This article presents the findings of an exploratory study into the perceptions of a culturally and linguistically diverse cohort of management students (n = 236) about the use of video as a teaching and learning tool. The results show that while students are generally favorable toward audiovisual materials, the choice of content, how the medium is used, and the types of supporting pedagogical activities all influence the students’ perceived learning and enjoyment. Notably, students from non-English-speaking backgrounds reported different benefits and challenges to their native English-speaking classmates. We use the findings to outline some practical guidelines for instructors about the most effective ways of using video as a pedagogical tool with diverse classes.
BallA. F.MuhummadR. J. (2003). Language diversity in teacher education and in the classroom. In SmithermanG.VillanuevaV. (Eds.), Language diversity in the classroom: From intention to practice (pp. 76-88). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
2.
BanduraA. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
3.
BumpasM. (2005). Using motion pictures to teach management: Refocusing the camera lens through the infusion approach to diversity. Journal of Management Education, 29, 792-815.
4.
CampbellF. A.GoldmanB. D.BocciaM. L.SkinnerM. (2004). The effect of format modifications and reading comprehension on recall of informed consent information by low-income parents: A comparison of print, video, and computer-based presentations. Patient Education and Counselling, 53, 205-216.
5.
ClarkeI.FlahertyT. (2002). Teaching internationally: Matching part-time MBA instructional tools to host country student preferences. Journal of Marketing Education, 24, 233-242.
6.
ComerD. R.HolbrookR. L. (2012). Getting behind the scenes of Fleetwood Mac’s rumours: Using a documentary on the making of a music album to learn about task groups. Journal of Management Education, 36, 544-567.
7.
DaglishC.EvansP. (2008). Teaching in the global business classroom. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.
8.
EisenhardtK. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532-550.
9.
FeldmanK. A. (1989). Association between student ratings of specific instructional dimensions and student achievement: Refining and extending the synthesis of data from multi section validity studies. Research in Higher Education, 30, 583-645.
10.
FieldA. (2005). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. London, England: Sage.
11.
GallosJ. (1993). Teaching about reframing with films and video. Journal of Management Education, 17, 127-132.
HayatiA.MohmediF. (2011). The effect of films with and without subtitles on listening comprehension of EFL learners. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42, 181-192.
14.
HellstenM.PrescottA. (2004). Learning at university: The international students’ experience. International Education Journal, 5, 344-351.
15.
HillsS.ThomV. (2005). Crossing a multicultural divide: Teaching business strategy to students from culturally mixed backgrounds. Journal of Studies in International Education, 9, 316-336.
16.
HolbrookR. L. (2007). Art imitates life: Using movies and music in principles of management. New York, NY: Wiley.
17.
HolbrookR. L. (2009). OB in a video box: Using remember the Titans as a microcosm for the organizational behavior course. Journal of Management Education, 33, 490-513.
18.
HoltbrüggeD.MohrA. T. (2010). Cultural determinants of learning style preferences. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 9, 622-637.
19.
HuczynskiA.BuchananD. (2004). Theory from fiction: A narrative process perspective on the pedagogical use of feature film. Journal of Management Education, 28, 707-726.
20.
HuntC. S. (2001). Must see TV: The timelessness of television as a teaching tool. Journal of Management Education, 25, 631-647.
21.
JonassenD. H.GrabowskiB. L. (1993). Handbook of individual differences, learning and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
22.
KalyugaS. (2005). The prior knowledge principle in multimedia learning. In MayerR. E. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 325-337). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
23.
KellyP. (2009). Group work and multicultural management education. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 20, 80-102.
24.
Kenworthy-U’RenA.EricksonA. (2009). Adventure racing and organizational behavior using eco challenge video clips to stimulate learning. Journal of Management Education, 33, 420-443.
25.
KingstonE.ForlandH. (2008). Bridging the gap in expectations between international students and academic staff. Journal of Studies in International Education, 12, 204-221.
26.
LeeD. S. (1997). What teachers can do to relieve problems identified by international students. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 70, 93-100.
27.
LiedtkaJ. (2001). The promise and peril of video cases: Reflections on their creation and use. Journal of Management Education, 25, 409-424.
