in a Middle East
hospital (Gary, Marrone & Boyles, 1998), and for stockbroker training at
the Salomon Smith Barney National Training Center (Davis, 1999).
Cermignano, Hargadon and McMullen (1998) describe a manual version
of Jeopardy! being used in an accounting context, but provide no details
for creation of a computerized version of the game.
Computer-based versions of Jeopardy! have been used primarily on
Apple computers at the grade school level, while others relied on use of
Microsoft PowerPoint. Gessaman (2000) uses a timed PowerPoint
presentation with buttons on a slide that serve as the Category/Value
Board hyperlinked to the appropriate answer. Greenawalt and Turner
(2000) recommend that students (preferably in groups) prepare the
questions and answers for the Accounting Jeopardy! boards in order to
enhance their written communication skills and their teamwork skills, in
addition to their intellectual skills.
RATIONALE FOR USING JEOPARDY! WITH GOVERNMENTAL
ACCOUNTING
The initial hurdle for faculty teaching governmental accounting is
introducing all of the new terminology unique to fund accounting. This
material must be grasped quickly in order to be able to understand and
interpret the financial statements for state and local governments. Not all
universities have a stand-alone, regular-credit undergraduate class
dedicated solely to governmental accounting. The time available is
further limited when governmental accounting is taught by using three
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
227
chapters of an Advanced Accounting text in a 15-week semester (or 10week quarter) Advanced Accounting course.
The use of Jeopardy! boards seems an appropriate instructional
strategy to learn the new terminology and financial statements in
governmental accounting introduced by Governmental Accounting
Standards Board (GASB) Statements 33 (GASB 1998) and 34 (GASB
1999). An innovative approach can motivate students who have not been
exposed to governmental accounting or have considered a career in the
field, and whose immediate concern is to acquire the knowledge needed
for the CPA exam.
Students must quickly grasp the language and systems that are
unique to governmental accounting: measurement focus and basis of
accounting, fund accounting, government-wide statements, and the
budgeting system. Knowledge of both the accounting system and the
financial reporting structure is necessary in order to properly interpret the
impact of transactions for state and local governments.
The content in
the lower levels
application). These
reaching the higher
1956)
Jeopardy! boards includes material associated with
of learning (knowledge, comprehension, and
lower levels of learning must be achieved prior to
levels of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. (Bloom
DEVELOPMENT OF THE GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING
JEOPARDY! BOARDS
The content of the governmental accounting Jeopardy! boards was
initially created by a few honors accounting students using MS Word and
edited by the instructor. Additional boards were subsequently developed
by the faculty member and made available to students on both the
Internet and in university networked personal computer labs.
The structure of the answer board and the question board is the same
as that used in the TV Jeopardy! game. The question board cells should
contain a complete sentence beginning with “What is”, “Who is”,
“Where is”, and so forth. The answer boards should contain the answers
to the questions in the question board. Some faculty may choose to use
multiple-choice or true-false questions in their Jeopardy! boards and
enhance them accordingly. The objective when assigning dollar values to
the questions and answers for each category is to give higher levels of
228
MURPHY
learning a higher dollar value. Thus, material associated with the lowest
level of learning (knowledge) was assigned the lowest dollar value,
followed sequentially by comprehension and application.
Initially, MS Word was used to create the electronic version of the
Jeopardy! boards. The Word-based Jeopardy! board with the categories
and values was created with hyperlinks to separate MS Word files
containing the related answer and question. All of the Word files have
links to sound files downloaded from the Jeopardy! Internet site. These
include wave files from the actual TV game for the “Board Fill”, a
“Daily Double”, the “Time’s Up”, the “End of Round”, and the “Think
Theme” used for Final Jeopardy!. The function of the sound files is to
enhance interest in the game, especially when used in a classroom
setting. However, two of the files have other specific functions. The
”Time’s Up” sound file should be used when no student players choose
to answer a question or when an incorrect answer is given by a student,
thus cueing the remaining student players that they have the option to
provide the question. When used in a classroom setting, the
instructor/announcer determines how long to wait before executing the
“Time’s Up” sound wave. For the “Think Theme” sound file, the length
of play time is also the length of time that should be allowed to provide
the question pertaining to the Final Jeopardy! answer.
For use outside of class, the zipped Word files and the sound files for
all boards were available through the faculty member’s web page or
Blackboard course site one week prior to their final exam. Students were
required to complete a survey pertaining to the Word-based
Governmental Accounting Jeopardy! boards and submit the survey on
the day of the final exam.
