Course: ACCT7011 Advanced Accounting Theory
Assessment 2: Critical Research Essay
Type: Individual Assessment
Value: 35%
Word Count: 2500 words (+/- 10%, excluding reference list)
Due Date: 11:59 pm, Friday, Week 10, Semester 1 2025 (Submission via Turnitin link on Moodle)
Get a Custom-Written Paper Delivered on Time
Our subject-specialist writers craft plagiarism-free, rubric-matched papers from scratch β serving students in Australia, UK, UAE, Kuwait, Canada & USA.
Purpose
This assessment requires students to critically evaluate the intersection of traditional accounting theories and the contemporary evolution of corporate reporting, specifically focusing on sustainability and climate-related disclosures. It is designed to develop skills in critical analysis, theoretical application, and research using real-world corporate data.
This assessment relates to learning outcomes:
- (a) Critically evaluate the role and limitations of traditional accounting theories in contemporary practice.
- (b) Analyse the implications of emerging regulatory changes (e.g., IFRS S1/S2) on financial and non-financial reporting.
- (c) Construct a coherent, evidence-based argument in a formal academic essay format.
Topic
Theoretical Implications of Integrated Reporting and Sustainability Standards.
Task Details
The introduction of the ISSB’s IFRS S1 (General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information) and IFRS S2 (Climate-related Disclosures) standards represents a significant shift in corporate reporting.
This essay requires you to:
- Select one ASX-listed company from the Energy (GICS 10) or Financials (GICS 40) sector.
- Retrieve its most recent (2023 or 2024) Annual Report and any separate Sustainability or Climate Report.
- Critically analyse the challenges and/or opportunities these new sustainability standards present for traditional accounting theories.
- Your analysis must explicitly apply two of the following theories discussed in class:
- Positive Accounting Theory (PAT)
- Legitimacy Theory
- Stakeholder Theory (either the normative or empirical branch)
- Institutional Theory
Your essay must be structured to answer the central question: “To what extent do new sustainability standards (IFRS S1/S2) reinforce, contradict, or extend the explanatory power of traditional accounting theories?”
EssayBishops Writers Are Online Right Now
Thousands of students at universities worldwide submit with confidence using our expert writing service. Human-written, Turnitin-safe, on time.
Your analysis should use specific examples from your chosen company’s disclosures (or lack thereof) to support your application of the theories.
Marking Guide
| Criteria | Weighting | Description |
| Identification & Application of Theory | 40% | Accuracy in explaining the two chosen theories. Depth and relevance of applying these theories to the IFRS S1/S2 context and the chosen company. |
| Depth of Analysis & Critique | 30% | Goes beyond description. Critically evaluates the relationship between the standards and theories. Demonstrates insight into the limitations or power of the theories. |
| Research & Evidence | 20% | Effective use of the selected company’s reports as primary evidence. Integration of high-quality, relevant academic literature (beyond core readings). |
| Structure, Clarity & Referencing | 10% | Logical essay structure (intro, body, conclusion). Clear and professional academic writing style. Correct Harvard referencing (in-text and list). |
Learning Resources
Guthrie, J., Manes-Rossi, F. and Orellana, A. (2022). ‘The future of sustainability accounting and reporting: A critical analysis of IFRS S1 and IFRS S2’. Public Money & Management, 42(7), pp. 511-514.
Hummel, K., Jobst, D. and Klawunn, C. (2024). ‘The role of the ISSBβs sustainability standards for the EUβs CSRD’. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 15(2), pp. 245-260.
Nurunnabi, M., Almubydeen, T.H., and Jaji, S. (2023). ‘Navigating the new frontier: A review of IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 and their implications for sustainable development’. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 16(12), p. 503.
Pizzi, S., Mat-Samsudin, S.Z., and Othman, Z. (2022). ‘The interplay between stakeholder pressure, corporate governance and ESG performance’. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(5), pp. 1600-1610.
Assessment 1
Assessment Type: Written Report – individual assessment
Purpose: This assessment is designed to reinforce the subject content and develop studentsβ skills and application of knowledge of the subject content to business situations.
This assessment relates to learning outcomes a, b and c.
Value: 20%
Word Count – 1800 (Plus Minus 10% is acceptable – excludes References)
Due Date: Students are to upload their submission to the Tumitin link on the KOI Moodle subject home page by 11:59pm on Tuesday of Week 8 on 1- September 2020.
Topic: This assignment covers the in-depth theoretical concepts with some practical accounting task application based on the topics from the subject.
Task Details: This assignment task requires a consideration and application of accounting theories and concepts with critical analysis based on General Purpose Financial Reporting by corporations. Students are required to prepare a comprehensive report directed to an Australian ASX Top 100 listed corporation detailing a critical analysis of the effectiveness of the corporation to meet the obligations of the conceptual framework of accounting. Students are to analyze the companyβs accounting policies and corporate governance matters under the concepts discussed during the classes such as accounting Theories, harmonization, standards settings, positive accounting theories, normative theories, measurement approaches and others.
Weekly Progress Report: Your lecturer / tutor will assign each student specific weekly targets. All students must demonstrate to their lecturer / tutor each week (weeks 5, 6 & 7) that their tasks are on schedule. The purpose is to ensure students do not leave the task till the last minute.
The Summary Report: should include data extracted from the Annual Report of the selected company relevant to the material analyzed.
Marking Guide:
Analysis – 30%
Theory support – 30%
Recommendations/conclusions – 20%
Presentation 20%