28.
LinJ.YiJ. (1997). Asian international students’ adjustment: Issues and program suggestions. College Student Journal, 31, 473-480.
29.
MahrousA. A.AhmedA. A. (2010). A cross-cultural investigation of students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of pedagogical tools. Journal of Studies in International Education, 14, 289-306.
30.
MayerR. E. (2008). Applying the science of learning: Evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. American Psychologist, 63, 760-769.
31.
MayerR. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
32.
MayerR. E.AndersonR. B. (1991). Animation needs narrations: An experimental test of a dual-coding hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 484-490.
33.
McCallumL. W. (1984). A meta-analysis of course evaluation data and its use in the tenure decision. Research in Higher Education, 21, 150-158.
34.
MerrittD. J. (2008). Bias, the brain, and student evaluations of teaching. St John’s Law Review, 82, 235-287.
35.
MichellL. (1999). Combining focus groups and interviews: Telling how it is; telling how it feels. In BarbourR. S.KitzingerJ. (Eds.), Developing focus group research: Politics, theory and practice (pp. 36-46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37.
MilnerH. R. (2010). Culture, curriculum, and identity in education. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
38.
MulliganD.KirkpatrickA. (2000). How much do they understand? Lecturers, students, and comprehension. Higher Education Research and Development, 19, 311-335.
39.
NatfulinD. H.WareJ. E.DonnellyF. A. (1973). The Doctor Fox lecture: A paradigm of educational seduction. Journal of Medical Education, 48, 630-635.
PattonM. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
42.
PiagetJ. (1955). The child’s construction of reality. London, England: Routledge.
43.
PrenskyM. (2005). Listen to the natives. Educational Leadership, 63, 8-13.
44.
RamburuthP.McCormickJ. (2001). Learning diversity in higher education: A comparative study of Asian international and Australian students. Higher Education, 42, 333-350.
45.
RobertsonM.LineM.JonesS.ThomasS. (2000). International students, learning environments and perceptions: A case study using the Delphi technique. Higher Education Research and Development, 19, 89-102.
46.
RodriguesC. (2005). Culture as a determinant of the importance level business students place on ten teaching/learning techniques. Journal of Management Development, 24, 608-611.
47.
SaltmarshS.SwirskiT. (2010). “Pawns and prawns”: International academics’ observations on their transition to working in an Australian university. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 32, 291-301.
SinghM. (2005). Engaging translational learning communities: Policies, pedagogies and politics of educational power. In NinnesP.HellstenM. (Eds.), Internationalizing higher education: Critical explorations of pedagogy and policy (pp. 9-36). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
50.
SmithK. J.DavyJ. A.RosenbergD. L.HaightG. T. (2009). The role of motivation and attitude on cheating among business students. Journal of Academic and Business Ethics, 2, 12-37.
51.
SmithermanG. (2000). Talkin that talk: Language, culture and education in African America. New York, NY: Routledge.
52.
TangT. L.-P.AustinM. J. (2009). Students’ perceptions of teaching technologies, application of technologies, and academic performance. Computers & Education, 53, 1241-1255.
53.
TatarS. (2005). Classroom participation by international students: The case of Turkish graduate students. Journal of Studies in International Education, 9, 337-355.
54.
TriceA. G. (2005). Navigating in a multicultural learning community: Academic departments’ responses to graduate international students. Journal of Studies in International Education, 9, 62-89.
55.
TylerC. L.AndersonM. H.TylerJ. M. (2009). Giving students new eyes: The benefits of having students find media clips to illustrate management concepts. Journal of Management Education, 33, 444-461.
56.
WilkinsonL. C. (2007). A developmental approach to uses of moving pictures in intercultural education. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31, 1-27.
57.
ZalanT.LewisG. (2004). Writing about methods in qualitative research: Towards a more transparent approach. In Marschan-PiekkariR.WelchC. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business (pp. 507-528). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
58.
ZhuC.ValckeM.SchellensT. (2008). A cross-cultural study of Chinese and Flemish university students: Do they differ in learning conceptions and approaches to learning?Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 120-127.
59.
ZikmundW. G. (1997). Business research methods (5th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Dryden Press.
