找出研究成果与教育之间的差距

Q1 Social Sciences
Lars Olbert
{"title":"找出研究成果与教育之间的差距","authors":"Lars Olbert","doi":"10.1016/j.jaccedu.2023.100884","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Although research results can enhance the content of education programs at various university levels, many important research results are only partly covered in major university-level textbooks. It is more difficult to transfer contributions from research results to practitioners if the former is not part of regular education programs. Here, we identify areas where researchers and educators can bridge the gap between theory and research results based on empirical studies, allowing findings to be more easily implemented by practitioners in situations that can improve their output. We take the use and accuracy of security and financial statement analysis as our prime target to examine empirical research results. Financial statement analysis and security valuation are two important applications in accounting and finance, and it is possible to measure changes in the models’ parameters and the effect these have on the outcome. We focus on five aspects of security and financial statement analysis: analysts’ use of valuation models, their estimates and accuracy, peer selection using multiples, valuation models target price accuracy, and differences in industry-specific valuation models and valuation factors. We find that most of the important research results are not referenced in major financial accounting textbooks.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":35578,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Accounting Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0748575123000568/pdfft?md5=8aa8aa1733b3665008c540f332050ecb&pid=1-s2.0-S0748575123000568-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying gaps between research results and education\",\"authors\":\"Lars Olbert\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jaccedu.2023.100884\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Although research results can enhance the content of education programs at various university levels, many important research results are only partly covered in major university-level textbooks. It is more difficult to transfer contributions from research results to practitioners if the former is not part of regular education programs. Here, we identify areas where researchers and educators can bridge the gap between theory and research results based on empirical studies, allowing findings to be more easily implemented by practitioners in situations that can improve their output. We take the use and accuracy of security and financial statement analysis as our prime target to examine empirical research results. Financial statement analysis and security valuation are two important applications in accounting and finance, and it is possible to measure changes in the models’ parameters and the effect these have on the outcome. We focus on five aspects of security and financial statement analysis: analysts’ use of valuation models, their estimates and accuracy, peer selection using multiples, valuation models target price accuracy, and differences in industry-specific valuation models and valuation factors. We find that most of the important research results are not referenced in major financial accounting textbooks.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35578,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Accounting Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0748575123000568/pdfft?md5=8aa8aa1733b3665008c540f332050ecb&pid=1-s2.0-S0748575123000568-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Accounting Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0748575123000568\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Accounting Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0748575123000568","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然研究成果可以充实大学各级教育课程的内容,但许多重要的研究成果在主要的大学教科书中只涉及一部分。如果研究成果不是常规教育课程的一部分,那么就更难将研究成果的贡献传递给实践者。在此,我们确定了研究人员和教育工作者可以在哪些领域弥合理论与基于实证研究的研究成果之间的差距,从而使研究成果更容易被实践者应用于提高产出的情况中。我们以证券分析和财务报表分析的使用和准确性为主要目标,对实证研究成果进行检验。财务报表分析和证券估值是会计和金融领域的两个重要应用,可以衡量模型参数的变化及其对结果的影响。我们重点关注证券和财务报表分析的五个方面:分析师对估值模型的使用、估值模型的估计和准确性、使用倍数选择同行、估值模型目标价格的准确性以及特定行业估值模型和估值因素的差异。我们发现,大多数重要的研究成果都没有在主要的财务会计教科书中提及。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Identifying gaps between research results and education

Although research results can enhance the content of education programs at various university levels, many important research results are only partly covered in major university-level textbooks. It is more difficult to transfer contributions from research results to practitioners if the former is not part of regular education programs. Here, we identify areas where researchers and educators can bridge the gap between theory and research results based on empirical studies, allowing findings to be more easily implemented by practitioners in situations that can improve their output. We take the use and accuracy of security and financial statement analysis as our prime target to examine empirical research results. Financial statement analysis and security valuation are two important applications in accounting and finance, and it is possible to measure changes in the models’ parameters and the effect these have on the outcome. We focus on five aspects of security and financial statement analysis: analysts’ use of valuation models, their estimates and accuracy, peer selection using multiples, valuation models target price accuracy, and differences in industry-specific valuation models and valuation factors. We find that most of the important research results are not referenced in major financial accounting textbooks.

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
Journal of Accounting Education
Journal of Accounting Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
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.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信