The Effect of Contemporary Learning Approaches on Student Percpetions in an Introductory Business Course
Main Article Content
University administrators and educators continue to explore and implement new approaches for delivering coursework. Ultimately, they are attempting to achieve the same goal; increasing the level of student engagement and retention of knowledge while maintaining educational quality. Various contemporary learning approaches can provide a “launching point” to assess, evaluate and implement creative course pedagogies in many introductory courses. To validate the influence of these approaches, this research offers an assessment of the changes applied to an Introduction to Business course using active, experiential, and cooperative learning approaches. The scope of the data was broadened to include both quantitative and qualitative data. Students registered for the course were surveyed using pretest and posttest instruments. The analysis of the data indicates that the application of the three learning approaches has a mixed impact on pedagogical results. Students perceive that their knowledge of business concepts increased after the course was completed despite a challenging environment requiring the application of theoretical concepts to practice. Students indicate that the knowledge gained from experiential-based deliverables through cooperative learning approaches, creates an opportunity for reinforcing and applying introductory concepts. The results of the research also found that while students perceive that their understanding of the concepts has increased, the variety of pedagogical approaches embedded in the course do not necessarily foster additional interest in the subject matter. However, the integration of student qualitative feedback clearly supports the benefits of each pedagogical approach while also providing insight into which approach students found most influential for learning. The contribution of this paper to the literature is to encourage the redesign of introductory courses by integrating all three pedagogical approaches to successfully foster student engagement and higher quality learning.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC-BY) 4.0 International, allowing others to share the work with proper acknowledgement and citation of the work's authorship and initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- Authors are able to enter separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- In pursuit of manuscripts of the highest quality, multiple opportunities for mentoring, and greater reach and citation of JoSoTL publications, JoSoTL encourages authors to share their drafts to seek feedback from relevant communities unless the manuscript is already under review or in the publication queue after being accepted. In other words, to be eligible for publication in JoSoTL, manuscripts should not be shared publicly (e.g., online), while under review (after being initially submitted, or after being revised and resubmitted for reconsideration), or upon notice of acceptance and before publication. Once published, authors are strongly encouraged to share the published version widely, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
Auster, E. R., Grant, T., & Wylie, K. K. (2005). Excellence in business teaching: A quick start guide. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.
Ausubel, D. E. (2000). The acquisition and retention of knowledge: A cognitive view. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
Becker, W. E., & Watts, M. (1995). Teaching tools: Teaching methods in undergraduate economics. Economic Inquiry, 33, 692-700.
Becker, W. E., & Watts, M. (2001). Chalk and Talk: A National Survey on Teaching Undergraduate Economics. Paper presented at the AEA Papers and Proceedings.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay.
Bonwell, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education.
Braxton, J. M., Milem, J. F., & Sullivan, A. S. (2000). The influence of active learning on the college student departure process. The Journal of Higher Education, 71(5), 569.
Cannon, A. R., Cobb, G. W., Hartlaub, B. A., Legler, J. M., Lock, R. H., Moore, T. L., . . . Witmer, J. A. (2013). Stat2 building models for a world of data. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Chickering, A. W. (1976). Developmental change as a major outcome. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Coates, H. (2005). The value of student engagement for higher education quality assurance. Quality in Higher Education, 11(1), 25-36.
Cooper, S. M. A. (2002). Classroom choices for enabling peer learning. Theory Into Practice, 49(Winter 2002), 53-57.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Downey, J. P., McGaughey, R., & Roach, D. (2011). Attitudes and influences toward choosing a business major: The case of information systems. Journal of Information Technology Education, 10, 231-251.
Govekar, M. A., & Rishi, M. (2007). Service learning: Bringing real-world education into the Bschool classroom. Journal of Education for Business, 83, 3-10.
Groebner, D. F., Shannon, P. W., Fry, P. C., & Smith, K. D. (2008). Business statistics: A decision-making approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hake, R. P. (1998). Interactive engagement vs. traditional methods: A six-thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74.
Harsell, D. M., & O'Neill, P. B. (2010). Experiential learning: Lessons learned from the UND business and government symposium. American Journal of Business Education, 3(8), 27-33.