SURVEY RESULTS
Students surveyed in advanced accounting courses using the Wordbased Governmental Accounting Jeopardy! boards totaled 77
summarized in Table 2. Students were enrolled in honors and nonhonors sections during two different quarters. The honors sections
represent day classes where only students from the accounting honors
program are enrolled. The distribution of males and females between the
honors sections of the classes is 14 males and 11 females. The nonhonors sections represent both day and evening students. Only one
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
229
TABLE 2
Number of Students in Advanced Accounting Course Completing
Surveys
Honors
Non-Honors
Total
Male
14
20
34
Female
11
32
43
All Students
25
52
77
evening class was involved; this evening section had a total of 20
students, including 10 males and 10 females. In all of the non-honors
sections, the females outnumber the males – 32 females compared to 20
males. Therefore, for both the honors and non-honors sections, the
females outnumber the males – 34 males compared to 43 females.
All advanced accounting students were asked the same 12 questions
pertaining to the use of the Governmental Accounting Jeopardy! boards.
Responses were recorded using a five-point Likert scale, as well as
written comments explaining the reasons for their answers to each of the
questions. Table 3 provides the questions included in the survey and the
descriptive statistics for each question.
Students were asked if they used the Jeopardy! boards to help them
learn course material. Students agreed that they had used the boards
(Question 1, mean response = 3.6). Students responding with a 4 or 5
provided comments affirming their use of the boards outside of class;
this group responding (with a 4 or 5 to Question 1) is categorized as the
heavier Jeopardy! users. Those responding with a 1, 2, or 3 represent
students that used the boards only during the classroom presentation; this
group is classified as the lighter Jeopardy! users. The comments from the
lighter users indicated that these students did not have time to use the
boards outside of class before taking the final exam. They did not have
time to download the boards, had difficulty unzipping the downloaded
files, or could not use the boards in the university PC labs.
Due to the different levels of student use of Governmental
Accounting Jeopardy! demonstrated in Question 1, separate descriptive
statistics have been tabulated for heavier and lighter users presented in
separate columns in Table 3, next to the full sample. The mean response
for the heavier users was statistically significantly different from those of
230
MURPHY
TABLE 3
Survey Questions and Results
A survey containing the questions below was distributed in advanced
accounting classes. The choices of responses for each of these questions
are as follows:
1
Strongly
Disagree
2
3
4
5
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
All Students Heavier* Jeopardy!
Lighter* Jeopardy!
Users
Users
1.** Did you use the Jeopardy! boards to help learn governmental accounting?
n
74
51
23
mean
3.6
4.4
1.9
Std. Dev.
1.3
0.5
0.8
2.** I used the Jeopardy! boards BEFORE I mastered the assigned homework
for governmental accounting.
n
75
50
25
mean
2.5
2.8
1.9
Std. Dev.
1.3
1.4
1.0
3.** I used the Jeopardy! boards instead of the assigned homework to study for
the final exam.
n
75
50
25
mean
2.1
2.2
1.7
Std. Dev.
1.1
1.1
0.9
4.** I found that use of the Jeopardy! boards provided additional help (beyond
merely doing the homework) in terms of learning governmental accounting for
the final exam.
n
75
50
25
mean
3.8
4.3
2.8
Std. Dev.
1.1
0.8
1.1
5.** I found that the Jeopardy! boards made the study process for governmental
accounting more interesting.
n
74
50
24
mean
3.9
4.4
3.0
Std. Dev.
1.2
0.8
1.2
6. I found that the Jeopardy! boards made the topic of governmental accounting
more interesting.
n
74
50
24
mean
3.3
3.4
3.0
Std. Dev.
1.2
1.2
1.0
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
231
TABLE 3(Continued)
All Students Heavier* Jeopardy!
Lighter* Jeopardy!
Users
Users
7.** I believe that use of the Jeopardy! boards made me feel more actively
involved in the learning process for governmental accounting.
n
74
50
24
mean
3.6
4.0
2.8
Std. Dev.
1.1
0.9
0.9
8. I have NOT previously seen any kind of tutorial that uses hyperlinked
Microsoft Word files OFFLINE (offline here means not being connected to the
Internet).
n
75
50
25
mean
4.0
4.1
3.8
Std. Dev.
1.2
1.2
1.1
9. I have NOT previously seen any kind of tutorial that uses hyperlinked
Microsoft Word files ONLINE (online here means while being connected to the
Internet).
n
75
50
25
mean
3.3
3.4
3.1
Std. Dev.
1.4
1.4
1.4
10. Using Jeopardy! boards in class is a better learning tool than covering the
assigned homework in class.
n
75
50
25
mean
3.0
3.1
2.8
Std. Dev.
1.3
1.4
1.1
11. The Jeopardy! boards should not be used in class, only outside of class as a
tutorial.
n
76
51
25
mean
2.4
2.2
2.8
Std. Dev.
