Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether learning communities (LCs), defined as a cohort of students jointly enrolled in two distinct courses, increase “deep learning” in either or both courses. This study focuses on the impact of learning communities in quantitative courses.

The hypothesis is tested using a unique data set including individual student performance and characteristics collected from students enrolled in an LC of Principles of Microeconomics and Elementary Statistics. The sample also includes students enrolled in each course separately which allows for testing between groups. The final exam in each course contained questions designed specifically to test deep learning. The design facilitates the use of multivariate regression analysis to examine the correlation between learning in communities and deep learning, holding constant other possible elements of student success.

Despite perceptions among the sample student population that learning increases in both courses as a result of the LC format, the empirical evidence does not reveal any statistically significant increase in deep learning as a result of learning in community. However, the sample is more introverted than the average college student which may meaningfully impact the results.

There are a number of important motivations for implementing an LC program that are not measured here. These include an increased sense of community among students, breadth (rather than depth) of knowledge, and awareness of the interconnectedness of learning across disciplines. However, to the extent that university instructors are motivated to ensure learning in their own discipline, this resource-intensive strategy may not be the most suitable approach in quantitative courses.

Learning communities continue to be a popular pedagogical technique and curriculum requirement, particularly at teaching-focused universities. This research offers an empirical approach to measuring one aspect of their value which is typically left to conceptual or qualitative study.

This research examines whether a shift to a hybrid classroom, which replaces some face-to-face classroom time with online instruction, adversely affects student learning if the structure and incentives that are characteristic of a flipped classroom are already in place.

This study features a quantitative analysis of individual student data collected over multiple sections of a single course with the same instructor. In all seven sections, over two semesters, principles of microeconomics used a flipped classroom format that features preclass video lectures, daily quizzes and highly interactive class time. In three of the seven sections, the time spent in class was reduced by one-third. For this experiment, student scores on the cumulative final exam evaluate student learning. Students took a survey at the end of the semester to provide feedback on time use during the course and to make observations about the class format.

Results from this study suggest that despite accountability for the work done outside of class, students score 4.4% points lower on the final exam in the class format that features reduced face-to-face time. However, student comments also suggest that this is a worthwhile tradeoff as they balance work, internships and other nonacademic demands on their time. Student evaluations of the course and instructor are statistically unchanged.

Efficiency in educational delivery is an ongoing concern for students and faculty. This research demonstrates that a classroom that is both flipped and hybrid makes better use of student and faculty time, provides a richer learning experience and only modestly reduces student learning. It is notable that students report a preference for the hybrid classroom model, despite modestly lower levels of learning.

While research has been done on flipped and hybrid classrooms separately, this is the first paper to isolate the effect of seat time within the flipped classroom context. This research addresses the flipped classroom design's ability to mitigate the documented reduction in student learning that often results from reduced class time or an increase in online learning.

The purpose of this cross-cultural study was to investigate whether the embraced national culture was a distinguishing factor of preferred downward influence tactics and targeted goals by principals of different countries. The participants of the study were the public school principals in Turkey and the United States, two culturally distinct countries. The conceptual framework for the study incorporated the Cultural Dimensions (CDs) of Hofstede and the Profiles of Organizational Influence Strategies (POIS) of Kipnis and Schmidt; two pioneers in their respective fields. The findings of the study supported Hofstede's framework for three of the four dimensions for both countries. By employing a pseudoetic cross-cultural research methodology and a relational causal-comparative research design, the study first tested the reliability and construct validity of POIS (Form S) influence tactics scale, both in the Turkish context and in the public education contexts of the two countries. The findings partially supported the applicability of POIS in both countries by yielding a three-factor model for the Turkish context and a four-factor model for the public education context. The multivariate analyses strongly supported literature in regards to the culture-specific nature of leadership influence practices, and it identified national culture as a significantly distinguishing factor of both Turkish and American principals in their preferred influence tactics. Similarly, national culture was also a significantly distinguishing factor of groups in principals' targeted educational goals.

For over two hundred years, our nation’s legal system has been based on the “American Rule” ‐ with each party bearing its own litigation costs. As the Supreme Court noted in 1975, this distinctly American tradition is “deeply rooted in our history and in congressional policy, and it is not for us to invade the legislature’s province by redistributing litigation costs…” Not surprisingly, the founders of our legal system did not anticipate the extent to which e‐mail would come to dominate our professional and personal lives. Experts estimate that 30 billion e‐mail messages are currently are being sent every day ‐ or an average of five e‐mails per day for every person on the planet.

