Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The case study pedagogy over the years led to its essence in effective learning with real-life situations, logical progression and data-driven analysis in solution optimization. However, it is has its limitations in solving managerial problems with creativity. It confines the learning to its boundaries, is mechanistic and unemotional by design. It does not unfold limitless interpretation while merging creativity and innovation with out-of-the-box thinking. A differentiated session offering led to incorporating fiction movies and books to tinker young minds with a plethora of thought rainbows. The essence of the unconventional mode of group learning resulted in linkage of marketing theories to fiction, taking the interpretations to a pleasure voyage. The philosophical perspective with high engagement moves from literary subjectivity to profound management objectivity. This article depicts that experimentation with differentiated pedagogy can generate better learning outcomes which can create an effective impact for management students in creative thinking and wiser decision-making.

Keywords

Pedagogy marketing pedagogy innovation in teaching student engagement augmented learning

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

P. H.

, & Lawton

(2005). The Effectiveness of simulation exercise for integrating problem-based learning in management education. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 32(1986), 10–18.

Bonney

K. M.

(2015). Case study teaching method improves student performance and perceptions of learning gains. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education, 16(1), 21–28.

Bridgman

, Cummings

, & McLaughlin

(2016). Restating the case: How revisiting the development of the case method can help us think differently about the future of the business school. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 15(4), 724–741.

Bridgman

, Cummings

, & McLaughlin

(2017). The case method as invented tradition: Revisiting Harvard’s history to reorient management education. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2015(1), 11637–11637.

Brownell

, & Jameson

D. A.

(2004). Problem-based learning in graduate management education: Interdisciplinary application. Journal of Management, 28(5), 558–577.

Christensen

C. R.

, & Hansen

A. J.

(1987). Teaching and the case method. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Datar

S. M.

, Garvin

D. A.

, & Cullen

(2010). Rethinking the MBA: Business education at the crossroads. Brighton, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.

Elmuti

(2004). Can management be taught? If so, what should management education curricula include and how should the process be approached? Management Decision, 42(3/4), 439–453.

Hallinger

, & Lu

(2011). Assessing the instructional effectiveness of problem-based management education in Thailand: A longitudinal evaluation. Management Learning, 42(3), 279–299.

10.

Hanover Research (2014, March). Trends in higher education marketing, recruitment, and technology (pp. 1–25). Washington, DC: Hanover Research.

11.

Hammond

J. S.

(2002). Learning by the Case Method (Case No. 9–376–241). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

12.

Jain

A. K.

(2005). Management education and case method as a pedagogy. Vikalpa, 30(1), 77–84.

13.

Lee

K. W.

(1986). Case studies of teaching problem solving. Research in Science Education Research in Science Education, 16(1), 21–30.

14.

Lin

Y. S.

(2011). Fostering creativity through education—A conceptual framework of creative pedagogy. Creative Education, 02(03), 149–155.

15.

Naidoo

, & Wu

(2011). Marketing strategy implementation in higher education: A mixed approach for model development and testing. Journal of Marketing Management, 27(11–12), 1117–1141.

16.

Neely

, & Tucker

(2013). Case study: An examination of the decision making process for selecting simulations for an online MBA program. Education and Training, 55(2), 128–138.

17.

Nicolescu

(2009). Applying marketing to higher education: Scope and limits. Management and Marketing, 4(2), 35–44.

18.

Raymond

(1996). The use of cases in management education (Case No. 9–376–240). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

19.

Scott

C. L.

(2015). The futures of learning 3: What kind of pedagogies for the 21st century? (ERF Working Papers Series, No. 15). Paris: UNESCO Education Research and Foresight.

20.

Selkrig

, & Keamy

(2017). Creative pedagogy: A case for teachers’ creative learning being at the centre. Teaching Education, 28(3), 317–332.

21.

Shapiro

(1985). Hints for case teaching (Case No. 9–585–012). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

22.

Sherwood

A. L.

(2010). Problem-based learning in management education. Journal of Management, 28, 536–557.

23.

Smith

, & Dowell

(2000). A case study of co-ordinative decision-making in disaster management. Ergonomics, 43(8), 1153–1166.

24.

Warnock

J. N.

, & Mohammadi-Aragh

M. J.

(2016). Case study: Use of problem-based learning to develop students’ technical and professional skills. European Journal of Engineering Education, 41(2), 142–153.

25.

Yoon

, Pedretti

, Hewitt

, Perris

, & Van Oostveen

(2006). Exploring the use of cases and case methods in influencing elementary preservice science teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(1), 15–35.

Eliminating Thought Boundaries Through Fiction Movies and Books

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References