Manajemen | Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji joeb.83.3.141-146
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Capstone Business Course Assessment: Exploring
Student Readiness Perspectives
Stephen L. Payne , Jan Flynn & J. Michael Whitfield
To cite this article: Stephen L. Payne , Jan Flynn & J. Michael Whitfield (2008) Capstone
Business Course Assessment: Exploring Student Readiness Perspectives, Journal of Education
for Business, 83:3, 141-146, DOI: 10.3200/JOEB.83.3.141-146
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.83.3.141-146
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 54
View related articles
Citing articles: 9 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 11 January 2016, At: 23:05
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
CapstoneBusinessCourseAssessment:
ExploringStudentReadinessPerspectives
STEPHENL.PAYNE
JANFLYNN
J.MICHAELWHITFIELD
GEORGIACOLLEGE&STATEUNIVERSITY
MILLEDGEVILLE,GEORGIA
ABSTRACT.Inadditiontoassessment
ofstudent-learningoutcomesincapstone
businesscourses,anassessmentconcernis
studentreadinessforthesetypicalcapstone
experiences.Areviewofboth(a)theliteratureonlearningretentionorapplication
andstudentdispositionsforundertaking
significantlearningchallengesand(b)
theauthors’preliminarydatacollection
andanalysisledtheauthorstoquestion
traditionalassumptionsregardingintegrativelearningpotentialsforsomestudents
enteringthecapstonebusinesscourse.The
authorsrecommendformsoffeed-forward
controls,concurrentcontrols,andfeedback
controlsforcapstonecoursestoenable
businesseducatorstoassessstudentlearningfromamoresystemicperspective.
Keywords:capstonebusinesscourses,
learningassessment,learningreadiness,
learningretention,studentdispositions
Copyright©2008HeldrefPublications
C
oncernformoreeffectiveassessment or assurance of learning is
evidentinrecentAssociationtoAdvance
CollegiateSchoolsofBusinessInternational(AACSB;2003)guidelines.Capstone courses within business schools
offeruniqueassessmentpotentials.The
capstoneexperiencecanbeviewedasa
keyassessmentopportunityforevaluatingoverallstudent-learningoutcomesin
abusinessschool.
Unlike commercially available or
locallyconstructedcomprehensivefield
exams for measuring student knowledge of business school concepts, the
capstone course provides an option to
measure such students’ knowledge and
theextenttowhichstudentsarecapable
ofdemonstratinghigherordercognitive
dimensionsoflearning,suchassynthesisandevaluationofbusinessconcepts.
The capstone course experience also
offers assessment potentials regarding
the affective and skills-based dimensionsofstudentlearning.
Since 2000, we have used a stakeholder approach and the scholarship
of the teaching and learning processes
(Payne, Whitfield, & Flynn, 2002) to
assess the capstone course in our business school. From the perspective of
control theory (Wiener, 1948), most of
ourearlyassessmenteffortsinthecapstone course focused on feedback controls or after-the-fact information from
sources such as surveys, grades, cap-
stonefailurerates,andstudentscoreson
a national comprehensive business exit
exam.Althoughtheseinitiativesprovided useful information, we recognized
that additional forms of control would
provide a more integrated perspective
onoverallstudentlearningrelatedtothe
capstonecourse.Tothisend,webegan
to reconsider concurrent controls with
a focus on the learning processes in a
student’scapstonecourseexperience.
There are three basic types of management controls that are covered in
introductory management textbooks:
feed-forward, concurrent, and feedback controls. In this application, controls can be established before (feed-
forward),during(concurrent),andafter
(feedback) student work or learning in
the classroom. We explored feed-forward controls to understand issues of
students’ readiness for undertaking the
higher level and integrative-learning
activities in the capstone course. Our
exploration of issues of student readiness involved questions concerning
(a) the extent to which students have
the necessary background knowledge,
skills, and dispositions to succeed in
the capstone course (i.e., feed-forward
control) and (b) whether students are
able to apply those skills, knowledge,
anddispositionstothecapstoneexperience(i.e.,concurrentcontrol).Therehas
been significant scholarship on assessing learning outcomes and processes.
January/February2008
141
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
Much less has been written about the
influenceofstudents’readinessontheir
successful outcomes in more advanced
andintegratedlearningenvironments.
Inthisarticle,wesummarizeconcepts
fromtheliteratureonlearningreadiness
thatarerelevanttoanintegratedcontrol
theory approach to overall assessment
ofthecapstonecourse.Wealsodescribe
pilot processes that we investigated to
gain different assessment-related student feedback and recommend that
educators undertake a more systemic
approachtoassessmentofthecapstone
learningexperience.
