Discussion: View Thread

  • 1.  Reference for how the problems of business school reseach and teaching might be changed

    Posted 04-16-2018 01:03

    Dear Jane

    Thank you so much for all the references. I am aware of the long history of the debate. What I am particularly troubled is the fact that despite the general agreement on the problem of business schools nothing seems be changing. As far as I can recall, Mintzberg and a few others have been giving critical talks on this topic on almost every AoM conference. Is any body aware of any studies of how such persistent problem in management education might be changed? Or, is any school is making serious effort to change its incentive system that gives rise to the problem in research and teaching?

    Neng Liang

     

    From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Jane Robbins
    Sent: 2018
    416 4:18
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: Reference for the importance of "faculty as teacher in management education"

     

    Dear Neng:

     

    In addition to the references already provided, I would suggest reviewing some of the critiques of management education that address faculty and teaching issues as part of curricular and structural challenges in management education. Many are studies in book form that cover a lot of ground, but some shorter articles echo or summarize the research. They go back many years . . . i.e., what you are interested in is a persistent issue. Here are a few items to look at if you have time:

     

    Khurana, Rakesh, 2010. From Higher aims to Hired Hands. Princeton University Press.

     

    Bennis, W. and O'Toole, J, "How Business Schools Lost Their Way," HBR, May 2005 makes some similar points, very short.

     

    Alluto, J., "Issues Affecting Business Schools: A Dean's Perspective," Selections: The Magazine of the Graduate Management Admissions Council," Autumn 1991. If you can find it, survey highlighting differences between administrative and faculty goals. I can send a summary if needed; still relevant.

     

    Porter, L., and McKibbin, 1988.  Management Education and Development: Drift or Thrust into the 21st Century, NY: McGraw-Hill (GMAT study). As a side-note, Porter was a research assistant on a similar study done 30 years earlier, listed below. 

     

    Gordon, R., and Howell, J., Higher Education for Business, 1959, Ford Foundation/Columbia University Press and Pierson, F., The Education of American Businessmen, McGraw-Hill, 1958. These were somewhat competing studies, selectively used and interpreted at the time, largely considered the turning point to the current research focus. 

     

    It might also be useful to search Academy of Management Learning and Education and Journal of Management Education, which occasionally publish broadly relevant articles. Books such as Roger Martin's Future of the MBA and Henry Mintzberg's Managers Not MBAs take a future-oriented look at curriculum and its implications for teaching.

     

    While I teach management and also do faculty development, I am a historian of higher education specializing in research universities and professional education, so feel free to contact me with any questions on any of the above. 

     

    Regards,

    Jane Robbins, PhD

     

     

     

     

     

    On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 2:48 AM, Liang Neng <liangneng@ceibs.edu> wrote:

    Dear colleagues

    I am preparing a speech for the international association of Chinese management research (www.iacmr.org) on the topic of "faculty as teacher" in management education. I believe that the importance of faculty as teacher is vastly under emphasized and even neglected in many business schools. Because of the "publish or perish" pressure, we see some faculty care virtually only about their publications, and grossly neglected their role as an educator. Can any one point me to relevant studies or references on this topic?

     

    Neng Liang, Ph.D.

    Professor of Management, China Europe International Business School (CEIBS)

    President, International Association of Chinese Management Research (IACMR)

    8621 2890-5229; liangneng@ceibs.edu

     

     



  • 2.  Reference for how the problems of business school reseach and teaching might be changed

    Posted 04-16-2018 06:02

    Dear Neng,

     

    The UK recently added Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) to already existing Research Excellence Framework (REF) in attempt to motivate universities to focus on teaching as much as they focus on research. The response from academic community has been mixed, mostly because it is very difficult to come up with a good set of metrics for teaching excellence.

     

    More on this can be found in Times Higher Education magazine https://www.timeshighereducation.com/

     

    Regards,

    Olga

     

     

     

    Lecturer in management

    School of Business

    Maynooth University

    Olga.Ryazanova@mu.ie

     

    Secretary, AOM Management Education & Development division

    http://med.aom.org/

     

     

     

    From: Management Education and Development Discussion <MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG> On Behalf Of Liang Neng
    Sent: 16 April 2018 06:03
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Reference for how the problems of business school reseach and teaching might be changed

     

    Dear Jane

    Thank you so much for all the references. I am aware of the long history of the debate. What I am particularly troubled is the fact that despite the general agreement on the problem of business schools nothing seems be changing. As far as I can recall, Mintzberg and a few others have been giving critical talks on this topic on almost every AoM conference. Is any body aware of any studies of how such persistent problem in management education might be changed? Or, is any school is making serious effort to change its incentive system that gives rise to the problem in research and teaching?

