20
ABSTRACT
In the present study, we addressed the issues of teaching format and course length in international business course. We want to see whether learning outcomes would be different or similar under face-to-face course, 15 week semester long online course and 7 week online course. Our results show that not all teaching format or course length was equally effective in promoting changes in students’ attitude and behavior. They have different impact on learning outcome. The changes in term of attentiveness to international affair and internationalism were significant and positive in regular face-to-face courses. In 15 weeks online course, the change in attentiveness to international affair was significant and positive; however, the change in internationalism was not significant. The changes were not significant on two learning outcome in 7 week online course. The contrast was so obvious. The results of this study show teaching format and course length matter.
Keywords: Teaching Format, Online course, Face-to-Face, Course Length, Intensive course, International Business course.
TEACHING FORMAT, THE LENGTH OF COURSE, AND THE LEARNING OUTCOMES IN INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS CLASSES
INTRODUCTION
In order to prepare business major students to compete in a global environment, many business schools require students to take international business related courses They believe after completing an international business course, students will gain international related knowledge and have a global perspective (Walton, & Basciano, 2006; Zimmer, Koernig & Greene, 2004). To identify whether taking an IB course achieve such objectives, many studies had examined students’ learning outcomes after they took an IB course. The results of these studies generally have been positive regarding acquisition of international business related knowledge but with mixed results for attitudes change (Brasfield, McCoy, & Reed, 2011; Chen, Stevens, Cox, 2016; Mpoyi & Thomans, 2008; Saghafi, 2001; Vemela, Chen, & Cox, 2014). However these studied have been conducted in the traditional face-to-face classroom, not in the online environment. Therefore, it is not clear whether such impact will be comparable in the online environment. We are not sure whether teaching format will affect the impact of taking an IB course. Therefore, in this paper, we want to examine whether online course and face-to-face course could produce the similar learning outcomes in international business course. This will allow us to better understand the impact of teaching formats on the learning outcomes.
At the same time, there are different lengths of online courses such as regular semester long online course and shorter-term online course. The impact of course length in online courses has not been studied in international business course. Is shorter term online course just like full term online course? Thus, in this study we study not only the impact of teaching format but also the impact of course length. We will combine these two issues into one study. For the purposes of this study, we will compare three kinds of IB courses, the semester-long face-to-face course, regular semester-long online course and 7 week shorter-term online course in this study.
The potential benefits of taking an IB course should not be limited to just learning of international business related knowledge but also potential changes of attitudes and behaviors (Margavio, Hignite, Moses, & Margavio, 2005; Walton, & Basciano, 2006; Zimmer et al., 2004. Previous research had found that compared to semester long face-to-face course, teaching format and the length of course produce comparable knowledge acquisition (Allen & Seaman, 2011; Bernard, et al., 2004; Daniel, 2000). As a result, the focus of this study is not about the acquisition of international related knowledge. In this study, we examine learning outcomes beyond retention of international business related knowledge. We want to see whether students change their behavior and attitude, more specifically students’ attention to worldwide affairs and concern about other countries welfare (i.e. internationalism). We want to know whether such change could be comparable or in all three types of courses or whether each course will produce different degree of change.
This remainder of this paper is structured into four main sections. The second section presents a review of literature as it relates to our topical focus and provides the hypotheses for this paper. The third section describes the methodology we undertook to measure our hypotheses and discusses the results of the data analysis related to our topical focus. The fourth section explains the results, offers practical implications as well general study discussions. Then we conclude our paper with an explanation related to the findings and the potential of future research on this topic.
LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES
Online courses have existed for almost two decades and became a popular delivery format (Arbaugh, Desai, Rau, & Sridhar, 2010). Although traditional face-to-face delivery is still the prevailing form of teaching in higher education; nontraditional delivery method such as online has became more popular in higher education institutions (Allen & Seaman, 2011; Demir Kaymak & Horzum, 2013). The number of courses and programs offered online has been growing each year. The percentage of students who took at least one online course has increased significantly in the past decade (Allen & Seaman, 2011; Wu, Hiltz, and Beiber, 2010). Even though online courses have become common; the concern over the effectiveness of online courses never subsides. (Allen & Seaman, 2011; Beqiri, Chase, & Bishka, 2010; Callaway, 2012; Hiltz & Turoff, 2005; Peck, 2012;). As a result, researchers in various disciplines had compared the learning outcomes between online courses and face-to-face courses (Alsharif et al., 2005; Lyke & Frank, 2012; Gallagher, et al., 2005; Porter, Pitterle, & Hayney, 2014; Sitznmann, Kraiger, Steward, Wisher, 2006; Summer, Waigandt, Whittaker, 2005). Overall, the findings suggest that compared to face-to-face deliver, online class could produce comparable or even better outcomes (Allen & Seaman, 2011; Bernard, Abrami, et al., 2004). Even in the college of business, no significant difference in testing scores between online and classroom courses in different studies (Arbaugh et. al, 2010; Cummins, Peltier, Erffmeyer, & Whalen, 2013; Parnell & Carraher, 2003, 2005; Peltier, Drago, & Schibrowsky, 2003; Raj, 2011).
At the same time, there are different forms of online courses, such as semester length and intensive online course. Subject intensive courses have been existed for a while and become more common in higher education institutions now. Subject intensive, accelerated or time-shortened course is defined as course taught within an accelerated format outside the traditional semester format (Kucsera & Zimmaro, 2010). The timeframe of accelerated format could vary from a specified number of weeks or days (Davies 2006) to just being a shorter period of time than current delivery (Anastasi 2007; Daniel 2000; Davies 2006; Scott 2003; Wlodkowski 2003). However, just like online course, criticism of this format also persisted. The major concern for intensive course is whether the shorter length of course would compromise students’ learning. Many argue that learning takes place over time. The course intensive or accelerated learning format could be less effective than traditional semester length one because such format could not allow students to absorb material effectively in a shorter period. Students definitely need certain time to absorb the knowledge. Therefore, research has been conducted to compare the regular and intensive course long time ago. Scott and Conrad (1992) reviewed over 50 studies of intensive courses and they found that compared to traditional semester length courses, intensive courses produce in mostly equivalent or even better learning outcomes. Other researchers have reached similar conclusions. For example, Daniel’s (2000) review of studies concluded that students in intensive courses achieve at least equal or even superior learning outcomes in comparison to traditional length courses, across a variety of fields. Overall, the research suggested that students in shorter term course were likely to hold as much as or more information and knowledge than those in traditional semester length courses.
Based on the literature review, both teaching formats and the length of course produced at least equivalent, sometimes even better results. However, the majority of studies on the impact of teaching format and course length focused on knowledge retention. They often used the test scores to see whether there was a difference. Rarely, it studied the learning outcome beyond knowledge acquisition. It remains not clear whether the learning outcomes beyond knowledge retention will be similar or even better in online courses or shorter term course. Therefore, we are going to study whether the teaching method and length of course will affect non-knowledge acquisition related learning outcomes. We want to compare whether students’ attitude and behavior changes are comparable or different among face-to-face, regular online and intensive online IB course.
Research has provided a significant amount of research related to the impact of completing an IB course. (Brasfield, McCoy, & Reed, 2011; Chen et. al, 2016; Mpoyi & Thomans, 2008; Saghafi, 2001; Vemela et. al, 2014). This research found that after taking an IB course, students acquired more international related information and skill, in general, (Brasfield et al., 2011; Mpoyi & Thomans, 2008), became more likely to do business with other countries (Brasfield, McCoy, & Reed, 2011), and care more about international events and news (Vemela et al., 2014; Chen, et al. 2016). The impact is not limited to knowledge and behavior. Some studies also found taking an IB course affect students’ attitude. Students became less ethnocentric ethnocentric (Saghafi, 2001; Walton and Basciano, 2006) and had more cultural empathy (Margavio, Hignite, Moses, & Margavio, 2005). Nevertheless, some results suggested students’ attitudes toward other cultures did not change even though their knowledge increased (Brasfield et al., 2011). Vemela, Chen, and Cox (2014) did not find a significant change in students’ attitudes toward other countries.