IssuesofStudentRetention
andDispositions
Two key concerns related to assessment of students’ readiness for a capstonebusinesscourseare(a)theirretentionofrelevantknowledgeandskillsand
(b) their disposition or motivation for
retrievingandapplyingsuchknowledge
and skills for the demands for higher
levellearninginacapstonecourse.The
efforts of previous researchers in variousacademicfieldshaveledustoboth
ofthesereadinessconcerns.
RetentionofKnowledgeandSkills
A key assumption underlying the
design of academic programs in most
business schools is that students who
successfully complete core courses in
functionalbusinessareasshouldbeable
toretainandapplysuchknowledgeand
skillseffectivelyforintegrativeorcapstone business courses. On the basis
of student feedback from our existing
assessmentsurveysandpersonalexperiencesinteachingcapstonecourses,we
began to question the extent to which
actualstudentretentionandapplication
of learning from core courses justified
faith in this conventional assumption.
In exploring issues related to studentlearning retention and readiness, we
foundacademicscholarshipinthefields
of cognitive psychology particularly
helpful. Cognitive psychologists have
conducted research on the degree to
which students hold in memory previously encountered information and the
degree to which they can then access
and transfer this previous learning for
new challenges (May & Kahnweiler,
142
JournalofEducationforBusiness
2000).Royer(1979),forexample,contrasts “near transfer” (p. 54) and “far
transfer”(p.55)oflearning.Neartransfer of learning occurs when a stimulus
thatissimilartoanearlieroneproduces
roughlythesamelearnedresponse.Far
transferinvolvesstudentretention,synthesis,andcreativeapplicationoflearning from several previous experiences
for somewhat different or just-related
stimuliorchallenges.
Other learning models in the field
of cognitive psychology describe an
advanced stage of learning. At this
advanced stage, there is a depth of
retained knowledge and skills and an
“automaticity”(Goldstein,1993,p.110)
in accessing earlier learning (Howell
& Cooke, 1989; Shiffrin & Schneider,
1977). This automaticity allows the
conscious mind to focus on different
aspects of new and more integrative
or demanding learning tasks. May and
Kahnweiler (2000) stressed that inadequate initial learning can be a major
handicapforstudentsstrivingformore
advanced stages of transfer of knowledgeandskills.Withoutsomedepthof
initiallearning,studentsdonothavethe
capacitytoretrieveneededconceptsor
skills and are not prepared for higher
orderlearninginadvancedcourses.
InfluenceofStudentLearning
Dispositions
Learning is a function not only of
individuals’existingorretainedknowledge and skills but also their dispositions for future learning. Individual
studentdispositionstowardlearningare
keyelementsinanysystemicoverview
of assessment in the capstone course.
Baldwin and Ford (1988) examined
knowledgeretentionandlearningtransfer from a perspective of personnel
psychology and training. The actual
learning of participants in their study
wasstronglyaffectedbyboththeindividual characteristics of learners and
the elements of the learning environment. Among the particular individual
characteristicsidentifiedasimportantto
learning were dispositions such as the
individual’sneedforachievement,locus
of control, confidence, desire to succeed, and perception of the particular
benefitsofthetrainingprogram.
A key element necessary for knowledge retention and transfer of learning,
accordingtoHalpernandHakel(2003),
isself-efficacy,thebeliefinone’sselfto
accomplishthetaskathand.Beyondpsychometricinstrumentsorscalesformeasuring self-confidence or self-efficacy,
a course assessment tool that Angelo
andCross(1993)describedisa“courserelated self-confidence” (pp. 275–279)
survey for college students. However,
self-confidence alone—without other
dispositional measures, such as selfcontrol—appears to have limited value
in predicting actual learning outcomes.
Excessive self-confidence, for example,
canoccasionallyreducethecognitiveor
affectivedissonancethatisoftenassociated with many higher learning challenges. Cvercko (1995) explored the
concept of trainee motivation for learningbyusingaframeworkofexpectancy
theory. Investigating variables associated with expectancy theory, she found
that these variables were predictive of
near and far transfers of learning in a
management training program. Schmitt
(2004)exploredmeasuresofhighschool
student readiness for college-learning
experiences, borrowing from this personnelpsychologyandtrainingliterature
and also applying an expectancy theory
approach(Vroom,1964).
