[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-159742-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":73,"doc-detail-159742-en":123},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":66,"head_meta":68,"extra_data":70,"updated_unix":72},105,"en","the-development-of-an-audit-learning-package-scam-research-reports-refereeing-process","The Development of an Audit Learning Package: SCAM - Research Reports Refereeing Process","","The report outlines a rigorous refereeing process used by the Research Committee of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland for research reports. The initial proposal is sent to two independent referees, one academic and one practitioner, and the Director of Research reviews drafts in close coordination with the project. Referees assess academic rigour, the validity of the approach, whether key issues are clearly presented for the intended audience, and whether the report advances knowledge and understanding.",{"@graph":14,"@context":65},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/the-development-of-an-audit-learning-package-scam-research-reports-refereeing-process/159742/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/the-development-of-an-audit-learning-package-scam-research-reports-refereeing-process/159742.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Finn","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-22","2026-08-29",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",14,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What criteria do referees comment on when reviewing a draft research report?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Referees comment on academic rigour, the validity of the report’s approach, whether presentation highlights key issues for the intended reader, and whether the document adds to knowledge and understanding.","Answer","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":67,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":69,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":71,"site_id":7},159742,1788022108,{"code":4,"msg":74,"data":75},"success",[76,80,84,88,93,98,103,107,112,115,119],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":77,"show_sort_weight":78,"slug":79},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":81,"show_sort_weight":82,"slug":83},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":89,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":90,"show_sort_weight":91,"slug":92},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":94,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":95,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":97},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":99,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":100,"show_sort_weight":101,"slug":102},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":104,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":105,"slug":106},8,30,"research-report",{"id":108,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":109,"show_sort_weight":110,"slug":111},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":110,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":113,"show_sort_weight":110,"slug":114},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":116,"slug":118},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":120,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":122},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":74,"data":124},{"doc_id":71,"user_id":125,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":126,"doc_module":4,"category_id":104,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":127,"file_id":128,"file_url":129,"file_type":130,"file_size":131,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":132,"language":133,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":134,"faqs":135,"seo_title":136,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":72,"read_time":137,"preview_page_count":4},34359740700684,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/1f400023980c374ae676?_k=1777273430885731487","Researchers: Christine Helliar  \nElizabeth Monk Lorna Stevenson Colin Allison  \nThe  \nDevelopment of an Audit Learning Package:  \nSCAM  \nThe DevelopmenT of an auDiT learning  \npackage: Scam  \nby  \nChristine Helliar  \nElizabeth Monk  \nLisa Stevenson  \nUniversity of Dundee  \nColin Allison  \nUniversity of St Andrews  \nPublished by  \nThe Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland CA House, 21 Haymarket Yards, Edinburgh EH12 5BH  \nFirst Published 2007  \nThe Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland  \n© 2006  \nISBN 978-1 904574-25-4  \nEAN 9781904574254  \nThis book is published for the Research Committee of The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Council of the Institute or the Research Committee.  \nNo responsibility for loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining from action as a result of any material in this publication can be accepted by the authors or publisher.  \nAll rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher.  \nPrinted and bound in Great Britain  \nby T J International Ltd  \nResearch Reports Refereeing Process  \nThe Research Committee applies a rigorous refereeing process to all stages of its research reports. The refereeing process operates by sending the initial research proposal to two independent referees (one academic and one practitioner) . The academic referee will either be a member of the Panel listed below or an ad hoc referee. All proposals are also reviewed by the Director of Research who remains in close contact with the project. The two referees are consulted on the academic and technical standard of the draft research report. In particular, they are asked to comment on:  \n• the academic rigour of the document;  \n• the validity of the approach taken in the report;  \n• whether the presentation of the report identifies the key issues and brings these to the attention of the intended reader; and  \n• whether the document will add to the knowledge and understanding of the interested reader.  \nPanel of Academic Reviewers  \nProfessor V Beattie Professor J Broadbent  \nProfessor J Haslam  \nProfessor J Holland Professor W M McInnes Professor C Mallin Professor H Mellett  \nProfessor M J Page  \nProfessor C Roberts Professor M J Sherer Professor P Weetman  \nProfessor R M S Wilson  \nUniversity of Glasgow  \nRoyal Holloway, University of London University of Dundee  \nUniversity of Glasgow University of Stirling  \nUniversity of Birmingham Cardiff University University of Portsmouth  \nUniversity of Aberdeen  \nUniversity of Essex  \nUniversity of Strathclyde  \nUniversity of Loughborough  \nThe Research Committee is grateful to all those who participate in the refereeing process.  \nconTenTS  \nForeword ........................................................................................... i  \nAcknowledgements ........................................................................... iii  \nExecutive Summary ........................................................................... v  \n1 Introduction ...................................................................... 1  \n2 Literature Review .............................................................. 5  \nIntroduction ............................................................................ 5  \nThe context of higher education for accountants in the twenty-first century .............................................................. 5  \nThe mechanics of learning ....................................................... 8  \nAudit teaching objectives ........................................................ 16  \nComputers in education ........................................................ 20  \nSummary ...................................................","cbCaihAiFMcE8luy","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaihAiFMcE8luy","pdf",2309762,207,"English","# Research Reports Refereeing Process\n## Refereeing process overview\n## Panel of Academic Reviewers","[{\"question\":\"What criteria do referees comment on when reviewing a draft research report?\",\"answer\":\"Referees comment on academic rigour, the validity of the report’s approach, whether presentation highlights key issues for the intended reader, and whether the document adds to knowledge and understanding.\"}]","The Development of an Audit Learning Package: SCAM - Research Reports Refereeing Process | PDF",522]