从业人员和教师对入门级公共会计师职业准备的看法

Kathryn Simms, Enrique G. Zapatero
{"title":"从业人员和教师对入门级公共会计师职业准备的看法","authors":"Kathryn Simms, Enrique G. Zapatero","doi":"10.3844/AJEBASP.2012.144.154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Entry-level public accountants in the U.S. must satisfy a litany of historically unparalleled requirements and demands. This unique set of challenges calls forth new questions about how effectively entry-level accountants are navigating the divide between their conceptual educations and the practical rigors of public practice. To examine these questions, we relied on qualitative analysis predicated on a theoretical framework of constructivism and systems theory. Our study confirmed practitioners’ perceptions about the preparation of entry-level accountants that have been documented for nearly a hundred years: Entry-level accountants’ shortcomings often include written and oral communications skills, interpersonal skills and critical thinking skills. However, what is unique to this study is that we also considered faculty perspectives. Faculty concurred with practitioners’ perspectives on entry-level accountants’ strengths and weaknesses-noting considerable growth in most problem areas over the college years. Practitioners and faculty also largely agreed about the pathway to successful and unsuccessful careers in public accounting. We suggest that continuing the historical perspective of extreme separation between academia and the business world is not particularly beneficial to the career preparation of junior accountants. Rather, we recommend that viewing accounting faculty and practitioners as part of the same continuum is likely to be more advantageous to the preparation of entry-level accountants and to the profession as a whole. We also conclude that differences in faculty and practitioner perspectives serve as checks and balances on the accounting profession-although more collaboration might facilitate greater improvements.","PeriodicalId":169514,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Economics and Business Administration","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"PRACTITIONER AND FACULTY PERSPECTIVES ON THE CAREER PREPARATION OF ENTRY-LEVEL PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS\",\"authors\":\"Kathryn Simms, Enrique G. Zapatero\",\"doi\":\"10.3844/AJEBASP.2012.144.154\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Entry-level public accountants in the U.S. must satisfy a litany of historically unparalleled requirements and demands. This unique set of challenges calls forth new questions about how effectively entry-level accountants are navigating the divide between their conceptual educations and the practical rigors of public practice. To examine these questions, we relied on qualitative analysis predicated on a theoretical framework of constructivism and systems theory. Our study confirmed practitioners’ perceptions about the preparation of entry-level accountants that have been documented for nearly a hundred years: Entry-level accountants’ shortcomings often include written and oral communications skills, interpersonal skills and critical thinking skills. However, what is unique to this study is that we also considered faculty perspectives. Faculty concurred with practitioners’ perspectives on entry-level accountants’ strengths and weaknesses-noting considerable growth in most problem areas over the college years. Practitioners and faculty also largely agreed about the pathway to successful and unsuccessful careers in public accounting. We suggest that continuing the historical perspective of extreme separation between academia and the business world is not particularly beneficial to the career preparation of junior accountants. Rather, we recommend that viewing accounting faculty and practitioners as part of the same continuum is likely to be more advantageous to the preparation of entry-level accountants and to the profession as a whole. We also conclude that differences in faculty and practitioner perspectives serve as checks and balances on the accounting profession-although more collaboration might facilitate greater improvements.\",\"PeriodicalId\":169514,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Economics and Business Administration\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Economics and Business Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3844/AJEBASP.2012.144.154\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Economics and Business Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3844/AJEBASP.2012.144.154","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

美国的初级会计师必须满足一系列前所未有的要求和要求。这种独特的挑战提出了新的问题,即入门级会计师如何有效地在他们的概念教育和公共实践的实际严谨性之间进行导航。为了检验这些问题,我们依赖于基于建构主义和系统理论的理论框架的定性分析。我们的研究证实了从业人员对入门级会计师准备工作的看法,这种看法已有近百年的历史:入门级会计师的缺点通常包括书面和口头沟通能力、人际交往能力和批判性思维能力。然而,这项研究的独特之处在于,我们也考虑了教师的观点。教师同意从业人员对入门级会计师的优势和劣势的看法,注意到在大学期间,大多数问题领域都有相当大的增长。从业人员和教师也在很大程度上同意在公共会计成功和不成功的职业道路。我们认为,延续学术界与商界极端分离的历史观点,对初级会计师的职业准备并不是特别有益。相反,我们建议将会计教师和从业人员视为同一连续体的一部分,这可能对入门级会计师的准备和整个职业更有利。我们还得出结论,教师和从业者观点的差异对会计专业起到了制衡作用——尽管更多的合作可能会促进更大的改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
PRACTITIONER AND FACULTY PERSPECTIVES ON THE CAREER PREPARATION OF ENTRY-LEVEL PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
Entry-level public accountants in the U.S. must satisfy a litany of historically unparalleled requirements and demands. This unique set of challenges calls forth new questions about how effectively entry-level accountants are navigating the divide between their conceptual educations and the practical rigors of public practice. To examine these questions, we relied on qualitative analysis predicated on a theoretical framework of constructivism and systems theory. Our study confirmed practitioners’ perceptions about the preparation of entry-level accountants that have been documented for nearly a hundred years: Entry-level accountants’ shortcomings often include written and oral communications skills, interpersonal skills and critical thinking skills. However, what is unique to this study is that we also considered faculty perspectives. Faculty concurred with practitioners’ perspectives on entry-level accountants’ strengths and weaknesses-noting considerable growth in most problem areas over the college years. Practitioners and faculty also largely agreed about the pathway to successful and unsuccessful careers in public accounting. We suggest that continuing the historical perspective of extreme separation between academia and the business world is not particularly beneficial to the career preparation of junior accountants. Rather, we recommend that viewing accounting faculty and practitioners as part of the same continuum is likely to be more advantageous to the preparation of entry-level accountants and to the profession as a whole. We also conclude that differences in faculty and practitioner perspectives serve as checks and balances on the accounting profession-although more collaboration might facilitate greater improvements.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信