MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116357934 · doi:10.5539/hes.v4n5p18

Bridging the Gap between Accounting Students and the Profession: A Case Study

2014· article· en· W2116357934 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Susan Lightweis

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting Education and Careers
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditAccountingPsychologyMemorizationMathematics educationPedagogyMedical educationMedicineBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study addresses the gap between accounting educators and the profession. Research indicates accounting graduates are underprepared for this challenging career. The issue stems from accounting educators who only lecture and accounting students who memorize the information provided in these lectures. Accounting students need opportunities to build their professional skills through learning activities that mimic real-world situations. This qualitative study analyzes the perspectives of advanced accounting students before and after computer-assisted instruction to determine if they believe their critical thinking, communication and problem solving skills have improved. I conducted an analysis using an auditing simulation, semi-structured interviews before and after computer use, and reflective journals provided by advanced accounting students attending Central North Carolina universities. The auditing simulation introduced in the study created the opportunity for students to practice their knowledge of accounting and enhance their professional skills. The findings suggested students made a connection between concepts learned in course work and situations found in the accounting profession. The simulation built confidence in students and motivated them to learn more about enhancing skills necessary for the accounting profession. The evidence recommends accounting educators to use simulations as a supplemental learning tool in preparing accounting students for the profession. This study allows colleges, universities, and state accounting associations and societies to explore and conduct future research in using learning tools to enhance professional skills to bridge the gap between accounting students and the profession.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations17
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicAccounting Education and CareersFrench-language works237,207