The research assessment exercise 2001—insights and implications for accounting education research in the UK

Accounting Education

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 411-426

  Paisey, Catriona ^a   Paisey, Nicholas J ^b  

^a GLASGOW CALEDONIAN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b HERIOT WATT UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

accounting education research; publishing patterns; Research assessment exercise

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750799180     PISSN: 09639284     EISSN: 14684489     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/06939280500347134     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Beattie, V., and Goodacre, A., 2004. Publishing patterns within the UK accounting and finance academic community. British Accounting Review, 36 (1): 7–44.
2. Bessant, J., 2003. The state of the field in UK management research: reflections of the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) Panel. British Journal of Management, 14 (1): 51–68.
3. Billing, D., 2004. International comparisons and trends in external quality assurance of higher education: commonality or diversity?. Higher Education, 47 (1): 113–137.
4. Braddock, R., and Neave, G., 2002. Research management in higher education: overview and conclusion of a debate. Higher Education Policy, 15 (3): 313–330.
5. Brinn, T., Jones, M. J., and Pendlebury, M., 2001a. Why do UK accounting and finance academics not publish in top US Journals?. British Accounting Review, 33 (2): 223–232.
6. Brinn, T., 2001b. The impact of research assessment exercises on UK accounting and finance faculty. British Accounting Review, 33 (3): 333–355.
7. CHA. 2003. “ Review of research assessment: response ”. Glasgow, UK: Committee of Heads of Accounting.
8. Cottingham, J., and Hussey, R., 2000. Publishing in professional accounting Journals: academic institutional performance 1987–96. British Accounting Review, 32 (1): 101–114.
9. CPAF. Review of research assessment: response. Conference of Professors of Accounting and Finance. Bristol, UK.
10. French, N. J., 2001. Research assessment in Hong Kong. Higher Education, 42 (1): 35–46.
11. Gray, R., 2002. Rites of passage and the self-immolation of academic accounting labour: an essay exploring exclusivity versus mutuality in accounting scholarship. Accounting Forum, 26 (1): 1–30.
12. Gray, R. H., and Helliar, C., 1994. UK accounting academics and publication: an explanation of observable variables associated with publication output. British Accounting Review, 26 (3): 235–254.
13. Harley, S., 2000. Accountants divided: research selectivity and academic accounting labour in UK universities. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 11 (5): 549–582.
14. Hasselback, J. R., 2000. Benchmarks for evaluating the research productivity of accounting faculty. Journal of Accounting Education, 18 (2): 79–97.
15. Heck, J. L., 1990. An analysis of contributors to accounting Journals. Part 1: the aggregate performances. International Journal of Accounting, 25 (3): 202–217.
16. Helliar, C. V., and Gray, R. H., 1998. The British Accounting Review Research Register, London: Academic Press.
17. Helliar, C. V., and Gray, R. H., 2000. The British Accounting Review Research Register, London: Academic Press.
18. Helliar, C. V., 2002. The British Accounting Review Research Register, London: Academic Press.
19. Henkel, M., 1999. The modernisation of research evaluation: the case of the UK. Higher Education, 38 (1): 105–122.
20. Hill, W. Y., 2002. I know where I am going. An essay on changing culture and value perspectives. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 13 (5–6): 705–717.
21. Humphrey, C., 1995. Questioning the value of the research selectivity process in British university accounting. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 8 (3): 141–164.
22. Locke, J., and Lowe, A., 2002. Problematising the construction of Journal quality: an engagement with the mainstream. Accounting Forum, 26 (1): 45–71.
23. Marston, C., and Ayub, A., 2000. Research note: relationship between publications in selected Journals and Research Assessment Exercise rankings in 1996 for accountancy departments. Accounting Education: an international journal, 9 (1): 93–102.
24. Milne, M. J., 2002. The construction of Journal quality: no engagement detected. Accounting Forum, 26 (1): 73–86.
25. Neave, G., 2002. Managing research or research management?. Higher Education Policy, 15 (3): 217–224.
26. Otley, D., 2002. British research in accounting and finance (1996–2000): the 2001 Research Assessment Exercise. British Accounting Review, 34 (4): 387–417.
27. Paisey, C., and Paisey, N. J., 2004. An analysis of accounting education research in Accounting Education: an international Journal 1992–2001. Accounting Education: an international journal, 13 (1): 69–99.
28. Parker, L., Accounting and management research: passwords from the gatekeepers. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 11 (4) 371–402.
29. Puxty, A. G., 1994. Systems of surveillance and the silence of academic accounting labour. British Accounting Review, 26 (2): 137–171.
30. Tapper, T., 2003. Interpreting the process of change in higher education: the case of the Research Assessment Exercises. Higher Education Quarterly, 57 (1): 4–23.
31. Whittington, G., 1993. Education and research notes. The 1992 Research Assessment Exercise. British Accounting Review, 25 (4): 388–395.
32. Whittington, G., 1997. The 1996 Research Assessment Exercise. British Accounting Review, 29 (2): 181–197.