1.3
1.4
1.1
12. Both the Jeopardy! boards and the assigned homework should be
used/covered during class time.
n
77
51
26
mean
3.6
3.7
3.3
Std. Dev.
1.1
1.2
1.0
Notes: * Heavier Jeopardy! users are those who answer 4 or 5 to Question 1;
lighter Jeopardy! users are those who responded 1, 2, or 3 to Question 1.
** For these questions, the mean responses of the heavier Jeopardy! users are
statistically different from those of the lighter Jeopardy! users at a p-value of
0.05 or less.
232
MURPHY
the lighter users (at a p-level of 0.05 or less) for the first five questions
plus Question 7 of the survey. For the remaining questions, the
responses from the two groups did not statistically differ.
For Questions 1, 2, and 3, responses from lighter users were
consistent (mean responses = 1.9, 1.9, and 1.7 for Questions 1, 2, and 3
respectively). Lighter users did not agree that they used the Jeopardy
boards to help learn governmental accounting in Question 1. Thus, they
would similarly disagree with the statements in Questions 2 and 3 about
whether the boards were used before mastering homework or instead of
homework. For heavier users, feedback was mixed regarding the timing
of usage of Governmental Accounting Jeopardy! (Question 2, mean
response = 2.8). Apparently some students used the Jeopardy! boards
before mastering the homework for the course, but others used them
after. The comments revealed the good news that the majority of the
students (27 out of 50) did indeed prioritize their study time; these
students disagreed with Question 2 and indicated that they had already
mastered the homework prior to receiving the Jeopardy boards. As a
result, the Jeopardy boards could be used only after completing the
homework for these students to assess their mastery of the material. For
those students who did use the boards before mastering the homework
(responding 4 or 5 to Question 2), their objective was to use the
Jeopardy! boards as an assessment tool, allowing them to determine how
much knowledge they acquired before mastering the homework. One
student noted, “I really thought I knew more, but it helped me see how
little I really knew.”
The heavier users did not agree that they used the Jeopardy! boards
instead of the homework (Question 3, mean response 2.2). The vast
majority of these students indicated that they used both the Jeopardy!
boards and the homework to study for their final exam; others indicated
use of these materials, as well as other materials. However, the 8 students
(out of 50) who did agree that they used the boards instead of the
homework (per their response of 4 or 5 to Question 3) earned grades of A
and B in the course. These students indicated that they had already
mastered the homework in preparation for the final exam at the time the
Jeopardy! boards were distributed; thus, they used the Jeopardy! boards
as their only review tool in preparation for the final exam.
The majority of the heavier users not only used both the boards and
the homework to study for the final exam, but also found that the boards
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
233
provided help over and above the learning experienced from doing the
assigned homework (Question 4, mean response 4.3). Students felt that
the boards emphasized the main concepts, reinforced material, served as
an assessment tool (to assess material understood versus areas needing
further study), served as a good review tool, and served as a fun way to
learn. Students also commented that the boards provided a different
perspective and required critical thinking due to the game’s structure,
where students are given the answers and must generate the questions.
Naturally, the lighter users responded differently than the heavier users
about the whether the boards helped them learn (Question 4, mean
response 2.8).
The heavier users strongly agreed that the use of the Jeopardy!
boards made the study process more interesting (Question 5, mean
response 4.4). However, the lighter users on the whole did not receive
this additional benefit (Question 5, mean response 3.0). Student
comments indicated that heavier users found the studying to be more fun,
more interesting, and more thought provoking. The use of the boards
made “time fly by,” maintained student attention, and created a
competitive atmosphere that some students found appealing. Students
mentioned that they were more motivated to study.
Even though some students found that the Jeopardy! boards made the
study process more interesting, students on the whole were neutral about
whether the boards made the course topic of governmental accounting
more interesting (Question 6, mean response 3.3). This was true for both
the heavier users (Question 6, mean response 3.4) and the lighter users
(Question 6, mean response 3.0) since these mean responses are not
statistically significantly different. Nonetheless, a t-test confirmed a
difference in the mean responses for Questions 5 and 6 for all students
(3.9 and 3.3, respectively), generating a t-statistic of 4.86 with an
associated probability of less than 0.0001. As one student noted “A game
doesn’t make a topic more interesting, it just makes it more interesting to
learn.” However, the mean response of 3.3 for Question 6 implies that
the student response was mixed; 29 students (39%) did agree that the
governmental accounting was made more interesting with the Jeopardy!
boards and 17 students (23%) did not agree.