Hernandez, S. A. (2002). Team learning in a marketing principles course: Cooperative structures that facilitate active learning and higher level thinking. Journal of Marketing Education, 24(1), 73.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. P. (1987). Joining together: Group theory and group skills. Englewood, Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1987). Creative conflict. Edina, MN: Interation Book Company.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Endina, MN: Interaction Book Co.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T.,Smith, K. A. (1991). Cooperative learning: Increasing college faculty instructional productivity. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report. Washington, DC: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
Joshi, M. P., Davis, E. B., Kathuria, R., & Weidner II, C. K. (2005). Experiential learning process: Exploring teaching and learning of strategic management framework through the Winder survival exercise. Journal of Management Education, 29(5), 672-695.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as a source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Krathwohl, D. (2012). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Kumar, A., & Kumar, P. (2013). An examination of factors influencing students selection of business majors using the TRA framework. Decision Science Journal of Innovative Education, 11(1), 77-105.
Lamb, C. H., Lee, J. B., & Vinton, K. L. (1997). Developing a freshman seminar: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Management Education, 21(1), 27.
Le Rouzie, V., Ouchi, F., & Zhou, C. (1999). Measuring What People Learn vs. What People Say They Learn: Does the Difference Matter? Paper presented at the American Evaluation Association Annual Conference, Chicago, IL.
Mallinger, M. (1998). Maintaining control in the classroom by giving up control. Journal of Management Education, 22, 472-483.
Maskulka, T. A., Stout, D. E., & Massad, V. J. (2011). Using and assessing an experiential learning project in a retail marketing course. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 6, 1-20.
McCorkle, D. E., Reardon, J., Alexander, J. F., Kling, N. D., Harris, R. C., & Iyer, R. V. (1999). Undergraduate marketing students, group projects, and teamwork: The good, the bad, and the ugly? Journal of Marketing Education, 21, 106-117.
Meyers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting active learning: Strategies for a college classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Michaelsen, L. K., & Black, R. H. (Eds.). (1994). Building learning teams: The key to harnessing the power of small groups in higher education (Vol. 2). State College, PA: National Center for Teaching, Learning and Assessment.
Michaelsen, L. K., Fink, L. D., & Knight, A. (Eds.). (1997). Designing effective group activities: Lessons for classroom teaching and faculty development (Vol. 16). Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.
Mullen, B., & Copper, C. (1994). The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115(2), 210-227.
Prussia, G. E., & Weis, W. L. (2003). Experiential learning effects on retention: Results from a required MBA course. Journal of College Student Retention, 5(4), 397.
Reichardt, C. S., & Mark, M. M. (1994). Quasi-Experimentation. In J. S. Wholey, H. P. Hatry & K. E. Newcomer (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation (Second ed., pp. 126-149). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Schomberg, S. F. (1986). Involving the high ability students in learning groups. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
Siciliano, J. I. (2001). How to incorporate cooperative learning principles in the classroom: It's more than just putting students in teams. Journal of Management Education, 25(1), 8-20.
Slavin, R. E. (1988). Cooperative learning: Student teams. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
Sutherland, T. E., & Bonwell, C. C. (1996). Using active learning in college classes: A range of options for faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Thomas, J. C. (2002). Active learning for organizational development students: The masterpiece project. Organization Development Journal, 20(3), 8-15.
Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities. The Journal of Higher Education, 68(6), 599.
Umble, E. J., Umble, M., & Artz, K. (2008). Enhancing undergraduates' capabilities through team-based competitions: The Edward Jones challenge. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 6, 1-27.
Vince, R. (1998). Behind and beyond Kolb's learning cycle. Journal of Management Education, 22(3), 304-319.
Webb, N. J., & Grib, T. F. (1967). Teaching process as a learning experience: The experimental use of student-led groups. Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education and Welfare.
Weldy, T., & Turnipseed, D. (2010). Assessing and improving learning in business schools: Direct and indirect measures of learning. Journal of Education for Business, 85(5), 268-273.
Whetten, D. A. (2007). Principles of effective course design: What I wish I had known about learning-centered teaching thirty-years ago. Journal of Management Education, 31(3), 339-357.
Wilkerson, L., & Gijselaers, W. H. (1996). Bringing problem-based learning to higher education: Theory and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Williams, D. L., Beard, J. P., & Rymer, J. (1991). Team projects: Achieving their full potential. Journal of Marketing Education, 13, 45-53.