    Neng Liang

     

    From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Jane Robbins
    Sent: 2018
    416 4:18
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: Reference for the importance of "faculty as teacher in management education"

     

    Dear Neng:

     

    In addition to the references already provided, I would suggest reviewing some of the critiques of management education that address faculty and teaching issues as part of curricular and structural challenges in management education. Many are studies in book form that cover a lot of ground, but some shorter articles echo or summarize the research. They go back many years . . . i.e., what you are interested in is a persistent issue. Here are a few items to look at if you have time:

     

    Khurana, Rakesh, 2010. From Higher aims to Hired Hands. Princeton University Press.

     

    Bennis, W. and O'Toole, J, "How Business Schools Lost Their Way," HBR, May 2005 makes some similar points, very short.

     

    Alluto, J., "Issues Affecting Business Schools: A Dean's Perspective," Selections: The Magazine of the Graduate Management Admissions Council," Autumn 1991. If you can find it, survey highlighting differences between administrative and faculty goals. I can send a summary if needed; still relevant.

     

    Porter, L., and McKibbin, 1988.  Management Education and Development: Drift or Thrust into the 21st Century, NY: McGraw-Hill (GMAT study). As a side-note, Porter was a research assistant on a similar study done 30 years earlier, listed below. 

     

    Gordon, R., and Howell, J., Higher Education for Business, 1959, Ford Foundation/Columbia University Press and Pierson, F., The Education of American Businessmen, McGraw-Hill, 1958. These were somewhat competing studies, selectively used and interpreted at the time, largely considered the turning point to the current research focus. 

     

    It might also be useful to search Academy of Management Learning and Education and Journal of Management Education, which occasionally publish broadly relevant articles. Books such as Roger Martin's Future of the MBA and Henry Mintzberg's Managers Not MBAs take a future-oriented look at curriculum and its implications for teaching.

     

    While I teach management and also do faculty development, I am a historian of higher education specializing in research universities and professional education, so feel free to contact me with any questions on any of the above. 

     

    Regards,

    Jane Robbins, PhD

     

     

     

     

     

    On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 2:48 AM, Liang Neng <liangneng@ceibs.edu> wrote:

    Dear colleagues

    I am preparing a speech for the international association of Chinese management research (www.iacmr.org) on the topic of "faculty as teacher" in management education. I believe that the importance of faculty as teacher is vastly under emphasized and even neglected in many business schools. Because of the "publish or perish" pressure, we see some faculty care virtually only about their publications, and grossly neglected their role as an educator. Can any one point me to relevant studies or references on this topic?

     

    Neng Liang, Ph.D.

    Professor of Management, China Europe International Business School (CEIBS)

    President, International Association of Chinese Management Research (IACMR)

    8621 2890-5229; liangneng@ceibs.edu

     

     



  • 3.  AW: Reference for how the problems of business school reseach and teaching might be changed

    Posted 04-16-2018 15:24

    Dear Neng

     

    May I point you to a design research study I did a while ago with a colleague in Switzerland. We cite some of the literature already mentioned and demonstrate how we designed, conducted and evaluated a new curriculum teaching research methods to management students. The paper is titled: Learning and teaching research methods in management education: Development of a curriculum to combine theory and practice – a Swiss case

     

    You can find it here: https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/IJEM-08-2014-0117

     

    Kind regards,

    Sabine

     

     


    Von: Management Education and Development Discussion <MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG> im Auftrag von Olga Ryazanova <Olga.Ryazanova@MU.IE>
    Gesendet: Montag, 16. April 2018 12:02
    An: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Betreff: Re: Reference for how the problems of business school reseach and teaching might be changed
     

    Dear Neng,

     

    The UK recently added Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) to already existing Research Excellence Framework (REF) in attempt to motivate universities to focus on teaching as much as they focus on research. The response from academic community has been mixed, mostly because it is very difficult to come up with a good set of metrics for teaching excellence.

     

    More on this can be found in Times Higher Education magazine https://www.timeshighereducation.com/

     

    Regards,

    Olga

     

     

     

    Lecturer in management

    School of Business

    Maynooth University

    Olga.Ryazanova@mu.ie

     

    Secretary, AOM Management Education & Development division

    http://med.aom.org/

     

     

     

    From: Management Education and Development Discussion <MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG> On Behalf Of Liang Neng
    Sent: 16 April 2018 06:03
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Reference for how the problems of business school reseach and teaching might be changed

     

    Dear Jane

    Thank you so much for all the references. I am aware of the long history of the debate. What I am particularly troubled is the fact that despite the general agreement on the problem of business schools nothing seems be changing. As far as I can recall, Mintzberg and a few others have been giving critical talks on this topic on almost every AoM conference. Is any body aware of any studies of how such persistent problem in management education might be changed? Or, is any school is making serious effort to change its incentive system that gives rise to the problem in research and teaching?

