Search results

To provide potential accounting doctoral students with relevant information on various doctoral program characteristics.

Current doctoral students in accounting, representing 60 different programs in the United States, completed a survey concerning various doctoral program characteristics at their respective doctoral institutions. We examine the survey responses along with program rankings and job placement data.

Doctoral programs in accounting differ on many dimensions such as the structure of the courses and deliverables required, the student cohort profile, student research support, and teaching expectations. In addition, top tier programs differ on a variety of these characteristics from lower tiered programs.

A single student at each doctoral program completed the survey. Doctoral students’ experiences may differ between each other and programs may change. However, we asked students to respond to the survey questions as a “typical student” and as a whole, doctoral programs appear to have remained similar over the past half of century.

The intended audience for this chapter is potential accounting doctoral students. Providing them with an awareness of the different program characteristics should prove to be useful in finding a program with the appropriate fit.

Students with mathematics-related learning difficulties (MLD) experience difficulties in many areas of mathematics achievement; without intervention, these difficulties will persist. In this chapter, I first review research examined cognitive processes deficits of MLD. Because difficulties in learning mathematics are presumably due to these cognitive deficits, findings of these studies can shed light on developing effective intervention programs. Second, using Response to Intervention (RTI) as a framework to distinguish the intensity level of intervention, I review findings from existing Tier 2 and Tier 3 intervention studies and synthesize the instructional approaches used in these studies as well as the factors researchers used to intensify the intervention. Finally, Data-Based Individualization (DBI), a systematic approach to intensify intervention, commonly used at the Tier 3 level, is review. Suggestions for future research directions for intensive mathematics intervention are also provided.

Multitiered systems of support (MTSS) is widely advocated as an approach to improving education for all students, including students with disabilities. A hope for MTSS is that it can solve or mitigate many problems associated with providing special education to students with disabilities. While MTSS shows some promise for better addressing these problems, enthusiasm for MTSS and unsound thinking about what MTSS can do, cannot do, and has not done can veil lack of progress toward improving special education, as well as obscure what improving special education requires. We suggest that for both MTSS and special education to make more progress toward achieving their promises, several reality checks are urgently needed.

Tier 2 intervention is defined by the application of brief, efficient, and accessible supports for students who are at risk for social-emotional and behavioral concerns. Historically, Tier 2 interventions have been delivered in accordance with a standard protocol, with each student receiving the same general strategy in an undifferentiated manner. Yet, research has suggested the potential value of an adaptive Tier 2 approach, wherein brief assessments are conducted to determine which intervention (or adapted version of one particular intervention) is best suited to a student's individual needs. Within this chapter, we provide an overview of procedures related to adaptive Tier 2 intervention and discuss different approaches one might take to this practice. We conclude with a discussion of directions for future research in this area if adaptive Tier 2 intervention is to be widely adopted, implemented, and sustained within schools.

To raise the quality of regulatory capital, Basel III capital rules recognize unrealized gains and losses on all available-for-sale (AFS) securities in Common Equity Tier 1 Capital (CET1). However, by examining the correlations between U.S. GDP growth rate, interest rates and regulatory capital ratios computed using Basel III regulatory capital definition for six U.S. global systemically important banks (G-SIBs) since 2007, this chapter finds that Basel III regulatory capital will enhance the pro-cyclicality of Basel III leverage ratio and Tier 1 capital ratio and their sensitivity to long-term interest rates. Therefore, Basel III capital standards may have significant implications for bank supervision and bank capital risk management in the near future. As banks will hold more high-quality liquid assets (HQLAs) as required by Basel III Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR), the weight of unrealized gains and losses arising from fair value accounting will increase in Basel III Tier 1 capital base, the consequent increase of pro-cyclicality in a bank’s regulatory capital ratios may distort the true picture of bank capital adequacy. If an expected loss approach (EL) is used as the provisioning model, such capital risk may be increased further. Moreover, as U.S. monetary policy has started tapering quantitative easing, long-term interest rates will increase inevitably. This may increase the negative impact of unrealized gains and losses on AFS securities on bank capital. As a result, it may be difficult for banks to maintain appropriate capital ratios to meet regulatory requirements and support business activities.

