MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W130020243

Challenges to Audit Education for the 21st Century: A Survey of Curricula, Course Content, and Delivery Methods: The 2000-2001 Auditing Section Education Committee American Accounting Association

2003· article· en· W130020243 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eric N. Johnson, Jane E. Baird, Paul Caster, William N. Dilla, Christine E. Earley, Timothy J. Louwers

Bibliographic record

VenueIssues in Accounting Education · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting Education and Careers
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditAccountingContext (archaeology)SyllabusCurriculumPolitical scienceBusinessPublic relationsPsychologyPedagogyGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: This paper reports the results of a survey of auditing and assurance courses in the U.S. and several other countries conducted during 2000-2001. The survey, commissioned by the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association, yielded data on a total of 285 auditing and assurance courses taught at 188 colleges and universities in the United States, Canada, and several other countries. The syllabi data were analyzed on a number of dimensions and the results compared to two prior surveys of auditing courses (Frakes 1987; Groomer and Heintz 1994). Our findings document substantial changes in content (e.g., new or expanded coverage of fraud, information technology, and assurance services) and pedagogy (e.g., increased use of team projects, student presentations, cases, and the Internet) in both introductory and advanced auditing courses over the past several years. These changes are discussed in the context of events that significantly impacted auditing education and practice from the late 1980s through the end of the 1990s. Data Availability: Course-level syllabi data that do not indicate the identity or institutional affiliation of individual auditing faculty are available from the authors. INTRODUCTION The 1990s were a decade of significant change in the auditing profession. At the beginning of the 21st century, investors and other stakeholders in an increasingly global capital market are demanding that companies provide accurate and relevant performance data in real time. In connection with these changes, the scope of the financial audit and the role of the independent auditor have expanded. In addition to attesting to the fairness of historical financial statements in accordance with prescribed accounting principles, the independent auditor now includes consideration of the client's performance, validity, and risk management of business processes in assessing overall engagement risk (Elliott 1998). In order to keep pace with these fundamental changes in the market for financial information, calls for significant change in accounting and auditing education have come from the accounting profession (e.g., Arthur Andersen et al. 1989; Elliott 1997) and academia (e.g., Accounting Education Change Commission [AECC] 1990; Williams 1993; Albrecht and Sack 2000). These changes include taking a broader, less structured, and less technical approach to accounting and auditing in the classroom, as well as integrating information technology into the curriculum, both as an instructional vehicle and as a tool to enhance students' research and communication skills. Another significant change impacting accounting and auditing education in the United States is the number of states that have adopted a 150-hour education requirement for the licensing of certified public accountants. Prior to 1990, only two states, Florida and Hawaii, had 150-hour requirements in effect. As of 2002, that number has grown to 38 states plus the District of Columbia, and nine additional states have enacted the requirement with a future effective date. This change has led to widespread redesign of accounting curricula across the country. To determine the impact of these changes on auditing education, we collected a large sample of auditing course syllabi, performed content analysis on the syllabi, and compared our results to those of two similar prior studies (Frakes 1987; Groomer and Heintz 1994). Frakes (1987) focused on the content and delivery of 233 undergraduate auditing courses in the late 1980s. Groomer and Heintz (1994) reported on 196 advanced auditing courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels in the early 1990s. As part of our analysis, we identified nine distinct auditing curriculum models among the institutions in the sample. These models range from a single financial auditing course at the undergraduate level to several specialized auditing courses at the graduate level. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIssues in Accounting EducationSame topicAccounting Education and CareersFrench-language works237,207