CHARACTERISTICS OF GRADUATE ACCOUNTING PROGRAMS: AN ANALYSIS OF UNIVERSITIES IN ENGLISH-SPEAKING COUNTRIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The literature indicates there is a shortage of professors of accounting. For some researchers this lack is related to the high price paid to obtain an advanced degree in this area. According to the American Accounting Association (AAA), graduate programs need to be more attractive, less stressful and less expensive for students. Therefore, the objective of this study is to map the characteristics of the selection process, the courses offered and the requirements to obtain a master’s degree in accounting from universities located in English-speaking. This study can be classified as descriptive, with a theoretical-conceptual nature and a qualitative approach. We rely on secondary sources and apply inductive logic. The main results are that in the United States, 71% of the programs require candidates to have knowledge of accounting, finance, economics, taxes, statistics and mathematics; 75% of Australian universities require a minimum score on the TOEFL for foreign students, 20% have a minimum GPA and 10% require taking the GMAT; and no Canadian university requires a letter of recommendation. Regarding the purpose of the courses, 88% of the institutions that offer master programs in accounting focus on improved professional qualification of accountants. In Australia, 30% of the programs last 18 months, while in Canada this figure is 66% and in New Zealand, 50% of the programs last at least two years. With respect to the graduation requirements, 82% of the universities require between 4 and 9 mandatory disciplines. In conclusion, the master programs in the United States and United Kingdom are relatively more demanding with respect to the degree requirements than in the other countries investigated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".