As expected, the heavier users supported the position that the
Jeopardy! boards made them feel more actively involved in the learning
process (Question 7, mean response 4.0). This response would be
234
MURPHY
expected due to the interactive nature of the computer-based tutorial
provided for governmental accounting. The mean response for lighter
users is significantly lower (Question 7, mean response 2.8). This
question alone provides strong support for finding ways to increase
student usage of the boards since research has shown that active student
involvement improves student learning.
Students were polled about how the Jeopardy! boards should be
used, and the responses for the two groups of users did not statistically
differ in their responses. As a result, the mean responses for all users
were examined for Questions 10, 11, and 12. There was not a consensus
about whether using the Jeopardy! boards in class was a better learning
tool than covering assigned homework in class (Question 10, mean
response 3.0). Students comments expressed a concern about whether the
Jeopardy! boards would cover the course content as comprehensively
and in the same depth as the homework. At the same time, students
disagreed with the statement that the boards should not be used in class,
only outside of class (Question 11, mean response 2.4). Their reasoning
is evident in their response to Question 12 where students agreed that
both the Jeopardy! boards and the homework should be used/covered
during class time (Question 12, mean response 3.6). Students mentioned
that going over the homework was important, but using the Jeopardy!
boards was a great review and more interesting. Many students stated
that they became more actively involved in class when the Jeopardy!
board was used. Since students did believe that the boards provided
added help for learning beyond that provided by the homework (per
Question 4), students would be expected to prefer that both teaching
methods be used during class time.
Students were also asked whether they had been previously exposed
to tutorials that use hyperlinked MS Word files, either online or offline.
Both groups of users combined agreed that they had not been exposed to
similar offline tutorials (Question 8, mean response 4.0), but apparently
had some exposure to similar online tutorials (Question 9, mean response
3.3). The greater exposure to online tools is consistent with the
increasing popularity of online games previously discussed. Students’
comments showed an interest in having a variety of tools to assist them
with learning.
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
235
DEVELOPMENT OF AN EXCEL-BASED TOOL
The survey responses and comments from the students regarding the
Jeopardy! boards indicated strong support for providing a fun, interactive
computer-based tutorial to help students get actively involved in the
learning process. However, 34% of the students did not use the
Jeopardy! boards outside of class (26 out of 77 students). These students
reported technology-related problems. Other students, including those
without access to PCs at home, desired manual versions of the Jeopardy!
boards whose format would be answer and question boards each printed
on a single page.
Microsoft Excel was used to develop an electronic-based
Governmental Accounting Jeopardy! game (U.S. Copyright Office
2001). Using Excel also provided additional enhancements over manual
versions  beyond just that of resolving the technology-related issues
mentioned by students, such as:
1. Simplification of the logistics involved for students to access and
use the electronic files. Only one Excel workbook (with multiple
worksheets) is needed, thereby avoiding the need to zip and unzip
multiple files.
2. Excel and Word do not require extensive technical expertise to
use and are widely available.
3. Tabulation of player scores is easier through use of a separate
worksheet within the workbook. Students can track their
performances with each use of the board by saving the score from
each use (three player scores are typically available) and by using
different colors to highlight the cells representing their incorrect
responses.
4. Faculty need to create only one version of the game for both
computer-based usage and manual usage; the worksheet used to
enter the questions and the worksheet to enter the answers in the
computer-based versions can each be printed to fit a single page
for manual usage.
5. Excel is much easier to manipulate during the playing of the game
for classroom usage.
6. Revising the Excel Board for use with different topics or courses
is easier, and thus quicker to complete once it is developed. The
236
MURPHY
size of the cells and the fonts can easily be changed to
accommodate questions and answers of different lengths.
7. Rather than merely using spell check for preparation of board
content, the text can be created in Word to also check for
grammar errors and then copied into Excel to take advantage of
its worksheet features mentioned above. Cell references are used
to link the worksheets used to play the Jeopardy! game to the
worksheets containing the text copied from Word.
PowerPoint, which has been used recently to create Jeopardy! games
(as documented in the literature), does not offer the same ease of use and
features as Excel. In particular, PowerPoint, does not have the option of
printing 30 slides on one page; this feature is needed for printing the
boards for manual usage. Power Point also does not readily lend itself to
tabulation of scores and manipulation between the related groups of
slides – the ones containing the questions and the ones containing the
answers. Power Point does permit a timed, automatic execution of the
Jeopardy! game; however, the order of the questions selected is based
only on the order presented on the Power-Point slides.
Sample printouts of selected Excel worksheets displayed while
playing the Governmental Accounting Jeopardy! game are provided in
Appendices B and C, such as the Governmental Accounting Jeopardy!
board, the answers, and the questions.2 All of the questions and answers
for an entire Governmental Accounting Jeopardy! game are included in
Appendix D and E.