Inthefieldofandragogy,orthestudy
ofadultlearning,researchershaveintroducedanddevelopedscalesandmeasures
to focus on various student dispositions
related to learning. The concept of selfdirectedlearningreadinessisoneexample. McCune, Guglielmino, and Garcia
(1990) stated that the Self-Directed
Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS),
developed initially by Guglielmino
(1978), appears to measure student
dispositions such as love of learning,
self-conceptasaneffectiveindependent
learner, tolerance of risk, ambiguity
and complexity in learning, creativity,
viewoflearningasalifelongandbeneficial process, initiative in learning,
self-understanding, and acceptance of
responsibility for one’s own learning.
BrockettandHiemstra(1991)described
a more restricted approach than the
SDLRS that measures the assumption of personal responsibility or the
self-control of students in response to
various learning challenges. Related
instrumentsorscalesthatmightprovide
feed-forward information on student
dispositionorreadinessincludevarious
forms of emotional intelligence (Tucker, Sojka, Barone, & McCarthy, 2000)
and the Academic Delay of Gratification Scale (Bembenutty & Karabenick,
1998). We used the latter instrument
and a motivational skills-and-strategies
questionnaire to assess students’ motivationaltendencies,cognitivestrategies,
andself-regulatorylearningstrategiesto
obtainacademicachievement.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
MethodandResults
Backgroundreadingandexperiencein
teaching the capstone course led us to
question the degree to which some of
ourstudentsretainedknowledgefromthe
commonbodyofknowledge(CBK)businesscoursesandthedegreetowhichsome
ofourstudentsweredisposedtoundertake
the higher learning challenges of most
capstonecourses.Toexploretheseissues,
wedevelopedseveralpreliminarylinesof
inquiry regarding the levels of retention
anddispositionsthatourstudentsbrought
tothecapstonecourse.
Core-CourseRetentionAnalysis
Oneofthefirstquestionsweinvestigated was the extent to which students
retained basic concepts that they had
earlier seemed to comprehend in their
CBKcourses.Toaddressthisquestion,
we enlisted the aid of colleagues who
teachCBKcourses.Inall,50undergraduatestudentsintwosectionsofanintroductorymanagementcourseand36studentsintwosectionsofanintroductory
businessfinancecoursetookexamsfor
gradedcreditearlyinthespringsemesterof2005.Individualinstructorsdeveloped and administered these multiple-
choice or short-answer exams as part
of their normal course activities and
covered basic course concepts deemed
important by the instructor.At the end
of that semester, instructors readministeredthesamequestionscoveringthese
concepts to see how much information
the 86 students had retained over the
course of the semester. Students were
notinformedthattheywouldberetested
ontheinitialinformation.
Usingasimplemeasureofthenumber
of questions answered correctly by the
samestudentonbothinitialandfollowuptests,wefoundthat,onaverage,only
70%ofthequestionsansweredcorrectly
onthefirsttestwereansweredcorrectly
in later testing. Even with its limited
natureandwithoutgreatrigor,thisindicationofthelackofknowledgeretention
atthissimplelevelinourCBKcourses
raisedconcern.Multiple-choiceorfill-inthe-blankquestionsusuallytargetlower
levellearningorbasicrecallofconcepts
orvocabulary.Evenatthisbasiclevelof
learning,resultssuggesta30%decrease
intheretentionrateofcore-courseconceptsoverthespaceofonlyweeksorless
than 2 months. If students are retaining
only70%oftheirlowerlevelcore-course
knowledge over this short time span, it
is not realistic to expect that students
enter the capstone experience, usually
the last course in their college career,
with a minimal base in some fields for
thehigherorderlearningnecessarytobe
successfulatthecapstonelevel.
Although more rigorous study
wouldbeneededforverificationofor
inference beyond these local results,
we argue that initial learning of key
core-course concepts needs to be
significantly reinforced or improved
for students to perform better in the
capstone course. This is particularly
important because more serious erosion of knowledge will most likely
occur in the time between completion
of the CBK courses and entry into
the capstone course. If some students
do not learn core-course concepts and
if those concepts are not reinforced
throughouttheCBKcurriculumtopromote retention and deeper learning,
then serious constraints exist against
higher level learning that is based on
analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of
core-courseconcepts.Thisassumption
ofstudents’abilitytoengageinhigher
order integrated learning is central to
the role of the capstone course in the
business school curriculum. Without
a focus on quality and depth of learning at the lower CBK course levels
and without better feed-forward controlsystemstoassessstudentlearning
and retention from these lower level
courses,educatorsandresearchersmay
have to reconsider the idea of the traditionalcapstonecourseanditsrolein
studentlearning.
