Evidence-Based Management Education

Snyder (2013) strongly claims we should do away with introductory textbooks because they ineffectively present theory in a nonengaging manner, use academic language, and get zero or minimal use by students. Certainly, some students do not read their textbooks, particularly when lectured to day after day; passive instructional methods (e.g., lecturing), as well as failing to assess the knowledge gained from a textbook, push students into adopting such habits. And, yes, some management texts are research-deficient (Rynes, Giluk, & Brown, 2007); management texts have negated advances in not only neuroscience but also in educational psychology, adult learning, and cognition. Regarding the poor organization and presentation used in some texts, the “staging” could be improved with the use of engaging captioned illustrations, visuals, and content linkages to help students digest important concepts (see multimedia learning theory in Burke, 2007; Mayer, Bove, Bryman, Mars, & Tapangco, 1996). Publishers, authors, and instructors should therefore invoke established theory and evidence in order to keep their message for students current, concise, clear, coherent, and coordinated (Mayer et al., 1996). Put simply, just as we advocate evidence-based management to guide executives in their field of practice (Rousseau & McCarthy, 2007), publishers, authors, and management faculty should pursue evidence-based teaching and education (see Davies, 1999).

The essay sparks many research questions worth empirical exploration. For example, do instructors outside of management report similar textbook problems or is there something endemic to our field of study (see Biglan, 1973) that promulgates marginal textbook support? Do introductory books “work” in other business courses but not in management and organizational behavior? Do business students spend significantly more time reading engagingly designed textbooks, and do such texts improve student learning? How does book cost, regardless of its design, affect student use? If we get rid of textbooks because meager options exist, what other research-supported alternatives should we pursue? In other words, before replacing textbooks with various hyperlinked readings as the author suggests, should we not methodically examine student use and learning outcomes associated with other creative solutions? It is important to note that it is possible when we redesign courses, in order to adopt seemingly better methods, students sometimes exhibit outcomes we did not expect, such as higher superficial learning and/or lower deep learning (see Nijhuis, Segers, & Gijselaers, 2005).

It is possible that certain learning support alternatives perform better than textbooks for particular courses and fields of study; such empirical investigations would contribute to the management education literature. For example, Stelzer, Gladding, Mestre, and Brookes (2009) compared the efficacy of multimedia learning modules with text-based presentations for the first few topics of an introductory electricity course. The multimedia modules were 12-minute flash movies with narrated animations, controlled by the student (pause, play, rewind), with embedded assessments. There were also two paper-based conditions: One consisted of printed scripts and static pictures and the other contained verbatim material from a traditional textbook (including the same worked examples as the multimedia condition). Students were randomly assigned to conditions; based on their reported findings, students receiving the multimedia learning modules performed significantly better on tests than those students experiencing the text-based presentations of content. Even if not empirically vetted to this extent, faculty could gather simple qualitative and quantitative data from their own students to glean the use of, and pros and cons associated with, various textbooks they adopt and make changes as necessary, or even solicit feedback from students during textbook adoption decisions.

In addition, before we burn all introductory management and organizational behavior textbooks, perhaps we should remind ourselves how a textbook can serve a positive role for students and teachers, at least in certain learning contexts. As a learning support resource, books should help students integrate text information with their existing knowledge so as to construct new knowledge and understanding (Shepardson & Pizzini, 1991). Hutchinson and Torres (1994) report that one of the top reasons learners cite for wanting a published textbook is that it acts as a meaningful framework or guide for organizing their learning (i.e., doing homework, studying on their own, preparing for tests, doing assignments, etc.). Admittedly, although ubiquitous content is readily available on the Internet, it is rarely structured into cohesive frameworks that are useful for learners. Perhaps textbooks (digital or paper) would play an even more important role for classes built on active learning methods such as the “flipped classroom model” (see Koller, 2011), in which content is delivered outside of class (e.g., via online lectures, readings, etc.) and class time is used solely for application, not lecturing. As far as higher level courses are concerned, specialized textbooks from a student’s field of study can be particularly useful for structuring preparation for certification exams after graduation and supporting ongoing professional development.

Last, it appears that this essay sparks even larger questions about the role of textbook publishers in higher education and in management education more specifically. Interestingly, although higher education is integrally intertwined with the publishing industry, we seem to know little about the industry (Thompson, 2005), for example, how is it organized, structured, rewarded, and formally and informally linked to the academy, and how does it source, reward, and evaluate textbook authors? All stakeholders should have a better fundamental understanding of this industry, and more relevant to the issue at hand we should revisit the current versus desired role of publishers in generating learning support resources for students. For example, could publishers and MOOCs (massive open online courses) work together to organize, deliver, and support knowledge dissemination to the point that the role of faculty is focused solely on knowledge creation? Could these entities also take on the important role of gathering and assimilating valid evidence regarding the effectiveness of their instructional products? Would they want to? Until we delve into the macro issues associated with the college textbook publishing industry, our critique or understanding of any deficient products will likely endure.