JEOPARDY! GROUP PROJECT
Due to the limited time available in the advanced accounting course,
students are only given assignments from the course text for the
governmental accounting material. Governmental accounting projects are
not assigned. However, for full courses on governmental accounting,
students could develop the categories and content for governmental
accounting boards. The author has used the development of the content
for an Excel-based board as a group project at the introductory
accounting level. This same approach can be used in governmental
accounting or any topic chosen by a faculty member in any discipline,
similar to those included in the literature previously discussed. Thus, the
experience with the group project from the introductory course is
described below.
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
237
Freshmen honors accounting students were required to develop their
own content for two difficult topics taught in the initial weeks of the
second introductory accounting course: long-term liabilities and
statement of cash flows. Separate Jeopardy! boards are required for each
topic, but the same groups of students were used to develop each board.
Students were provided with an Excel workbook on the instructor's
Blackboard-platform course website that contained governmental
accounting material. Students were required to change the content for
each of the topics from the governmental accounting material provided
and submit these projects using Blackboard’s digital drop box. Only the
content for one Jeopardy! board (not Double Jeopardy!) and Final
Jeopardy! was required for each of the two introductory accounting
topics. The corrected boards for both topics were made available to all
students on Blackboard (with only the group members getting the project
score assigned to their group) to use as a study tool before taking their
exams.
Students also had to complete an evaluation form that included a
review of each member of their group on the quantity and quality of their
work.3 The major benefit of the form is its ability to fairly identify
slackers; students are required to indicate which student performed each
of the tasks needed to complete the project. Faculty can use the data
provided by these responses as support for penalties in the grades for the
slackers in a group.
These group Jeopardy! projects provided students with the
opportunity to develop their skills in critical thinking, written
communication, technology, and teamwork. Students in each group
needed to agree on the six categories for their board based on the course
content emphasized in the course. If students included content not
covered in class or in the assignments, points were deducted for
including irrelevant material. Students were also graded on the creativity
of their categories, considering not only the names selected, but also
acknowledging categories that were not the same as the headings from
the topics in the chapter of the assigned text. The grading for grammar
and spelling emphasized the importance of the clarity of their written
communication skills. The editing of the Excel file and the downloading
and uploading of files does address technology, but groups typically
assigned the entry of the content into the Excel board to just one or two
students in the group. To force greater participation in the technologyrelated aspects of the project, requiring use of online group discussion
238
MURPHY
boards for all group communications (such as those available through
Blackboard) is recommended.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
This paper describes the creation and use of both Word and Excelbased Jeopardy! boards for use in teaching governmental accounting.
When surveyed, students indicated that these boards helped them learn
and provided additional help not provided by homework. They further
noted that the boards made the learning process more interesting, even
though the topic itself was not perceived as being more interesting (for
some of the students) from use of the boards. Students felt more actively
involved in the learning process and found that the boards forced them to
think more critically. Students indicated that the Jeopardy! boards served
as a useful assessment tool – to help determine the material needing
additional attention prior to taking examinations. Like homework,
students believed that Jeopardy! would be useful for teaching students
and/or reviewing material during class time. They found the tool to be
fun and entertaining, yet useful for learning. The boards provide an
appealing vehicle for addressing the lower level learning objectives in
Bloom’s Taxonomy – knowledge, comprehension, and application.
However, the greater benefits from the Governmental Accounting
Jeopardy! boards were derived by the students who used the boards not
only in class, but also outside of class.
Despite the positive feedback by students using the boards outside of
class, a large number of students (26 out of 77 or 34%) experienced
difficulty with using the Word-based boards, such as difficulty with
downloading and unzipping files. To avoid these and other difficulties
experienced by students and to add enhancements not previously
available, an Excel-based version of the Jeopardy! game was developed.
Using groups to develop these Jeopardy! boards, as well as classroom
usage of this game, offers the added opportunity to enhance oral
communication and teamwork skills. The graded group projects also
provide multiple boards for students to use to assess their knowledge
prior to taking course examinations.
Perhaps the most rewarding aspect of this effort was observing
student participation while the Jeopardy! game was played during
governmental accounting class time and long after class time ended. That
experience, similar to those of other researchers (including Hogle, 1996)
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
239
who support the integration of games and learning, made me realize
“Now ‘That’s Edutainment’ for my students!”
While manual versions of games were used in the past, current
technology now allows faculty and students to readily use integrated
Excel workbooks to develop games. In the future, technology is likely to
permit widespread use of these enhancements in a distance learning
environment where touch panels are used to identify the fingerprints of
students “ringing-in”, and voice recognition devices are used to convey
their responses. That technology will then track the level of active
participation in the learning process for each student that can serve as
empirical data for future educational research.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author gratefully acknowledges the research opportunities
provided by DePaul University, and in particular, the support extended
by its University Research Council. The author also gratefully
acknowledges this journal’s reviewers, as well as Gail Kaciuba, for their
valuable insights. Thanks also to Bob Peters of DePaul for providing the
inspiration to develop the electronic Jeopardy! game.