If the past 30 years of history have taught anything, it is that white‐collar offenders often run afoul of the law by their participation in cover‐ups rather than their part in a substantive criminal offenses. In August 1974, President Richard Nixon was forced to resign as President of the United States ‐ not because of the Watergate break in itself, but his attempts to cover it up. President Clinton was impeached and narrowly avoided indictment ‐ not for his sexual escapades with Monica Lewinsky, but his attempt to redefine the word “is” during his testimony at a deposition. Recently, we have seen the demise of Arthur Andersen, LLP ‐ not as the result of a securities fraud conviction, but a conviction for obstruction of justice. Frank Quattrone was indicted recently for allegedly counseling the destruction of documents, and Martha Stewart was indicted, not for insider trading or the alleged conduct that first brought her under the microscope of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and Department of Justice (“DOJ”), but allegedly for misleading federal agents. This article will review the current round of indictments against Wall Street luminaries for obstruction, as well as the new obstruction provisions of the Sarbanes‐Oxley Act. It then will make some observations on how these events should impact a corporation’s document retention policy. Finally, it will discuss how compliance programs that aim to enforce the laws of this country and assist governmental inquiries may actually ensnare corporation employees in an obstruction trap.

The purpose of this study is to investigate mentorship practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and to consider how mentorship could be improved to support students of educational leadership (EDLE) during crises.

Participants in this collective self-study were four faculty members (i.e. the authors) within an EDLE program in one public, research-intensive university in the southern USA. Data sources were memos, email correspondence, reflective dialogue, course evaluations and meeting notes. Analysis involved dialogic engagement among the research team to identify emergent themes.

Analysis revealed five themes that reflect our collective experiences as mentors during the pandemic. These themes were challenges created by dismantled systems; meeting students' needs for understanding, flexibility and meaningful learning experiences; evolving personal–professional boundaries; grappling with our own sense-making and well-beingness; and clarifying values and priorities.

The pandemic exemplifies the need for a deeper conceptualization of mentorship that stimulates more intimate, compassionate relationships between mentors and mentees. When mentorship is grounded in compassion, intimacy and mutual vulnerability, it demonstrates a genuine ethic of care and concern for others that is supportive of well-being and serves as a model for mentees entering the profession.

This paper extends disciplinary knowledge by focusing on the mentorship of EDLE students during crises and provides insights on how mentorship could be enacted to mutually support mentor–mentee well-being.

The present study consists of managers and professionals in 26 countries including seven from Central and Eastern Europe. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether culture dimensions predict country differences in the relationship between gender and organizational commitment. The study integrated theories of social learning, role adjustment and exchange that link commitment to organizational roles to explain such differences in gender effects. Findings indicate that an alternative modernities perspective on theories of gender and commitment is better warranted than is a traditional modernities perspective.

This study examined the relationship between gender and organizational commitment using primary data collected in 26 counties. The cross-level moderating effects of individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, power distance and restraint vs indulgence was examined using hierarchical linear modeling.

Organizational commitment is found to be higher among men than women in four countries (Australia, China, Hungary, Jamaica) and higher among women than men in two countries (Bulgaria and Romania). Results shows that large power distance, uncertainty avoidance, femininity (social goal emphasis) and restraint (vs indulgence) predict an association between being female and commitment. These all suggest limitations to the traditional modernity-based understanding of gender and the workplace.

This study is unique based on the three theories it integrates and because it tests the proposed hypothesis using a multi-level nested research design. Moreover, the results suggest a tension between an alternative modernities perspective on top-down governmental effects on commitment through exchange and bottom-up personal effects on commitment through social learning with role adjustment in an intermediate position.

This article provides an overview of the panel vector autoregressive models (VAR) used in macroeconomics and finance to study the dynamic relationships between heterogeneous assets, households, firms, sectors, and countries. We discuss what their distinctive features are, what they are used for, and how they can be derived from economic theory. We also describe how they are estimated and how shock identification is performed. We compare panel VAR models to other approaches used in the literature to estimate dynamic models involving heterogeneous units. Finally, we show how structural time variation can be dealt with.