The desire to be part of the new global economy is prompting many countries to challenge long-standing patriarchal assumptions and addresses the issue of sexual harassment in the workplace. The state of sexual harassment policy in any country allows them to be classified into tiers, depending on the degree to which the country is confronting the issue of sexual harassment. Tier I countries are simply not dealing with sexual harassment. The primary distinction between Tier II, III and IV countries is the degree to which they are addressing the issue. The non-inhabited Tier X classification would represent an idealized, gender-egalitarian workplace.

We review the concept of response to intervention (RtI) as it is being applied to emotional and behavioral disorders (EDB) in the early part of the 21st century, examining how it differs from and incorporates features of other approaches to addressing those problems, including pre-referral interventions, applied behavior analysis, functional behavioral assessment, curriculum-based measurement, positive behavioral interventions and supports, and special education. After discussing alternative concepts about how RtI might be applied to students with EBD, we note that our search of the literature revealed very few studies examining the application of RtI with students having EBD. We found both substantive and methodological problems in the studies we reviewed. For example, researchers did not describe adequately how students were selected for tiers, what dependent measures were chosen and why, what independent variables were manipulated, what criteria led to moving a child to a different tier, and how RtI addressed (or failed to address) the need for special education services. We conclude that, although some of the components of RtI have solid evidentiary bases, little evidence supports common claims of the benefits of RtI, especially as applied to students with EBD.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate why multi-tier apparel suppliers integrate social sustainability practices into their supply chains and what barriers these suppliers encounter while embedding social sustainability practices.

This study employs a qualitative research design, drawing on data from semi-structured interviews with 46 owners and managers from 33 multi-tier apparel suppliers in Bangladesh, an important outsourcing hub for the global apparel industry. To corroborate research findings, the views of owners and managers were triangulated by further interviewing 11 key representatives of institutional actors such as third-party auditors, a donor agency, industry associations, regulatory agencies and a non-governmental organisation (NGO).

The authors' findings suggest a range of divergent institutional drivers and barriers – coercive, mimetic and normative – that determine the implementation of multi-tier suppliers' social sustainability practices. The key reported drivers were buyers' requirements, external stakeholders' expectations, top management commitment and competition. Conversely, cost and resource concerns and gaps in the regulatory framework were identified as key social sustainability implementation barriers. In particular, owners and managers of second-tier and third-tier supplier firms experienced more internal barriers such as cost and resource concerns than external barriers such as gaps in values, learning and commitment (i.e. compromise for mutual benefit and non-disclosure of non-compliance) that impeded effective social sustainability implementation.

Social sustainability in supply chain management has received significant attention from academics, business practitioners, governments, NGOs and supranational organisations. However, limited attention has been paid to investigating the drivers and barriers for social sustainability implementation from a developing country's multi-tier supplier perspective. The authors' research has addressed this knowledge gap.

The evidence from the authors' study provides robust support for key assumptions of institutional theory and has useful implications for both managers and policy-makers.

The authors' study contributes to the embryonic research stream of socially sustainable multi-tier supply chain management by connecting it to the application of institutional theory in a challenging institutional context.

Implementing sustainable practices in multi-tier supply chains (MTSCs) is a difficult task. This study aims to investigate why such endeavours fail and how MTSC partners can address them.

A single-case study of a global food retail company was used in this study. Semi-structured interviews with the case firm and its first- and second-tier suppliers were used to collect data, which were then qualitatively analysed using thematic analysis.

Major barriers impeding the implementation of sustainability in multi-tier food supply chains were revealed such as the cost of sustainability, knowledge gap, lack of infrastructure and supply chain complexity. Furthermore, the findings reveal five possible solutions such as multi-tier collaboration and partnership, diffusion of innovation along the chain, supply chain mapping, sustainability performance measurement and capacity building, all of which can aid in the improvement of sustainability practices.

Future research should investigate how specific barriers and drivers affect specific aspects of sustainability, pointing practitioners to specific links between the variables that can aid in tailoring sustainability oriented investment.

This research supports managerial comprehension of MTSC sustainability, pointing out ways to improve sustainability performance despite the complex multi-tier system of food supply chains.

The research on MTSC sustainability is still growing, and this research contributes to the debate about how MTSCs can become more sustainable from the perspective of the triple bottom line, particularly food supply chains which face significant sustainability challenges.