NOTES
1. The rules for playing the game of Jeopardy! are included in
Appendix A for those not familiar with this game.
2. Interested readers should contact the author via e-mail for a copy of
the Governmental Accounting Jeopardy! electronic workbook. The
workbook includes Daily Double and Final Jeopardy! worksheets not
displayed in the appendix. If desired, specific guidelines for the
development of the Excel-based Jeopardy! workbook will also be
provided.
3. Interested readers should contact the author via e-mail for a copy of
the evaluation form.
REFERENCES
American Accounting Association (AAA), Committee on the Future
Structure, Content, and Scope of Accounting Education. (1986).
240
MURPHY
“Future Accounting Education: Preparing for the Expanding
Profession.” Issues in Accounting Education, 1: 168-195.
Accounting Education Change Commission. (1990). “Objectives of
Education for Accountants: Position Statement Number One.” Issues
in Accounting Education, 5: 307-312.
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.) (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The
Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook I, Cognitive Domain.
New York and Toronto: Longmans, Green.
Cermignano, G. P., Hargadon, J. M., & McMullen, D. A. (1998). “The
Games Accounting Professors Play: Communicating with
Generation X.” Advances in Accounting Education, 1: 133-146.
Cook, E. D. (1997). “An Innovative Method of Classroom Presentation:
What is ‘Jeopardy?’” Journal of Accounting Education, 15 (1): 123131.
Davis, S. (1999, February 22). “Future Brokers Work and Play in
Training Centers.” Wall Street Journal.
Deavor, J. P (1996). “Chemical Jeopardy.” Journal of Chemical
Education, 73 (5): 430-435.
Drake, A., Haka, S. F., & Ravenscroft, S. F. (2001). “An ABC
Simulation Focusing on Incentives and Innovation.” Issues in
Accounting Education, 16 (3): 443-472.
Gary, R., Marrone, S., & Boyles, C. (1998). “The Use of Gaming
Strategies in a Transcultural Setting.” The Journal of Continuing
Education in Nursing, 29 (5): 221-27.
Gaudry-Hudson, C. (2000). “Game Shows in the Classroom.” The
French Review, 73 (3): 512-525.
Gessaman, M. K. (2000). “Using Presentation Software for Review.”
Mathematics Teacher, 93 (1): 68-69.
Goulding, M. (1991). “Real Librarians Don’t Play Jeopardy.” Illinois
Libraries, 73 (2): 140-46.
Governmental Accounting Standards Board (1998). Statement No. 33:
Accounting and Financial Reporting for Nonexchange Transactions
Norwalk, CT: Author.
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
241
Governmental Accounting Standards Board (1999). Statement No. 34:
Basic Financial Statements − and Management’s Discussion and
Analysis− for State and Local Governments. Norwalk, CT: Author.
Greenawalt, M. B., & Turner, T. (2000, August). “Accounting Jeopardy:
Motivating Students Through Question Writing and Game Playing.”
Paper presented at the American Accounting Association Annual
Meeting, Philadelphia.
Hermanson, D. R. (1994). “The Effect of Self-Generated Elaboration on
Students’ Recall of Tax and Accounting Material: Further
Evidence.” Issues in Accounting Education, 9 (2): 301-318.
Hogle, J. G. (1996). “Considering Games as Cognitive Tools: In Search
of Effective ‘Edutainment’.” East Lansing, MI: National Center for
Research on Teacher Learning, ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED 425737.
Keck, M. V. (2000). “A Final Exam Review Activity Based on the
Jeopardy Format.” Journal of Chemical Education, 77 (4): 483.
Keutzer, C. S. (1993). “Jeopardy in Abnormal Psychology.” Teaching of
Psychology, 20 (1): 45-46.
Meadows, D. L. (1999). “Learning to Be Simple: My Odyssey with
Games,” Simulation and Gaming, 30 (3): 342-52.
Moy, J. R., Rodenbaugh, D. W., Collins, H. L., & Di Carlo, S. E. (2000).
“Who Wants to Be a Physician? An Educational Tool for Reviewing
Pulmonary Physiology.” Advances in Physiology Education, 24 (1):
30-37.
Pillay, H., Brownlee, J., & Wilss, L. (1999). “Cognition and Recreational
Computer Games: Implications for Educational Technology.”
Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32 (1): 203-217.