    Neng Liang

     

    From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Jane Robbins
    Sent: 2018
    416 4:18
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: Reference for the importance of "faculty as teacher in management education"

     

    Dear Neng:

     

    In addition to the references already provided, I would suggest reviewing some of the critiques of management education that address faculty and teaching issues as part of curricular and structural challenges in management education. Many are studies in book form that cover a lot of ground, but some shorter articles echo or summarize the research. They go back many years . . . i.e., what you are interested in is a persistent issue. Here are a few items to look at if you have time:

     

    Khurana, Rakesh, 2010. From Higher aims to Hired Hands. Princeton University Press.

     

    Bennis, W. and O'Toole, J, "How Business Schools Lost Their Way," HBR, May 2005 makes some similar points, very short.

     

    Alluto, J., "Issues Affecting Business Schools: A Dean's Perspective," Selections: The Magazine of the Graduate Management Admissions Council," Autumn 1991. If you can find it, survey highlighting differences between administrative and faculty goals. I can send a summary if needed; still relevant.

     

    Porter, L., and McKibbin, 1988.  Management Education and Development: Drift or Thrust into the 21st Century, NY: McGraw-Hill (GMAT study). As a side-note, Porter was a research assistant on a similar study done 30 years earlier, listed below. 

     

    Gordon, R., and Howell, J., Higher Education for Business, 1959, Ford Foundation/Columbia University Press and Pierson, F., The Education of American Businessmen, McGraw-Hill, 1958. These were somewhat competing studies, selectively used and interpreted at the time, largely considered the turning point to the current research focus. 

     

    It might also be useful to search Academy of Management Learning and Education and Journal of Management Education, which occasionally publish broadly relevant articles. Books such as Roger Martin's Future of the MBA and Henry Mintzberg's Managers Not MBAs take a future-oriented look at curriculum and its implications for teaching.

     

    While I teach management and also do faculty development, I am a historian of higher education specializing in research universities and professional education, so feel free to contact me with any questions on any of the above. 

     

    Regards,

    Jane Robbins, PhD

     

     

     

     

     

    On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 2:48 AM, Liang Neng <liangneng@ceibs.edu> wrote:

    Dear colleagues

    I am preparing a speech for the international association of Chinese management research (www.iacmr.org) on the topic of "faculty as teacher" in management education. I believe that the importance of faculty as teacher is vastly under emphasized and even neglected in many business schools. Because of the "publish or perish" pressure, we see some faculty care virtually only about their publications, and grossly neglected their role as an educator. Can any one point me to relevant studies or references on this topic?

     

    Neng Liang, Ph.D.

    Professor of Management, China Europe International Business School (CEIBS)

    President, International Association of Chinese Management Research (IACMR)

    8621 2890-5229; liangneng@ceibs.edu

     

     



  • 4.  Reference for how the problems of business school reseach and teaching might be changed

    Posted 04-16-2018 09:18

    Dear Neng,

     

    You have been inundated with references and as you note below, the debate has been raging for decades.  In my experience, when you speak, people will be more interested in your views and why you hold them than citing reference after reference to what other people think.  Sometimes academics fall into that habit-citing without expressing their own views.  The work of Tversky, Kahneman, Greene, Haidt and others (including my focus on VABEs see www.nadobimakoba.com ) shows that people, even academics, tend to let their VABEs dominate rational, data-based thought.  In my view,

     

    1.       Anyone, especially academics, who teach should be required to learn how to "facilitate learning" rather than "profess."

    2.       Research shows that adults learn best when they are working on issues/problems that are immediate and relevant for them (not the professor's)

    3.       Also, adults learn best when they are involved/participate.  Lectures ignore this research. 

    4.       Most universities reward publications above teaching which greatly diminishes the emphasis placed on classroom performance.

    5.       "Teaching" is not about covering material, rather "facilitating learning." 

    6.       The number/proportion of people who have three skill sets--research, learning facilitation, and intimacy with practitioners-is low.  Even having the first two, which you are exploring, is vanity unless we understand deeply the world of practicing managers. 

    7.       Unless we can identify and explore people's VABEs, we are shooting peanuts at turtle shells.  (add Ed Schein's work to those listed above).  Real influence is that which touches on what people Value, Assume, Believe and Expect to be true.  Hence, rational education is an uphill battle in pushing for change.

    8.       Having asked over 1,500 people worldwide about human habituality, I found they say on average at Level One (visible behavior) 75%, Level Two (conscious thought) 85%, and at Level Three (semi-conscious VABEs) 95+%.  People tend to be strong creatures of habit. Hence, it's "no surprise" that university administrators trained in a "publish or perish" culture are reluctant to emphasize classroom performance much less encouraging consulting or case writing among practitioners.

