Search results

Islands have long been discussed as refuges from global catastrophes; this paper will evaluate them systematically, discussing both the positives and negatives of islands as refuges. There are examples of isolated human communities surviving for thousands of years on places like Easter Island. Islands could provide protection against many low-level risks, notably including bio-risks. However, they are vulnerable to tsunamis, bird-transmitted diseases and other risks. This paper aims to explore how to use the advantages of islands for survival during global catastrophes.

Preliminary horizon scanning based on the application of the research principles established in the previous global catastrophic literature.

The large number of islands on Earth, and their diverse conditions, increase the chance that one of them will provide protection from a catastrophe. Additionally, this protection could be increased if an island was used as a base for a nuclear submarine refuge combined with underground bunkers and/or extremely long-term data storage. The requirements for survival on islands, their vulnerabilities and ways to mitigate and adapt to risks are explored. Several existing islands, suitable for the survival of different types of risk, timing and budgets, are examined. Islands suitable for different types of refuges and other island-like options that could also provide protection are also discussed.

The possible use of islands as refuges from social collapse and existential risks has not been previously examined systematically. This paper contributes to the expanding research on survival scenarios.

Most universities have relied on student evaluations as a source of evidence in their assessment of teaching performance. However, a complete evaluation of all dimensions of a faculty member's teaching requires multiple sources of evidence. The purpose of this chapter is to identify the sources of evidence that accounting chairs report they currently use to assess teaching. Calderon and Green first examined this issue in their 1997 study. However, their results may be outdated due to changes in accreditation requirements, teaching delivery methods, and the continued evolution of assessment tools. Responding department chairs report that peer observation followed by course syllabus, exams given in class, and instructor course notes are the most frequently used evidence types, with an average of 3.16 sources beyond student evaluations. The source and quantity of evidence vary across different types of institutions. While Calderon and Green reported that most schools use ad hoc and subjective sources of evidence, respondents in this study focus more on instructor-supplied materials and direct evidence from inside the classroom.

This chapter includes a citation analysis of the first 16 volumes of Advances in Accounting Education: Teaching and Curriculum Innovations (henceforth, Advances in Accounting Education). Using this analysis, we identified the top 20 articles of the 195 articles published. This analysis provides an understanding of the relative contribution and impact of the papers published in Advances in Accounting Education, and the information provides past authors with a measure of how their contributions compare with the contributions of other authors. Also, this analysis may be valuable for potential contributors who are developing a research topic in that it will enable them to identify the types of articles that have traditionally had the greatest impact.

We also identify the top 30 authors of the 383 who have published in the journal. This analysis not only gives feedback to the authors listed, but also helps accounting education researchers identify authors whose work may be relevant to their interests.

We report the research categories (issues) and methodologies used for all articles published from 1998 to 2015 in Advances in Accounting Education. We also compare the research issues and research methodologies used in Advances in Accounting Education to those in the Journal of Accounting Education and Issues in Accounting Education for the period 2006–2015. Authors considering submitting a manuscript to one of these journals can use this information to determine which journal might be the best fit for their work.

Employers state that their major concern with accounting graduates is their inadequate skills in reading, writing, speaking, and listening (Kranacher, 2007, p. 80). Yet, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and some state boards of accountancy have minimized the importance of these skills on professional certification exams. This conflict creates a mixed message. The purpose of our study is to determine accounting department chairs’ perceptions of the importance of writing, speaking, listening, interpersonal, and technological communication skills for both the accounting and the business curricula and where in the curriculum these skills are taught. In our study, we surveyed 122 accounting administrators from the largest North American accountancy programs. Survey respondents report that most required communication courses are in the general business curriculum and, to a lesser extent, as a required course in the accounting major. Consistent across demographics, respondents also indicate that all communication skills are important, but writing skills followed by technological skills are the most valued for the accounting curriculum, while writing and speaking skills are most important in the business curriculum. Implications for the curriculum are discussed.

Standards for Accounting and Review Services (SSARS) Number (No.) 1, “Compilations and Review Services” (AICPA, 1979), provides guidance for public accountants associated with unaudited financial statements through compilations and reviews. SSARS No. 8, “Amendment to SSARS No. 1, Compilation and Review of Financial Statements” (2000), extends this guidance to plain paper statements. Unlike traditional compilations, plain paper statements are intended only for the use of informed members of management.

To examine the effects of SSARS No. 8, we surveyed practicing Certified Public Accountants (CPAs) and bank loan officers to measure their perceptions of what constitute “submitted financial statements,” “third parties,” “informed members of management,” and other key terms that aroused concerns described in SSARS No. 8 comment letters. We find that several years after the issuance of SSARS No. 8, CPAs, even those somewhat familiar with SSARS No. 8, and bankers who have experience with plain paper statements do not fully understand the definitions and applications of SSARS No. 8. In addition, several of the concerns cited in the statement's Exposure Draft (ED) comment letters linger. The results suggest the need to either better education plain paper statement users or revise the standards, perhaps prohibiting a CPA's association with plain paper statements. We also identify future research questions.