Pedagogical Training in Ph.D. Programs: How Does Accounting Compare to Similar Disciplines?

Abstract

Abstract Purpose We examine and compare current practices in teaching preparation in U.S. accounting, finance, management, and economics doctoral programs. Methodology/approach We conduct an anonymous online survey of the pedagogical training practices experienced by Ph.D. students in accounting, finance, management, and economics programs in the United States. Findings Results indicate that accounting, finance, and management perform similarly with respect to providing doctoral students with first-hand teaching experience and requiring for-credit courses in teacher training. Accounting and management appear to utilize doctoral students as teaching assistants less than the other disciplines. A lower proportion of accounting doctoral students indicate that their program requires proof of English proficiency prior to teaching, and pedagogical mentoring is rare across disciplines. Accounting and management doctoral students feel more prepared to teach undergraduate courses compared to finance and economics students. However, all disciplines indicate a relative lack of perceived preparation to teach graduate courses. Practical implications This study provides empirical evidence of the current practices in pedagogical training of accounting, finance, management, and economics doctoral students. Social implications The results highlight several areas where accounting could possibly improve with regard to pedagogical training in doctoral programs. In particular we suggest (1) changes in the teaching evaluation process, (2) development of teaching mentorships, (3) implementing a teaching portfolio requirement, and (4) incorporation of additional methods of assisting non-native English speakers for teaching duties. Originality/value The study fills a gap in the literature regarding the pedagogical training in accounting doctoral programs.