No abstract

The impact of the Guided Problem Based Learning (Guided PBL) approach on Critical Thinking (CT) skills in a core business analysis course was examined. The implementation of this approach included using a textbook created for this purpose, which presents problems first, with blank spaces for students to work them out. Discussion of the concepts and theory needed to understand and solve the problems, as well as the solutions, come later in the book. This book is referred to as the Reversed Textbook. Students attempt to answer questions or solve problems in class with instructor guidance as needed, before discussion of theory. Student learning in sections taught prior to implementing the Guided PBL method was compared with student learning in sections taught with the method. Results indicate that the approach motivated learning and improved student performance on a departmental final exam by an average of 9%. When measured on CT questions alone, the improvement was on average 24%. Finally, the Guided PBL approach also improved group task performance by 6%. All the improvements were statistically significant.

Student Evaluations of Instruction (SEIs) from about 6,000 sections over 4 years representing over 100,000 students at the college of business at a large public university are analyzed, to study the impact of noninstructional factors on student ratings. Administrative factors like semester, time of day, location, and instructor attributes like gender and rank are studied. The combined impact of all the noninstructional factors studied is statistically significant. Our study has practical implications for administrators who use SEIs to evaluate faculty performance. SEI scores reflect some inherent biases due to noninstructional factors. Appropriate norming procedures can compensate for such biases, ensuring fair evaluations.

We analyzed over 100,000 student evaluations of instruction over four years in the college of business at a major public university. We found that the original instrument that was validated about 20 years ago is still valid, with factor analysis showing that the six underlying dimensions used in the instrument remained relatively intact. Also, we found that the relative importance of those six factors in the overall assessment of instruction changed over the past two decades, reflecting changes in the expectations of the current millennial generation of students. The results were consistent across four subgroups studied -Undergraduate Core, Undergraduate Non-Core, Graduate Core and Graduate Non-Core classes, with minor differences. Student Motivation (the instructor's ability to motivate students) and grading/assignments (fairness and objectivity of grading practices) have superseded presentation ability in relative importance as indicators of overall teaching effectiveness. Our study has implications for teachers in terms of the appropriate areas to focus on for improving their teaching practices.

The advent of digital course offerings, the use of social media, the integration of the Khan Academy into curricula, the use of smart phones and tablets, and massive online courses place greater emphasis than ever on effective teaching. While business schools fund faculty development in teaching, too few doctoral programs offer systematic teacher training. We discuss the lack of, and the need for, comprehensive teacher‐training programs. We present the Robinson College of Business model and offer recommendations on how to get started. It is time for PhD programs to certify that their students are capable of teaching upon graduation.