Search results

To disseminate helpful advice to current and future candidates about the accounting academic job market.

Literature review, interviews with recently hired faculty members, insights from the author’s experiences as both job candidates and search committee members, and discussions with colleagues.

In this chapter, we discuss the current state of the job market for accounting professors and offer our insights as well as those from a group of recent graduates. It is our recent experience that many rookie candidates pursue initial faculty positions with an incomplete understanding of many aspects of the market, including how the market clears, job expectations, and other issues that we believe are important. While others have adequately addressed the importance of research in the profession and alluded to some aspects of the market, we provide additional useful information about the market and other career aspects in order to assist new graduates in their quests to find fulfilling appointments. Our chapter complements existing literature to form an updated and more complete picture of the market and profession.

This chapter helps prepare candidates for the job market by providing information and advice that complements advice given in Ph.D. programs and the existing literature.

Candidates entering the job market will better understand the nuances of the market and can make more informed decisions about the institutions that best meet their needs.

The chapter provides important practical advice for job seekers about the accounting academic job market not available elsewhere.

We survey full-time accounting faculty holding terminal degrees about professional certifications. In addition to asking faculty about professional certifications they hold, we gather data about faculty’s experiences as well as their perceptions about the pursuit of professional certifications. We find significant results for the following items: faculty at non-doctoral schools are more likely to hold professional certifications than their doctoral counterparts; newer faculty are less likely to hold a professional certification, indicating a decreasing trend of accounting faculty who are professionally certified, and faculty teaching audit and taxation are more likely to hold a professional certification, denoting a higher practice credential requirement for faculty teaching in those areas. Our work also reveals faculty’s perceptions about the benefits of obtaining a certification to both teaching and research. By understanding the motivations and obstacles perceived by accounting faculty in their pursuit of professional certifications, universities can design reward systems that best suit their institutional mission while accommodating faculty pursuit of professional certifications in order to bridge the gap between accounting education and accounting practice.

We investigate how different methods of instructor-led reviews for an introductory accounting exam may affect student achievement. We compare two review groups: students who review for the exam by playing Monopoly versus those engaged a more traditional review. We also include a third group (no formal review). We conducted an experiment by examining students’ test scores on an accounting cycle exam. The students were placed into three groups: those who played Monopoly to review for the exam, those who participated in a more traditional exam review, and those who did not participate in any formal review. Our results indicate that, as expected, reviewing for an exam significantly improves students’ exam scores when compared to peers that did not review. However, this result is driven by the students in the Monopoly condition. Students in the traditional review did not score statistically significantly higher than those in the control (no review) group. Also, we did not find that students playing Monopoly as a review scored significantly higher than students actively working in a more traditional review. This study contributes to the literature by informing professors about the efficacy of using Monopoly to review the accounting cycle. This is the first paper to directly test the effects of using Monopoly on student achievement.