Pillsbury, C. M. (1993). “Systems Softball: An Interactive, Group Game
for Teaching Internal Control Evaluation.” Issues in Accounting
Education, 8 (1): 128-139.
Prensky, M. (2001). “Ask the Expert: Digital Game-Based Learning.”
Corporate University Review, 9 (1): 18.
Simms, R. R. (1993). “The Enhancement of Learning in Public Sector
Training Programs.” Public Personnel Management, 22 (2): 243256.
242
MURPHY
Spragins, E. E. (1992). “Turning Education into a Game.” Inc., 14 (9):
34-36.
Sternberger, C. (1995). “Adult Teaching Strategies.” Adult Learning, 6
(4): 12-13.
Takahashi, D. (2000, April 17). “E-Commerce (A Special Report):
Industry by Industry – Don’t Shoot! Everybody Figured Game Sites
Would Be Hot; the Surprise is Who’s Playing – and What.” Wall
Street Journal: R53.
Thatcher, D. C. (1990). “Promoting Learning through Games and
Simulations.” Simulation and Gaming, 21 (3): 262-74.
Ury, C. J., & King, T. L. (1995). “Reinforcement of Library Orientation
Instruction for Freshman Seminar Students.” Research Strategies, 13
(3): 153-64.
U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress (1987, March 12). Jeopardy:
No. 516/ Produced by Alex Trebek; Directed by Dick Schneider.
Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress (2001, December 14). ExcelBased Accounting Jeopardy authored by Elizabeth A. Murphy.
(Registration No. Txu 1-013-667). Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office.
APPENDIX A
Game Rules for Jeopardy!
The TV game of Jeopardy!, created in 1964 by Merv Griffin, is currently
televised in 43 countries and available in an online version
(http://www.station.sony.com/jeopardy/). The televised version of the
game involves three contestants and an announcer who play three
rounds: Jeopardy!, Double Jeopardy!, and Final Jeopardy!. In the first
round, 30 questions from six categories are displayed on a game board.
The board displays six categories with five different dollar amounts,
starting with $100 and increasing in dollar amounts and difficulty of the
questions. Contestants use electronic ringers to identify interest in
providing the correct Jeopardy! question. If the contestant incorrectly
answers, the associated dollar amount is deducted from their score and
others are permitted to participate. If the contestant correctly answers,
the associated dollar amount is added to their score; that contestant also
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
243
selects the next category and dollar amount. A special feature of the
game is the “Daily Double” which permits contestants to determine the
dollar value assigned to their question. The maximum wager permitted is
the higher of the contestant’s winnings at the time the question is
selected or the largest dollar value available on the board ($500 for
Jeopardy! round, $1,000 for Double Jeopardy! round). Double Jeopardy!
has the same format as Jeopardy!, except the dollar amounts double and
two Daily Doubles are included. For the Final Jeopardy! round,
contestants with positive scores determine the amount of their own wager
whose maximum amount is the accumulated winnings prior to Final
Jeopardy! The winner is the contestant with the highest score.
APPENDIX B
Governmental Accounting Jeopardy!
Excel Display: Worksheet Containing Primary Playing Board
244
MURPHY
APPENDIX C
Governmental Accounting Jeopardy!
Excel Display: Answers Worksheet and Questions Worksheet
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
245
APPENDIX D
Potpourri
Name That
Governmental Fund
GovernmentWide
Financial
Statements
All About
Funds
Reporting for
General
Purpose
Governmental
Units
Fund
Financial
Statements
Governmental Accounting Jeopardy!
Example of Contents of Question Board Worksheet
$100 What are
the governmental
funds?
What are the
Schedule of
Funding
Progress and
the Schedule
of Employer
Contributions?
What are
governmental,
proprietary,
and
fiduciary
funds?
What are the What is the
Statement of General
Net Assets Fund?
and the
Statement of
Activities?
What is the
modified
accrual basis
of accountting?
$200 What are
the governmental,
proprietary,
and
fiduciary
funds?
What are the
MD&A, the
Budgetary
Comparison
Schedules, and
the
information
about
infrastructure
assets?
What are the
General,
Special
Revenue,
Debt
Service,
Capital
Projects, and
Permanent
Funds?
What are
restricted,
unrestricted,
and net
assets
invested in
capital
assets net of
related debt?
What are
Internal
Service
Funds?
$300 What are
the
proprietary
funds?
What are the
economic
resources
measurement
focus and the
accrual basis
of accounting?
What are the
Internal
Service and
the
Enterprise
Funds?
What are the What is the What are
government- debt service Enterprise
al activities, fund?
Funds?
businesstype
activities,
total
primary
government,
and
component
units?
$400 What are
the governmental
funds?
