Journal Operations

Many papers submitted to the journal include work first disseminated in presentations at the AIS Educator Association (AISEA) annual conference. Using feedback provided by conference attendees, authors often revise their work and submit it to the AISEJ.

We conclude fiscal 2023 with seven papers in process and look forward to continuing increases in submissions.

Submission Processing

In recent years, AISEJ editors’ reports have included information about the journal’s acceptance rate. We continue this practice, presenting data about the papers processed during the most recent fiscal year in Table 1.

Table 1 Papers Submitted and Processed July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023

View Fullscreen

Using these data, we calculate an acceptance rate for fiscal 2023 of 45% by dividing the number of papers accepted (5) by the sum (11) of the number of papers accepted (5) and rejected (6). Because we publish only one issue each year, the acceptance rate can fluctuate when calculated on an annual basis. We believe a calculation over a longer period better reflects journal practices. Thus, we also report submission processing data for the five most recent years in Table 2.

Table 2 Papers Submitted and Processed July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2023

View Fullscreen

Using these data, we calculate an average acceptance rate over the most recent five fiscal years of 35% by dividing the number of papers accepted (21) by the sum (60) of the number of papers accepted (21) and rejected (39). The 21 papers accepted during this period were published in Volumes 14 (3), 15 (4), 16 (5), 17 (4), and18(5). These counts include refereed papers only; they do not include editorials. Last year, AISEJ reported a four-year acceptance rate of 33% (Lee & Schneider, 2022).

Editors’ Commentary on Papers Published in Volume 18

Pan and Mazzei (2023) develop a seven-step process of incorporating data analytics into the school’s curriculum. They build their model by pulling from several key curriculum models (Tyler, 1949; Taba, 1962; Wheeler, 1967; and Kern, 2009). Injecting data analytics into business curriculum is vital to our profession and is supported by numerous accrediting (AASCB International, 2018) and credentialing bodies (Tysiac, 2019). This builds on previously-published articles in our journal which show that data analytics and visualization tools are becoming important assets within accounting firms (Lee et al., 2018). Moreover, Gomaa et al. (2021) proposed a data analytics elective course for graduate accounting students. This study shows how analytics can be embedded into an undergraduate curriculum and developed as a concentration for students wanting to specialize in the area. With challenges and lessons learned from their journey, the article provides a valuable resource for those who are interested in data analytics adoption.

Bradley, Behrend and Drum (2023) survey AIS instructors to document characteristics of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) adopters. Employers highly value transaction processing being taught in the AIS class (Garnsey et al., 2019; Weisenfeld et al., 2020), and applying ERP to transaction processing allows for realistic and relevant content in the AIS course (Vician & Mortenson, 2017) They structure their study around five key research questions and tie those questions to the surveyed items. This allows the reader to see the link of the key learning objectives to the reason for the adoptions. They also create a self-assessment tool for academics thinking about adopting ERPs in their own courses.

Hawk (2023) creates an Information Technology (IT) audit case where students perform controls testing by using both Excel and IDEA. This differs from Lee and Sawyer (2019) whose case study focused on user access management within Excel. Her approach focuses on Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS), and along with key information technology concepts, meets the demands of career preparation for our students, (AACSB, 2020; AICPA, 2022; PwC, 2020). Because students apply the same task to two different software applications, they can see the efficiencies in tools developed for specific auditing purposes. The overall case allows students to develop their critical thinking skills (Miri et al., 2007) and prepare themselves for adaptability to various applications in the workplace.

Corradino (2023) develops a teaching case where students analyze business process activities and record transactions in QuickBooks software. Notably, the case takes a business cycle approach and maps business cycles to business process steps to QuickBooks tasks. As QuickBooks is widely-used computerized accounting systems, especially for small businesses, this case represents a practical, real-world scenario that accounting students may encounter in practice.

In the final paper of this issue, King, Church, Schmidt, and Harnowo (2023) position LinkedIn as a technology-based tool for networking. They develop a comprehensive assignment for students to study best practices associated with networking using LinkedIn and to develop their own profile and to begin the networking process through interactions with accounting professionals.

We believe these papers include helpful resources for AIS educators that will help readers do a better job of increasing student learning. Each contributes to the AIS education research literature that can inspire readers to teach better and create new cases, teaching tools, assignments, courses, and programs.

Conclusion

We are grateful to the AISEA, its members, and all our stakeholders who produce and use the content we publish in the journal. The exemplary work of our dedicated Associate Editors deserves recognition, and we thank Dawna Drum, Cynthia Frownfelter-Lohrke, David C. Hayes, Conni Lehmann, Brad Schafer, Gary Schneider, and David Wood.

We also acknowledge the many constructive contributions of our volunteer ad hoc reviewers. Each processed submission requires at least four volunteers (Senior Editor, Associate Editor, and two or three ad hoc reviewers) to evaluate the paper and to write developmental suggestions. The Appendix lists the names of those who reviewed one or more papers during the three years ending with Volume 18. These reviewers’ time and effort are essential to the journal’s quality and reputation. Thank you for making AISEJ a strong and recognized publication outlet for AIS education research. Sincere thanks and special mention also to our editorial assistant, Abby Bensen. We are grateful for her continued work with us.

Finally, we thank everyone who submitted their work to the journal this past year. Without you, we would not exist. We thank each of you for making AISEJ an essential source of AIS education research and teaching resources to our academic community.