Progression to intermediate level courses; is a “pass” enough?

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to test the impact of a rule that affects tertiary students progressing from an introductory level finance course to intermediate level. The rule restricted students from progressing until they achieved a higher grade than just a “pass” mark. Design/methodology/approach: Archival data were gathered from 11 semesters regarding student performance pre and post the rule being introduced. Findings: Results show that the rule was associated with an increase in the chances of success at intermediate level for those students enrolled after the rule was introduced. Practical implications: This paper’s main contribution regards the evidence that increasing prior learning at an introductory level has a positive follow-on effect for students learning at intermediate level. This has a practical implication for educators, as the rule has shown to increase the chance of success for knowledge development in the first year of studies. Originality/value: The setting for this paper is unique and could potentially be replicated elsewhere. In 1980, Schaffer and Calkins called for an evaluation of the pre-requisites necessary for finance education at the tertiary level, and this paper answer this call stating that pre-requisites can contribute to the academic success of finance students.