The impact of changing learning environment on students’ learning in marketing education: A case-study applied in higher education in Egypt

Samia Adly Hanna El Sheikh, Reda Youssef Assaad

Abstract


Abstract:

The purpose of this study is to change the learning environment in an introductory course of Principles of Marketing (MKT 201), so as to foster a deep and achieving approach to learning as compared to surface learning. This change in environment is done through presenting 2 teaching/learning strategies which are:

(1)  Pointing out learning outcomes (L.O.) of each session to the students at the beginning of each lecture while making sure they understand them and

(2)  Constant use of in-class real-life exercises in the form of case-studies to check that students have digested the main concepts and are able to apply them.

This study measures the impact of this change in learning environment on students’ overall achievement (results).This study is conducted on a cohort of students in semester fall 2016 and the grades (results) of the students of this cohort are compared against the grades (results) of 2 previous cohorts in the same course (Principles of Marketing) at October University for Modern Sciences and Arts (MSA) Egypt.  

 


Keywords


Key words: - Learning environment - Deep approach to learning versus surface approach to learning - Outcome based approach in teaching, learning and assessment - Problem based learning - Experiential learning - Least Significant Differences (LSD)/mu

Full Text:

PDF

References


VII: References:

Atherton, J.S. (2003). Learning and Teaching: Deep and Surface Learning, Retrieved from http://www.dmu.ac.uk/~jamesa/learning/deepsurf.htm

Ausubel, D. (2000). The acquisition and retention of knowledge: A cognitive view. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Bacon, D. and Stewart, K. (2006). Journal of Marketing Education, Vol. 26, 3 Pro Quest Social Sciences Premium Collection pp. 181-192.

Besant, S. Balley, P. Rrobinson, Z. Tomkinsn, R. Ormerod, R.M. Boast, R. (2013). Problem based learning: a case study of sustainability education. A toolkit for university lecturers. HEA, Universities of keele, Manchester, Staffordshire.

Biggs, J. and Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 4th Ed. Berkshire: Open University Text. pp. 9-14.

Biggs, J. (1999). What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning, Higher Education Research and Development, 18 (1), pp. 57-75.

Brennan, R. (2014). Reflecting on experiential learning in marketing education, The Marketing Review, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 97-108.

Entwistle, N., Skinner, D., Entwistle, D. & Orr, S. (2000). Conceptions and Beliefs about “Good Teaching”: An Integration of Contrasting Research Areas, Higher Education research & Development 19 (1): pp. 5-26.

Gremler, D. Hoffman, K., Keaveney, S. and Wright, L. (2000). Experiential Learning Exercises in Services Marketing Courses, Journal of Marketing Education. Vol. 22, No. 1, April 2000 pp. 35-44.

Hall, M. Ramsay, A. & Raven, J. (2002). Changing the learning environment to promote deep learning approaches in first year accounting students. Retrieved from http://www.business.murdoch.edu.au/999n/sympasia/2002/hall.pdf.

Halpern, D. and Hakel, M. (2003). Applying the science of learning of the university and beyond. Change, Vol. 35 (4), pp. 36-41.

Hussey, T. Smith, P. (2002). The Trouble with Learning Outcomes, Active Learning in Higher Education 3 (3) pp. 220-233. Sage. Available at http://alh.sagepub.com/content/3/3/220.full.pdf+html (portal log-in required)

Lebow, D. (1993). Constructivist Values for Instructional Systems Design: Five Principles toward a New Mindset. Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 41, No. 3 (1993), pp. 4-16. Content/uploads/2011/12/lebow-1993-constructivist-values.pdf

Linrud, J. and M.C. Hall (1999). Integrating the Business Practitioner into Marketing Coursework, 9 (2), pp. 15-22.

Major, C. and Palmer, B. (2001). Assessing the effectiveness of problem-based learning in higher education: lessons from the literature, Academic Exchange Quarterly, Vol. 5, No. 1, p. 4.

Marton, F. & Saljo, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: 1- Outcome and process, British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 46, pp. 4-11.

Moon, J. (2009). Achieving success through academic assertiveness real life strategies for today’s students, Routledge www.cemp.ad.uk.

Neisser, U. (1984). Interpreting Harry Bahrick’s discovery: What confers immunity against forgetting? Journal of Experimental Psychology-General, Vol. 113, pp. 32-35.

Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London, Routledge.

Schwartz, J. and Fontenot, R. (2007). Recreating the Principles of Marketing Group Project: A Case Study in Service Learning. 11(winter), pp. 11-18.

Vernon, D. and Blake, R. (1993). Does Problem-Based Learning Works? A meta-analysis of evaluative research. Academic Medicine, Vol. 68, No. 7.

Williams ,L..and Abdi,H.(2010) Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD)Test in Neil Salkind (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Research Design. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage 2010




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21100/compass.v11i2.675

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.