The Role of Economics in Canadian Undergraduate Business Education

Mang, Colin F.; Brown, Natalya

doi:10.1080/08832323.2012.670671

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These publications illustrate the use of a wide range of methodological approaches, including: surveys of teaching faculty and business school deans (Athavale et al, 2008; Athavale, Myring, Davis, & Truell, 2010; Barrie, 2007; Wart, Baker, & Ni, 2014); student surveys (Caza et al, 2015; Leberman & Martin, 2005); employers and deans (Shuayto, 2013); employer surveys (Sincoff & Owen, 2004; Wolf & Wright, 2014); and analyses of learning outcomes, mission statements, and assessment methods (Genc & Bekmez, 2009; Palmer & Short, 2008; Sampson & Betters-Reed, 2008). Additionally, many studies seek to identify best practice by focusing on the most common elements of successful business management education using case study, comparative, or data-driven methods (Mang & Brown, 2013; McCord, Houseworth, & Michaelsen, 2015; Puri, Jocums, & Latif, 2010; Wu, Huang, Kuo, & Wu, 2010).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…and analyses of learning outcomes, mission statements and assessment methods (Palmer & Short, 2008;Sampson & Betters-Reid, 2008;Genc & Bekmez, 2009). Additionally, many studies seek to identify best practice by focussing on the most common elements of successful Business Management education using case study, comparative, or data-driven methods (Puri, Jocums & Latif, 2010;Wu, Huang, Kuo & Wu, 2010;Mang & Brown, 2013;McCord, Houseworth & Michaelsen, 2015).…”

Section: Reflection and Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• There is variation in the conceptualizations of graduate attributes in terms of disciplinary content (Jones, 2009) and generic cognitive attributes (Barrie, 2007;Green, Hammer & Star, 2009) • Much review work seems based on surveys of either students, employers, or academics, treating these as isolated stakeholder communities (Athavale, Davis & Myring, 2008;Caza, Brower & Wayne, 2015;Wolf & Wright, 2014) • Most curriculum review work seems to be carried out reactively at module and theme level and, therefore, runs the risk of producing disconnected program changes (Fliedner & Mathieson, 2009;Mang & Brown, 2013) • Most curriculum review work fails to recognize the potential of the informal curriculum to provide spaces for learning activities or the importance of future-facing educational programs To avoid these pitfalls, we adopted a holistic, future-facing method based on Appreciative Inquiry (Inquiry into Graduate Attributes or IGA), in which participants from a range of stakeholder groups were asked to agree on the most desirable attributes of business management graduates in the year 2020 and beyond. We then used this set of Graduate…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most curriculum review work seems to be carried out reactively at module and theme level and, therefore, runs the risk of producing disconnected program changes (Fliedner & Mathieson, 2009; Mang & Brown, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Inquiry Into Graduate Attributes: Reviewing the Formal and Informal Management Curricula

Allen

Simpson

2019

Journal of Management Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is aimed at any departmental faculty or head of school in charge of conducting curriculum review and presents a holistic approach based on Appreciative Inquiry and recently used by a University Business School in the Southwest of England. As a future-facing or strength-based approach, our Inquiry into Graduate Attributes brought together students, academics, employers, and employment consultants to agree on the most desirable generic attributes of business management graduates 5 years into the future, and to propose changes to course content, assessment, and cocurricular activities in line with these. The Inquiry into Graduate Attributes approach provides a methodological model for integrating the expectations of different stakeholder groups while acknowledging the various ways in which understandings of knowledge and outcomes are related to disciplinary epistemology. For researchers interested in the use of Action Research in the process of curriculum review, this article presents a relatively novel use of an applied Appreciative Inquiry technique, which we hope will initiate a broader conversation around the dynamics and reflective practices of curriculum design.

show abstract