The Accounting Doctoral Shortage: Time for a New Model

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 427-432 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerry E. Trapnell ◽  
Neal Mero ◽  
Jan R. Williams ◽  
George W. Krull

ABSTRACT: The crisis in supply versus demand for doctorally qualified faculty members in accounting is well documented (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business [AACSB] 2003a, 2003b; Plumlee et al. 2005; Leslie 2008). Little progress has been made in addressing this serious challenge facing the accounting academic community and the accounting profession. Faculty time, institutional incentives, the doctoral model itself, and research diversity are noted as major challenges to making progress on this issue. The authors propose six recommendations, including a new, extramurally funded research program aimed at supporting doctoral students that functions similar to research programs supported by such organizations as the National Science Foundation and other science-based funding sources. The goal is to create capacity, improve structures for doctoral programs, and provide incentives to enhance doctoral enrollments. This should lead to an increased supply of graduates while also enhancing and supporting broad-based research outcomes across the accounting landscape, including auditing and tax.

2000 ◽  
Vol 632 ◽  
Author(s):  
Devdas M. Pai ◽  
Jagannathan Sankar ◽  
Clinton B. Lee

ABSTRACTFaculty members at the authors' institution are involved in multidisciplinary materials research through a National Science Foundation funded center. One goal of this center is to empower materials education through the incorporation of research outcomes into the undergraduate and graduate curricula. There are currently no MSE degree programs on this campus; therefore, a variety of means is being employed to infuse MSE information into non-MSE curricula. In addition to classroom lectures and case studies, students receive an extramural exposure to the multidisciplinary aspects of MSE by engaging in team or individual projects that exploit fully the center's facilities and resources. Benefits are being experienced in terms of a heightened enrollment of students in graduate MSE programs, and increased placement of students in materials related positions in industry. The paper describes the status of these efforts.


BMC Nursing ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Beata Dobrowolska ◽  
Paweł Chruściel ◽  
Anna Pilewska-Kozak ◽  
Violetta Mianowana ◽  
Marta Monist ◽  
...  

Abstract Background This study aimed to map and summarise the state of the research regarding doctoral programs in nursing, as well as the issues debated in the context of nursing doctoral education. A Scoping Review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension scoping reviews statement (PRISMA-ScR) was conducted. Three electronic bibliographic data bases were searched: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Complete, Medline (on EBSCO Host) and SCOPUS to identify empirical studies published between January 2009 and December 2019. The review process was based on framework identified by Arksey and O’Malley and further revised by Levac and colleagues. Analysis was performed with the use of the Donabedian framework regarding the structure of the doctorate programmes, the process, and the outcomes. Results The review included 41 articles, mostly originating in the United States (n=26) and Europe (n=8), mainly by collecting the perceptions of students and faculty members with descriptive studies. The following issues were investigated at the (a) structure level: Prerequisite for doctoral candidates, Qualifications of faculty members, Mission of doctoral programs; (b) process level: Doctoral programs contents, Doctoral programs resources and quality, Mentoring and supervision, Doing doctorate abroad; and (c) outcome level: Academic performance outcomes in doctoral programs, Doctoral graduates’ competences, Doctoral students/graduates’ satisfaction, Doctoral graduates’ challenges. Conclusions Doctoral programs have mainly been investigated to date with descriptive studies, suggesting more robust research investigating the effectiveness of strategies to prepare future scientists in the nursing discipline. Doctorates are different across countries, and there is no visible cooperation of scholars internationally; their structure and processes have been reported to be stable over the years, thus not following the research development in nursing, discipline and practice expectations. Moreover, no clear framework of outcomes in the short- and long-term have been established to date to measure the quality and effectiveness of doctorate education. National and global strategies might establish common structure, process and outcome frameworks, as well as promote robust studies that are capable of assessing the effectiveness of this field of education.