What are the
introductory,
the financial,
and the
statistical
sections?
What are
capital
assets and
long-term
debt?
What is the What is the
Statement of capital
Activities? project
fund?
What is a
special
revenue
fund?
What are
privatepurpose
trust funds?
246
MURPHY
$500 What
are the
proprietary
funds?
What is
other
supplementary
information?
Potpourri
Name That
Govern-mental
Fund
GovernmentWide Financial
Statements
All About
Funds
Reporting for
General
Purpose
Governmental
Fund Financial
Statements
APPENDIX D (Continued)
What are (1) total assets, What are What is a What are
liabilities, revenues,
special
permanent Fiduciary
expenditures/expenses of items?
fund?
Funds?
individual fund = 10% of
fund’s category and (2)
total assets, liabilities,
revenues, expenditures/
expenses are 5% of both
the governmental &
enterprise categories?
APPENDIX E
$100 The changes in The RSI
the fund
balances for
this category of
funds must be
reconciled to
the change in
the net assets
shown on the
governmentwide
statements.
(Required
Supplement
ary Information) for
entities
reporting
Pension
Trust Funds
must
include
these.
These
are the
three
general
categori
es of
funds
under
GASB
34.
These are
the two
government-wide
statements.
This fund
accounts
for all
financial
resources
except
those
required to
be
accounted
for in
another
fund.
Potpourri
Name That
Governmental
Fund
GovernmentWide
Financial
Statements
Reporting for
General
Purpose
Governmental
Units
All About
Funds
Fund
Financial
Statements
Governmental Accounting Jeopardy!
Example of Contents of Answer Board Worksheet
Under this
basis of
accounting,
revenue is
recognized
when
measurable
and
available to
finance
current
period
expenditures.
ENHANCING STUDENT LEARNING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING JEOPARDY!
247
Potpourri
Name That
Governmental
Fund
GovernmentWide
Financial
Statements
Fund
Financial
Statements
Reporting for
General
Purpose
Governmental
All About
Funds
APPENDIX E (Continued)
These
funds
report any
activity
that
provides
goods or
services to
other funds
of the
primary
government on a
costreimburse
ment basis.
$300 These
These are Separate
This fund
These
This
columns
accounts for funds may
funds must measure- the two
be used to
the
report a
ment focus proprie- should be
used to
accumula- provide
Statement and basis tary
reflect these tion of
goods or
of Cash
of account- funds.
services to
activities on resources
Flows.
ting used
the Statement for and the external
in some
of Net
payment of users for a
financial
fee.
Assets.
general
statements
long-term
is similar
debt and
to accountinterest.
ting for
business
enterprises.
$200 These
funds are
required to
present a
Balance
Sheet or a
Statement
of Net
Assets.
Besides the
schedules
required
for the
Pension
Trust
Funds,
these items
must also
be included
as RSI.
These are
the funds
categorized as
governmental
funds.
These are the
three
components
of net assets
reflected on
the Statement
of Net
Assets.
This fund
accounts for
revenue
sources
(other than
expendable
trusts/major
capital
projects)
that are
legally
restricted to
expenditure
for specified
purposes.
248
MURPHY
$400 These
These
items are
not
reported
in the
fund
financial
statements,
only in
the
governmentwide
financial
statements.
$500 These
This is
These are
the
funds must how
present a combining conditions
Statement statements that exist
for
when a
of
Revenues, nonmajor fund is
Expenses, funds are consireported. dered to
and
be major.
Changes in
Fund Net
Assets (or
Fund
Equity).
funds must
present a
Statement
of
Revenues,
Expenditures, and
Changes in
Fund
Balances?
A complete
CAFR
(comprehensive
annual
financial
report)
includes
these major
sections.
This
governmentwide
statement is
used to report
revenues and
expenses on
the full
accrual basis.
These items
reported on
the Statement
of Activities
are within the
control of
management
and are either
unusual in
nature or
infrequent in
occurrence.
This fund
accounts for
financial
resources
used for the
acquisition
or
construction
of major
capital
facilities,
other than
those
financed by
proprietary
or trust
funds.
This type of
fund is used
to report
resources
legally
restricted in
a way that
only
earnings
(not the
principal)
can be used
to support
government
programs.
Potpourri
Name That
Governmental
Fund
GovernmentWide
Financial
Statements
Fund
Financial
Statements
Reporting for
General
Purpose
Governmental
All About
Funds
APPENDIX E (Continued)
Fiduciary
funds
include
pension
trust funds,
investment
trust funds,
agency
funds, and
this other
fund.
These
funds
account for
resources
held and
used by
governments for
the benefit
of
individuals
and entities
other than
the government.