Perspective transformation of instructors in pedagogical strategies: Achieving effective learning for new generation business students in higher education

In today's knowledge-based economy, education is not only an essential instrument for knowledge acquisition and self-development, but also a mandatory tool that enables students to secure a good job, gain respect in society, and develop a personal identity. The importance of having the intellectual curiosity, ability to effectively apply the acquired knowledge/skills and job expertise becomes even more crucial in the highly competitive, fast-paced workplace. As a result, students are increasingly pressured to excel and succeed in this compelling academic journey. Globalization and rapid advancements in technology have facilitated many new e-teaching tools and social media platforms to cope with changing trends in students' receptivity to information and communication styles, making it even more essential for educators to continually review the education system in order to convey knowledge to students more creatively and effectively. Consequently, the instructional approaches which influence the behavioral aspect of learning that motivate and stimulate an individual's interest in learning and effective understanding with acquiring of knowledge are essential to examine. With deeper reflection and analysis on the behavioral learning of students, instructors could better comprehend the needs and expectations which facilitate providing their students the necessary inputs. Through this instructional article, a learning framework “Perspective Transformation of instructors in Pedagogical Strategies” is proposed to facilitate more effective learning among business students. The conceptual framework proposes a shift from instructor-centric to learner-centric in the instructional roles, design of curriculum and assessments, learning culture and feedback process, by adopting five essential strategies: (1) Performing different instructional roles for varying types of instructional approaches (2) Shift in learning culture: embracing creative learning; (3) Professional soft skills training; (4) Assessments based on three fundamentals of understanding, critical thinking and application; (5) Continuous process of correspondence between instructors and students coupled with reflection in terms of formative and summative feedback; These learning approaches within the proposed framework have been applied in the classroom context at Nanyang Technological University, Nanyang Business School, in Semester 2 Annual Year 12/13. They have resulted in good course assessment and examination outcomes with positive feedback from students. This framework continuously allows avenues for further exploration in terms of optimal and effective pedagogical approaches by incorporating practical solutions to calibrate and embrace the rapid changing learning needs and demands.

[1]  G. Biesta.  From Learning Cultures to Educational Cultures: Values and Judgements in Educational Research and Educational Improvement , 2011 .

[2]  H. Brown,et al.  Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy , 1995 .

[3]  Larry Ambrose,et al.  The power of feedback. , 2002, Healthcare executive.

[4]  D. Royce Sadler,et al.  Interpretations of criteria‐based assessment and grading in higher education , 2005 .

[5]  S. Ghoshal.  Bad Management Theories Are Destroying Good Management Practices , 2005 .

[6]  D. Schoen,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action , 1985 .

[7]  A. Rushton.  Formative assessment: a key to deep learning? , 2005, Medical teacher.

[8]  Sandra Waddock,et al.  Developing More Holistic Management Education: Lessons Learned From Two Programs , 2013 .

[9]  Linda A. Suskie.  Assessing Student Learning: A Common Sense Guide , 2004 .

[10]  Doncho Petkov,et al.  Development of Scoring Rubrics for IS Projects as an Assessment Tool , 2006 .

[11]  Marvin Bower.  The Will to Manage: Corporate Success Through Programmed Management , 1966 .

[12]  D. Sadler.  Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems , 1989 .

[13]  D. Royce Sadler,et al.  Specifying and Promulgating Achievement Standards , 1987 .

[14]  E. F. Cheit.  Business Schools and Their Critics , 1985 .

[15]  Thomas Ehrlich,et al.  Rethinking Undergraduate Business Education: Liberal Learning for the Profession , 2011 .

[16]  James T. Walz.  Managers not MBAs: A Hard Look at the Soft Practice of Managing and Management Development , 2006 .

[17]  M. Zollo,et al.  Psychological Antecedents to Socially Responsible Behavior , 2008 .

[18]  G. Domino.  Interactive Effects of Achievement Orientation and Teaching Style on Academic Achievement. , 1971 .

[19]  Zoltán Dörnyei,et al.  Group Dynamics in the Language Classroom: Contents , 2003 .

[20]  Donald A. Sch.  The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action , 1983 .

[21]  D. Sadler.  Evaluation and the Improvement of Academic Learning , 1983 .

[22]  A. Chickering,et al.  Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education , 1987, CORE.

[23]  Z. Dörnyei,et al.  Group Dynamics in the Language Classroom , 2004 .

[24]  Stephen Merry,et al.  The Use of Exemplars and Formative Feedback when Using Student Derived Marking Criteria in Peer and Self-assessment , 2002 .

[25]  D. Finkel,et al.  Teaching with Your Mouth Shut , 2000 .

[26]  D. Nicol,et al.  Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice , 2006 .

[27]  Harold J. Leavitt,et al.  Educating Our MBAs: On Teaching What We Haven't Taught , 1989 .

[28]  Z. Dörnyei,et al.  Group Dynamics in the Language Classroom: Introduction , 2003 .

[29]  Joan L. Herman,et al.  A practical guide to alternative assessment , 1992 .