MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999878103 · doi:10.1108/arj-07-2018-0122

Undergraduate accounting students’ perception of a course in accounting research and theory

2020· article· en· W2999878103 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting Research Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting Education and Careers
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountingAccounting researchPositive accountingFinancial accountingPsychologyCurriculumManagement accountingOriginalityMedical educationMathematics educationAccounting information systemPedagogySociologyQualitative researchMedicineBusinessSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This study aims to measure the response of undergraduate accounting students to a stand-alone course in accounting theory and research. The aim of the study was to gauge students’ perceptions of the usefulness of this course and to determine if exposure to this material would increase student interest in accounting research and in pursuing a career in academia. Design/methodology/approach Three cohorts of students enrolled in the course completed an in-class survey. The study was conducted from 2015 to 2017. Findings The results of the survey show that student interest in accounting research and theory increased substantially as a result of the course. Students felt that learning about accounting research and the theories used in accounting research enhanced their overall understanding of accounting and would be useful to them as accounting practitioners. This study also reports that students interested in pursuing a PhD and/or an academic career also increased. Research limitations/implications Data were only collected at a single university and represent student perceptions only. Practical implications The results of this study and the description of the course design will inform academics seeking to answer the American Accounting Association Pathways Commission’s call to integrate accounting research and education. This study also suggests a pathway towards addressing the chronic academic accounting faculty shortage. Finally, the results will be of interest to those designing undergraduate accounting curriculum. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature on the “teaching-research nexus” in accounting by providing evidence, from the perspective of undergraduate accounting students, of the usefulness of integrating research into undergraduate accounting education. While many accounting researchers view accounting research and teaching accounting as separate activities, the response from students suggests that there is value in fostering a more complementary relationship between these two activities.

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.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.313 · 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