10.28945/4701 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 171-187
Author(s):  
Dr. Sharron Scott ◽  
Jennifer M Johnson

Aim/Purpose: This qualitative study investigated the educational experiences of Black male doctoral students that contributed to prolonged “All But Dissertation” (ABD) status. Background: Explorations of the enrollment and persistent patterns among Black/African American students has shed light on the disparate rates of graduate school completion. While previous scholarship has focused on Black men in doctoral programs, there has been less focus on the experiences of Black male doctoral students who, after successfully completing coursework, comprehensive examinations, and a dissertation proposal hearing, find themselves mired in “All But Dissertation” (ABD) status. The purpose of this research was to explore the intersections of race and gender in the educational experiences of Black male doctoral students that contribute to delayed terminal degree completion. Methodology: Utilizing Self-Efficacy Theory and Critical Race Theory, this phenomenological investigation examines the racialized experiences of three Black male doctoral candidates enrolled in diverse graduate programs. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to identify how race and gender intersects with faculty advising, mentoring, student behaviors, and the ways faculty members support or impede doctoral student progression during the dissertation phase. Contribution: This study contributes to research in three critical ways: (1) it expands our understanding of the experiences of doctoral students specifically between completing coursework and defending a dissertation; (2) it illustrates the types of racialized encounters experienced during graduate study that contribute to prolonged ABD status and program attrition; and (3) it offers strategies for campus administrators and faculty to consider to extend structures of support to promote degree attainment among Black male doctoral students. Findings: This study’s findings indicate that racialized dynamics during doctoral education create environments that negatively impact doctoral student self-esteem and diminish motivation to complete doctoral studies. Through the narratives of Rico, Jeremy, and Kevin, three core themes emerged that illustrate the salience of race in the doctoral program experiences of Black males: (1) Underrepresented & Undervalued, (2) Challenging Transitions, and (3) Gendered Racism. First, each participant attended doctoral programs at predominantly White institutions, and all shared the commonality of being the only or one of a few Black male doctoral students in their program. Being underrepresented in the program led to challenges finding faculty members who valued their burgeoning research interests and were willing to support them through the dissertation process. Additionally, participants described challenging transitions at each stage of their doctoral program, which ultimately contributed to extending their time as students. Not only did they describe having different levels of preparedness to begin doctoral study, limited feedback from faculty through coursework and on dissertation proposal drafts prolonging their time as doctoral candidates. Finally, participants described their experiences navigating gendered racism, or racism that was attributed to their identity as Black men. Exasperated by their underrepresentation in the academy, participants talked about being surveilled on campus, having their intellect questioned, and the struggles associated with getting approval for their research. Recommendations for Practitioners: The experiences highlighted by participants offer insights into the institutional policies and procedures that can be implemented to support Black men. Specifically, findings speak to the importance of diversity. Campuses should work to ensure there is structural diversity within programs, and that faculty can guide students through a diverse array of research interests and topics as well. Faculty should offer clear and consistent feedback on student writing at all stages of graduate education to better prepare students for the transition to writing a dissertation independently. Finally, as racism is endemic to education, administration should promote spaces where students of color can talk about their racially charged experiences navigating the academy. Recommendation for Researchers: This work would benefit from additional research exploring the experiences of doctoral candidates across diverse institutional contexts. This includes intentional exploration of experiences of students enrolled in online doctoral programs, executive doctoral programs, and other types of programs that have emerged.


2018 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-7
Author(s):  
Murray Webster

Jane Sell’s contributions to social psychology include guides to theory building, experimental methods, public goods, prosocial interaction, gender, race, and status processes. She serves on committees and panels at the American Sociological Association (ASA), the ASA Social Psychology Section, and the National Science Foundation. Her doctoral students attest to her wise and patient guidance, and she continues to enrich social psychology through her research, her service, and her many students.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David Allison

Abstract Objectives To present the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the National Academies report Reproducibility and Replicability in Science, as relevant to the nutrition research community, and to engage in a discussion of implications for nutrition research. Methods The report was developed by a committee of individuals with expertise in research methodologies across a range to disciplines and fields, including nutrition research. The committee was charged with assessing what is known about the extent of the issues of replication and reproducibility (R&R) in scientific and engineering research. To inform the development of the report, the committee held several evidence-gathering sessions and reviewed published literature. Results Reproducibility and Replicability in Science will be published in spring 2019, after undergoing the National Academies’ rigorous review process. The report will include (1) definitions of “reproducibility” and “replication,” (2) an assessment of what is known about the extent of R&R in scientific and engineering research, (3) consideration of whether a lack of R&R impacts the health or the public's perception of research, (4) a review of approaches to improve R&R, (5) examination of factors affecting R&R, (6) consideration of R&R across a range of research methodologies, and (7) conclusions and recommendations for improving R&R and highlighting examples of good practices. Conclusions Conclusions remain confidential until the report has cleared the National Academies report review process. The report will include conclusions and recommendations for improving R&R, with relevance for nutrition research. Funding Sources This study was supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Soenen ◽  
Dana Gerlach ◽  
Christina Haskins ◽  
Taylor Heyl ◽  
Danie Kinkade ◽  
...  