In this study, we want to examine whether exposure to international business content would increase students’ attention to international affair and changes student attitudes regarding another country, internationalism. There are reasons why we focus on these two outcomes. Research and anecdotal evidence suggest that compared to people in other countries, Americans pay less attention to issues out of the Unites States and do not know much about worldwide events (Curran, Lyengar, Lund, Salovarra & Moring, 2009; Ivengar & Morin, 2006). Thus, we want to see whether students pay more attention to international event or affair after completing an IB course. Another outcome we examine here is internationalism. Internationalism has been defined by Kosterman and Feshback (1989) as “international sharing and welfare, and reflects an empathy for the peoples of other countries” (p. 271). Balabanis et al. (2001) also suggested that the main focus of internationalism is people’s concern about other countries’ welfare. This differs from cultural openness or global awareness because internationalism is considered as a more active attitude than just accepting the foreign cultures and people (Sharma et al., 1995). Therefore, we believe internationalism and attentiveness to international affair are appropriate learning outcomes to examine the impact of taking an IB course. Our question is whether teaching format (face-to-face and Online) or course length (semester long and intensive) produces similar outcomes in international business course. Will positive gain in attentiveness to global issue and internationalism also be found in online course and intensive online course? Will teaching format and course length have similar effect on change in attentiveness to global issue and internationalism?
Attentiveness to international affairs: First, we examine if the students’ behavior would be affected by the international business course they took. Therefore, the first learning outcome we examine is to see whether the positive gains on attentiveness to international affair are comparable in three types of courses. Because an international business class covers many issues related to cultural, political, economic, and legal topics across many countries, the class could provide students an opportunity to be engaged with information or events beyond the United States. There is a higher chance that students’ interest in those events or news will increase. Thus, they are more likely to pay more attention to something related to international events. Prasad et al.(2014) and Chen et al.(2016) all found that after taking an IB class, students were more likely to pay more attention to international affair than they did before taking an IB course. Their studies were done in a face-to-face setting. The results support that students’ immersion in international information and events could lead to increased attention to global event. Would teaching format or course length affect students’ interest in international affair? We argue exposure to such information may not be so different in face to face class and online course. As long as online course could provide such information to students, the effectiveness could be similar. Therefore, we suggest the teaching format may not affect this learning outcome.
However, the course of length may have an impact on this learning outcome. The relationship between course length and learning is elusive. Even though course length did not interfere knowledge retention. The impact on another outcome is not clear. We found the relationship between course of length and global awareness in the literature of study abroad program. Attentiveness to international affair and global awareness are similar concepts. Therefore, we believe such relationship could be applied here. In the literature of study abroad program found that not all the study abroad programs fostered the same degree of change in participants’ global awareness (Dwyer, 2004; Kehl & Morris, 2007). The length of study abroad program was positively related to the change of students’ global awareness. Students who studied abroad for a whole semester had significantly greater levels of global awareness than those who studied for short term study abroad program (Dwyer, 2004; Kehl & Morris, 2007). Therefore, the impact will be affected by the course length.
We argue that face-to-face course and regular online courses will have similar impact on the positive gain on attention to international affair. Also their gain will be bigger the gain in 7 week online course. The above arguments lead to the next hypotheses.
H1: The positive gain in attentiveness to international affair will be comparable in both face to face course and semester long course. The gain in these two formats will be more significant than that of a 7-week online class.
Internationalism: Then, we examine whether the degree of students’ attitudes change will differ among three kind of courses. As we discussed before, the results regarding students’ attitudes were mixed in previous studies on international business course outcomes. For internationalism, Chen et al. (2016) found students’ degree of internationalism did change after taking an IB course. However, their studied was conducted in face-to-face environments. Thus, we are not sure whether teaching format or course length will affect the learning outcomes. Our question is that is particular environment more conducive for fostering internationalism? Will teaching method or course length matter?