Reforming accounting as a STEM discipline

Q1 Social Sciences

Journal of Accounting Education Pub Date : 2025-04-21 DOI:10.1016/j.jaccedu.2025.100968

Ken H. Guo

引用次数: 0

Abstract

There has been some effort to push the recognition of accounting as a STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) field through congressional legislation and the designation of academic accounting programs by individual schools. In this paper I argue that such legitimization is insufficient and that the accounting profession can best accomplish its stemmatization goal by reforming accounting as an information systems discipline. Such reform would necessitate a meaningful change of the accounting focus from rules to information systems design, implementation, and data analytics. I use four examples to illustrate how such reform might be carried out and discuss potential pitfalls and obstacles.

查看原文本刊更多论文

改革会计作为一门STEM学科

通过国会立法和个别学校指定学术会计课程，人们一直在努力推动会计作为STEM（科学、技术、工程和数学）领域的认可。在本文中，我认为这种合法化是不够的，会计行业可以通过改革会计作为一门信息系统学科来最好地实现其系统化目标。这种改革需要将会计重点从规则转向信息系统设计、实施和数据分析。我用四个例子来说明如何进行这种改革，并讨论潜在的陷阱和障碍。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Accounting Education Social Sciences-Education

CiteScore

4.20

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Accounting Education (JAEd) is a refereed journal dedicated to promoting and publishing research on accounting education issues and to improving the quality of accounting education worldwide. The Journal provides a vehicle for making results of empirical studies available to educators and for exchanging ideas, instructional resources, and best practices that help improve accounting education. The Journal includes four sections: a Main Articles Section, a Teaching and Educational Notes Section, an Educational Case Section, and a Best Practices Section. Manuscripts published in the Main Articles Section generally present results of empirical studies, although non-empirical papers (such as policy-related or essay papers) are sometimes published in this section. Papers published in the Teaching and Educational Notes Section include short empirical pieces (e.g., replications) as well as instructional resources that are not properly categorized as cases, which are published in a separate Case Section. Note: as part of the Teaching Note accompany educational cases, authors must include implementation guidance (based on actual case usage) and evidence regarding the efficacy of the case vis-a-vis a listing of educational objectives associated with the case. To meet the efficacy requirement, authors must include direct assessment (e.g grades by case requirement/objective or pre-post tests). Although interesting and encouraged, student perceptions (surveys) are considered indirect assessment and do not meet the efficacy requirement. The case must have been used more than once in a course to avoid potential anomalies and to vet the case before submission. Authors may be asked to collect additional data, depending on course size/circumstances.