Survey results of assessment methods used by simulation instructors to evaluate student performance on business simulations are presented. The learning objectives that instructors were attempting to measure with these assessment methods are also presented. The Bloom et al. (1959) taxonomy for classifying levels of learning was used to categorize these learning objectives.
Anderson, P. H.
, & Lawton, L. (1988). Assessing student performance on a business simulation exercise. In P. Sanders & T. Pray (Eds.), Developments in business simulation and experimential exercises (pp. 241-245). Stillwater Oklahoma State University.
2.
Bloom, B. S.
, Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., HiLl, W. H., & Drathwohl, D. R. (1959). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook) 1: Cognitive domain. New York. David McKay.
3.
Gentry, J. W.
, & Burns, A. C. (1981). Operationalizing a test of a model of the use of simulation games and experiential exercises. In W. D. Biggs & D. J. Fritzsche (Eds.), Developments in business simulation and experiential exercises (pp. 48-52). Normal: Illinois State University.
4.
Gosenpud, J.
(1990). Evaluation of experiential learning. In J. W. Gentry (Ed.), Guide to business gaming and experiential learning (pp. 301-329). London: Kogan Page.
5.
House, W. C.
, & Napier, H. S. (1988). A comparative study of strategic performance factors in actual and simulated business environments. In P. Sanders & T. Pray (Eds.), Developments in business simulation and experiential exercises (pp. 50-55). Stillwater. Oklahoma State University.
6.
Teach, R. D.
(1990). Profits: The false prophet in business gaming. Simulation & Gaming, 21(1), 12-26.
7.
Wolfe, J.
(1990). The evaluation of computer-based business games: Methodology, findings, and future needs. In J. W. Gentry (Ed.), Guide to business gaming and experiential learning (pp. 279-300). London: Kogan Page.