    9.       A big issue here is "who is your primary audience?"  Most academics would answer "other academics."  Some would say "students."  Some would say "practitioners."  Many don't even think about that or offer a generalize "the pool of knowledge."

    10.   I applaud your effort to understand and express your views on the "teaching vs researching" issue.  I hope you will add a third leg, the importance of connecting with practicing managers.  How many managers read academic journals? 

    11.   Finally, my book Teaching Management (Cambridge University Press) explores many of the issues you are wrestling with. 

     

    However you synthesize all of the recommendations you have been given, though,  I still believe that your audience will want to hear what you think rather than a collage of what others think.  And why you think what you think.  This will require forming your own opinion(s). 

     

    Very best wishes in this regard,

      Jim

    James G. Clawson

    Johnson & Higgins Professor of Leadership and Organizational Behavior, Emeritus

    The Darden School, University of Virginia

     

    Cell:  434 825-3797             Webhttp://faculty.darden.virginia.edu/clawson/index.htm

    Twitter:  @Jajisee              Bloghttp://jajisee.blogspot.com/

     

    Level Three Leadershiphttp://www.nadobimakoba.com

    Latest WorkA Song of Humanity: A Science-Based Alternative to the World's Scriptures

     

    From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Liang Neng
    Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 1:03 AM
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Reference for how the problems of business school reseach and teaching might be changed

     

    Dear Jane

    Thank you so much for all the references. I am aware of the long history of the debate. What I am particularly troubled is the fact that despite the general agreement on the problem of business schools nothing seems be changing. As far as I can recall, Mintzberg and a few others have been giving critical talks on this topic on almost every AoM conference. Is any body aware of any studies of how such persistent problem in management education might be changed? Or, is any school is making serious effort to change its incentive system that gives rise to the problem in research and teaching?

    Neng Liang

     

    From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG] On Behalf Of Jane Robbins
    Sent: 2018
    416 4:18
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.AOM.ORG
    Subject: Re: Reference for the importance of "faculty as teacher in management education"

     

    Dear Neng:

     

    In addition to the references already provided, I would suggest reviewing some of the critiques of management education that address faculty and teaching issues as part of curricular and structural challenges in management education. Many are studies in book form that cover a lot of ground, but some shorter articles echo or summarize the research. They go back many years . . . i.e., what you are interested in is a persistent issue. Here are a few items to look at if you have time:

     

    Khurana, Rakesh, 2010. From Higher aims to Hired Hands. Princeton University Press.

     

    Bennis, W. and O'Toole, J, "How Business Schools Lost Their Way," HBR, May 2005 makes some similar points, very short.

     

    Alluto, J., "Issues Affecting Business Schools: A Dean's Perspective," Selections: The Magazine of the Graduate Management Admissions Council," Autumn 1991. If you can find it, survey highlighting differences between administrative and faculty goals. I can send a summary if needed; still relevant.

     

    Porter, L., and McKibbin, 1988.  Management Education and Development: Drift or Thrust into the 21st Century, NY: McGraw-Hill (GMAT study). As a side-note, Porter was a research assistant on a similar study done 30 years earlier, listed below. 

     

    Gordon, R., and Howell, J., Higher Education for Business, 1959, Ford Foundation/Columbia University Press and Pierson, F., The Education of American Businessmen, McGraw-Hill, 1958. These were somewhat competing studies, selectively used and interpreted at the time, largely considered the turning point to the current research focus. 

     

    It might also be useful to search Academy of Management Learning and Education and Journal of Management Education, which occasionally publish broadly relevant articles. Books such as Roger Martin's Future of the MBA and Henry Mintzberg's Managers Not MBAs take a future-oriented look at curriculum and its implications for teaching.

     

    While I teach management and also do faculty development, I am a historian of higher education specializing in research universities and professional education, so feel free to contact me with any questions on any of the above. 

     

    Regards,

    Jane Robbins, PhD

     

     

     

     

     

    On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 2:48 AM, Liang Neng <liangneng@ceibs.edu> wrote:

    Dear colleagues

    I am preparing a speech for the international association of Chinese management research (www.iacmr.org) on the topic of "faculty as teacher" in management education. I believe that the importance of faculty as teacher is vastly under emphasized and even neglected in many business schools. Because of the "publish or perish" pressure, we see some faculty care virtually only about their publications, and grossly neglected their role as an educator. Can any one point me to relevant studies or references on this topic?

     

    Neng Liang, Ph.D.

    Professor of Management, China Europe International Business School (CEIBS)

    President, International Association of Chinese Management Research (IACMR)

    8621 2890-5229; liangneng@ceibs.edu