|
Problem #1 - Inadequate Attention to Marketing (Communication) At several points during the three-year grant, particularly during the first year, the project team ran into considerable resistance from stakeholders, primarily due to their lack of understanding of what the project was attempting to accomplish. The two primary stakeholders were students and other instructors, both within and outside the accounting area. Initial reactions of many students were quite negative. They were not prepared for a classroom setting that placed considerable emphasis on the active learning mode (e.g., frequent questions from the instructor, numerous group assignments, oral presentation requirements, etc.). Nor were they prepared for discovery learning which, among other things, forced them to view the textbook as just one of several resources that could be consulted in addressing assignments. Nor did they feel comfortable with the notion that certain assignments did not have one right answer, but instead had a range of defensible solutions. Instructors were the second primary stakeholder. Early on, the project team presented to the entire college faculty its statement of course objectives in a white paper. Based on feedback from the faculty, the draft was modified and eventually ratified by the accounting faculty. This same review process was not followed, however, in dealing with the first cut of the newly-created instructional materials. Instead, the new materials went directly into the classroom after intensive review by the project team. This approach was purposely taken in order to speed up the process of classroom testing. However, it received considerable negative reaction from many faculty members who are accustomed to having all new curricula ratified at both the department and college levels before implementation and testing in the classroom. Solution to Problem #1 The project team addressed these initial marketing failures by creating a ten-minute promotional video that: i) explained the basic rationale for reengineering introductory accounting; ii) described the course objectives; iii) showed actual activities taking place in the classroom; and iv) provided student testimonials about the "good" things that were happening to them in the reengineered classes. The video message, which is shown on the first day of class, is now reinforced with explanatory materials contained in the syllabus and student workbook. In addition, on the first day of class, instructors now highlight many of the messages provided in the video and instructional materials. To alleviate faculty concerns the project team: i) provided other departments with complete sets of the instructional materials; and ii) met with selected faculty. However, in order to keep the instructional materials moving iteratively through a semester-by-semester set of tests and improvements, the project team resisted attempts by other faculty to bring the new curriculum within the college's formal review channels. The project team not only feared that such a move would drastically reduce the potential for results within the three-year time frame of the grant, but also believed that the college's existing curriculum review process is inconsistent with the notions of experimentation and continuous improvement.
Structure of the New Courses | Obstacles | Resources | Outcome Measures Reaction of Interested Parties | Recommendations for Interested Parties | Links | Index |