Journal of Commerce and Accounting Research

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Controversies Surrounding Teaching Effectiveness Versus Research Productivity in Accounting: Some Hong Kong Evidence


Affiliations
1 Department of Accounting, Hong Kong Shue Yan University, China
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


With economic empirical research emphasized in accounting at the majority of universities worldwide in the past three to four decades, would this enhance the teaching effectiveness of accounting or would this be at the expense of teaching and learning of accounting? The purpose of this study is twofold (a) To determine through literature review the different views between research productivity and teaching effectiveness, what academic research today is all about and its relevance to practitioners. (b) To conduct a survey of accounting academics and the accounting profession in Hong Kong via a survey questionnaire (12 questions) followed by interviews of respondents with respect to their emphasis on teaching and research and the relevance of academic accounting research to practitioners. The conclusion of the study is derived from answering the following three research questions developed through the completion of a questionnaire by accounting academics,the accounting profession and the accounting practitioners in Hong Kong followed by interviews with the respondents: 1. Should there be a greater emphasis on teaching skills and a better balance between teaching and research? 2. Does faculty mix (e.g. qualifications) affect teaching? 3. Should faculty research cater to the needs of practitioners?

Keywords

Teaching Versus Research, Accounting Academics, Accounting Profession, Accounting Practitioners, Hong Kong.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Albrecht, W. S., & Sack, R. J. (2000). Accounting Education: Charting the Course through a Perilous Future. Accounting Education Series, 16, American Accounting Association: Sarasota.

  • Albrecht, W. S., & Sack, R. J. (2001).The perilous future of accounting education. The CPA Journal, 71(3), 17-23. New York.

  • Bausell, R. B., & Magoon, J. (1972). The validation of student ratings of instruction: An institutional research model. Newark, DE.: College of Education, University of Delaware.

  • Bean, D. F., & Bernardi, R. A. (2005). Estimating the ratings of journals omitted in prior quality ratings. Advances in Accounting Education, 7, 109-127.

  • Bell, T. B., Frecka, T. J., & Solomon, I. (1993). The relation between research productivity and teaching effectiveness: Empirical evidence for accounting educators. Accounting Horizons, 7(4), 33-49.Sarasota.

  • Bricker, R. (1993). Toward understanding academic research. The CPA Journal, 63(2), 52-54. New York.

  • Bricker, R. J., & Previts. (1990). Thesociology of accountancy: A study of academic and practice community schisms. Accounting Horizons (March), 1-14.

  • Centra, J. A. (1981). Research report: Research productivity and teaching effectiveness. Educational Testing Service. Princeton, NJ.

  • Chen, T. T. Y. (2013). Lifelong learning for the accounting profession: A comparison of the views of the academics and the practitioners in Hong Kong. Pan-Pacific Management Review, 16(1), 1-26.

  • Demski, J. S., & Zimmerman, J. L. (2000). On Research Vs. Teaching: A Long Term-Perspective. Accounting Horizons, 14(3), 343-352. Sarasota.

  • Doogar, R. (2003). What should accounting doctoral programs focus on? An economic perspective. Advances in Accounting Education, 5, 199-209.

  • Dyckman, T. R. (1989). Practice to research - What have you done for me hately? Accounting Horizons.

  • Everett, J. O., Klamm, B., & Stoltzfus, R. (2004). Developing benchmarks for evaluating publication records at doctoral programs in accounting. Journal of Accounting Education, 22(3), 229-252.

  • Fay, J. R., Ferrara, J. R., & Stryker, J. P. (1993). The quest for quality in business schools. Management Accounting, 75(6), 48-50. Montvale.

  • Feldman, K. A. (1987). Research productivity and scholarly accomplishment of college teachers as related to their instructional effectiveness: A review and exploration. Research in Higher Education, 26(3),163-226.

  • Fogarty, T. J. (2004). Sustained research productivity in accounting: A study of the senior cohort. Global Perspectives on Accounting Education, 1,31-58.

  • Grant, C. W. (1971). Faculty allocation of effort and student course evaluations. Journal of Educational Research, 64(9),405-410.

  • Gribbin, D. W. (1995). Accounting practitioners' views of the relative importance of teaching and research in accounting education. Journal of Education for Business, 70(4), 215-219.