BCO-DMO curates a database of research-ready data spanning the full range of marine ecosystem related measurements including in-situ and remotely sensed observations, experimental and model results, and synthesis products. We work closely with investigators to publish data and information from research projects supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF), as well as those supported by state, private, and other funding sources. BCO-DMO supports all phases of the data life cycle and ensures open access of well-curated project data and information. We employ F.A.I.R. Principles that comprise a set of values intended to guide data producers and publishers in establishing good data management practices that will enable effective reuse.


2009 ◽  
Vol 1233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Velda Goldberg ◽  
Leonard J. Soltzberg ◽  
Michael D. Kaplan ◽  
Richard W. Gurney ◽  
Nancy E. Lee ◽  
...  

AbstractThe Women in Materials (WIM) program is an on-going collaboration between Simmons College and the Cornell Center for Materials Research (CCMR). Beginning in 2001, during the initial four years of the project, materials-related curricula were developed, a new joint research project was begun, and nearly 1/2 of Simmons College science majors participated in materials-related research during their first two years as undergraduates. We have previously reported the student outcomes as a result of this initial stage of the project, demonstrating a successful partnership between a primarily undergraduate women's college and a federally funded Materials Research Science and Engineering Center. Here, we report the evolution and impact of this project over the last three years, subsequent to the initial seed funding from the National Science Foundation. The Women in Materials project is now a key feature of the undergraduate science program at Simmons College and has developed into an organizing structure for materials-related research at the College. Initially, three faculty members were involved and now eight faculty members from all three laboratory science departments participate (biology, chemistry, and physics). The program now involves research related to optoelectronics, polymer synthesis, biomaterials, and green chemistry, and each semester about 80% of the students who participate in these projects are 1st and 2nd year science majors. This structure has led to enhanced funding within the sciences, shared instrumentation facilities, a new minor in materials science, and a spirit of collaboration among science faculty and departments. It has also spawned a new, innovative curricular initiative, the Undergraduate Laboratory Renaissance, now in its second year of implementation, involving all three laboratory science departments in incorporating actual, on-going research projects into introductory and intermediate science laboratories. Most importantly, the Women in Materials program has embedded materials-related research into our science curriculum and has deepened and broadened the educational experience for our students; the student outcomes speak to the program's success. Approximately 70% of our science majors go on to graduate school within two years of completing their undergraduate degree. Our students also have a high acceptance rate at highly competitive summer research programs, such as Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) programs funded by the National Science Foundation.


This chapter examines design considerations for online doctoral programs. Although the methods of course delivery and interpersonal interactions are different, the rigor of the online programs must equal those of the on-ground programs. Interactions among classmates, fellow doctoral students, and the faculty members must be purposefully designed and supported in order to attain the same enhancements that those equivalent interactions in on-ground courses support. Support mechanisms for encouraging and facilitating beyond course experiences must be created and periodically assessed.


2013 ◽  
Vol 78 (2) ◽  
pp. 322-343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah Chazin ◽  
Stephen E. Nash

AbstractPaul Sidney Martin identified two “watershed” moments in his career: (1) his adoption of the tenets of the New Archaeology and (2) the changes he made in his approach to pedagogy at the Vernon field school. We explore the relationship between these two watershed moments using Martin’s archival record. We find that, rather than being watershed moments, these changes have deeper roots in the trajectory of Martin’s work and career and moreover are clearly linked to broader historical occurrences, such as World War II, the G.I. Bill, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the establishment of the National Science Foundation. Furthermore, we find that the New Archaeology’s emphasis on egalitarian science—the metaphor of “archaeology as commune”—serves as a link among its theoretical innovations, methodology, and pedagogy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document