  • Gribbin, D. W., Sobery, J., & Braswell, D. (2002). Development of teaching skills in doctoral programs vs. faculty performance evaluation: A survey study. Advances in Accounting Education, 4, 87-104.

  • Harry, J., & Goldner, N. S. (1972). The null relationship between teaching and research. Sociology of Education, 45(1), 47-60.

  • Herron, T. L., & Hall, T. W. (2004). Faculty perceptions of journals: Quality and publishing feasibility. Journal of Accounting Education, 22(3), 175-210.

  • Hoque, Z. (2002). Using journal articles to teach public sector accounting in higher education. Journal of Accounting Education, 20(3), 139-161.

  • Kinney, W. R. Jr. (1989). The relation of accounting research to teaching and practice: A positive view. Accounting Horizons (March), 119-124.

  • Leisenring, J. J., & Johnson, L. T. (1994). Accounting research: On the relevance of research to practice. Accounting Horizons, 8(4), 74-79.Sarasota.

  • Linsky, A. S., & Straus, M. A. (1975). Student evaluations, research productivity, and eminence of college faculty. Journal of Higher Education (February), 76-80.

  • Marsh, H. W. (1984). Students'evaluation of university teaching: Dimensionality, reliability, validity, potential biases, and utility. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(5), 707-754.

  • Marsh, H. W. (1987). Students'evaluation of university teaching: Research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research. Journal of Educational Research, 11, 253-388.

  • McCullagh, R. D., & Roy, M. R. (1975).The contribution of non-instructional activities to college classroom teacher effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Education, 44(1), 61-70.

  • Mounce, P. H., Mauldin, D. S., & Braun, R. L. (2004). The importance of relevant practical experience among accounting faculty: An empirical analysis of students' perceptions. Issues in Accounting Education, 19(4), 399-411.

  • Porter, G. L. (1992). Professional accounting education - Back to the future? Management Accounting, 73(7), 63- 64. Montvale.

  • Read, W., Rama, D., & Raghunandan, K. (1998). Are publication requirements for accounting faculty promotions still increasing? Issues in Accounting Education (May), 327-339.

  • Strait, A. M., & Bull, I. (1992). Do academic traditions undermine teaching? Journal of Accountancy, 174(3), 69- 73. New York.

  • Swain, M. R., & Stout, D. E. (2000). Survey evidence of teacher development based on AECC recommendations. Journal of Accounting Education, 18(2), 99-113.

  • Usry, M. F. (1993). Educational change: A call to action. Management Accounting, 74(8), 20.Montvale.

  • Volpe, R. P., & Chen, H. (2001). Finance: A missing dimension in accounting education. Ohio CPA Journal, 60(2), 49-51. Columbus.

  • Zivney, R. L., Berlin, W., & Gavin, T. (1995). A comprehensive examination of accounting faculty publishing. Issues in Accounting Education (Spring), 1-25.


Abstract Views: 394

PDF Views: 3




  • Controversies Surrounding Teaching Effectiveness Versus Research Productivity in Accounting: Some Hong Kong Evidence

Abstract Views: 394  |  PDF Views: 3

Authors

Theodore Tien-Yiu Chen
Department of Accounting, Hong Kong Shue Yan University, China

Abstract


With economic empirical research emphasized in accounting at the majority of universities worldwide in the past three to four decades, would this enhance the teaching effectiveness of accounting or would this be at the expense of teaching and learning of accounting? The purpose of this study is twofold (a) To determine through literature review the different views between research productivity and teaching effectiveness, what academic research today is all about and its relevance to practitioners. (b) To conduct a survey of accounting academics and the accounting profession in Hong Kong via a survey questionnaire (12 questions) followed by interviews of respondents with respect to their emphasis on teaching and research and the relevance of academic accounting research to practitioners. The conclusion of the study is derived from answering the following three research questions developed through the completion of a questionnaire by accounting academics,the accounting profession and the accounting practitioners in Hong Kong followed by interviews with the respondents: 1. Should there be a greater emphasis on teaching skills and a better balance between teaching and research? 2. Does faculty mix (e.g. qualifications) affect teaching? 3. Should faculty research cater to the needs of practitioners?

Keywords


Teaching Versus Research, Accounting Academics, Accounting Profession, Accounting Practitioners, Hong Kong.

References