MotivationandDispositionalAnalysis
The literature on individual attitudes, motivations, and dispositions
toward learning and learning outcomes
encouraged us to explore perceptions
thatstudentshadregardingtheirexperiences with core and capstone courses.
Weconductedin-depthinterviewswith
studentsenteringcapstonecoursesconcerning their perceived learning goals,
perceivedobstaclesinthepathoftheir
learning,andideasofhowfacultymight
help them overcome these obstacles.
We disseminated information regarding interview opportunities to students
throughe-mailprecedingthecourseand
through announcements in initial sessionsofthecapstonecourse.Weasked
studentstovolunteerfortheinterviews
andpaidthem$10fortheirtime.Atotal
of 12 students volunteered in the time
frame allotted and was interviewed by
another faculty member teaching the
capstone course. All interviews were
taped with student permission. Most
interviews lasted between 45 and 60
min. The university’s institutional
review board approved the questions
and procedures used to gather this
information. The interviews were transcribed from the tapes and analyzed
by using a qualitative process for indepth or intense interviews suggested
byMcCracken(1988).
Of the 12 students interviewed, 8
emphasized learning knowledge and
skills necessary for success in future
work settings as a primary goal for all
coursework,includingworkinthecapstone course. A few students stressed
shorter term and more specific goals
suchasgettingagoodgrade,keepinga
scholarship,orpassingacertifiedpublic
accountant (CPA) exam. Other goals
mentionedby1or2individualsincluded areas of skill development such as
time management, speaking and communicating in business contexts, and
knowledgeofcurrentbusinessenvironmentsorevents.
Among the most common learning
barriers mentioned by students were
difficultyinretainingmaterialcovered,
both in earlier courses and in courses
within the semester, not enough time
for necessary study, and faculty who
had not required integrative or higher
January/February2008
143
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
order learning. Other barriers identified were laziness in individual studentsandalackoftheirownabilityto
thinkcritically.Severallearningbarriers
mentionedbystudentsinvolvedfacultyrelated concerns. Among those issues
mentionedbythestudentswerelackof
clarityoflearninggoalsforsomecourses,lackofeffectivefacultyfeedbackon
studentassignments,lackofintegration
ofconceptsacrosscourses,andfaculty
teaching methods that do little to help
theretentionofknowledge.
In particular, students were asked
what,ifany,obstaclesexistedforthem
infourtypesoflearningactivitiescommon in the capstone course: classroom
discussion, team projects, traditional
testing, and written assignments. Several students stated that they were shy
or lacked the confidence necessary to
speak or interact significantly in openclassroomdiscussions.Abouthalfofthe
students reported having had generally
positive group-learning experiences,
but more than half of the respondents
reported group-learning experiences
that were frustrating and involved difficultbarriersforthemtoovercome.
Most of the students interviewed
indicated concerns about testing as a
learning barrier for them. For written
assignments, several students reported
encountering obstacles such as vague
assignment goals, lack of a rubric in
evaluations of assignments, lack of
feedbackontheseassignments,lackof
adequatestudentknowledgeonhowto
conductresearch,difficultyofthecritical-
thinkingdemandsofsomeassignments,
and difficulty expressing their ideas
appropriately.
All students we interviewed made
comments concerning how faculty
could remove obstacles in the path
of their learning goals. Generally, the
students prefaced their comments by
indicatingoverallsatisfactionwithcurrent business-faculty practices and that
their suggestions applied to few faculty members. Suggestions for faculty
includedincreasedclarityandrelevance
of learning expectations, better feedback on student work, and improved
facultyattitudesofcareforstudentsand
towardhelpingstudents.
Results from our initial efforts to
collect and analyze data related to
144
JournalofEducationforBusiness
student retention and dispositions led
to specific changes in our planning
and assessment activities in the capstonecourse.Additionalquestionsand
broader concerns regarding overall
assessmentwerealsoraised.
Discussion
DirectImplicationsofResearch
Since 2000, we have been collecting
information from capstone students at
the end of each semester and asking
themwhichCBKareastheyfoundthemselvesrevisitingandstudyingmoreduringthecapstonecourse.Onthebasisof
ourretentionanalysisandin-depthinterviews, we revised our previous assessment survey to include two new items
askingstudentsto(a)ratetheirperceived
level of knowledge retention from core
orfunctionalcourseareasand(b)evaluatetheirperceiveddegreeofcompetence
infivecommontypesoflearningactivitiesinbusinesscapstonecourses.
Asaresultoftheircapstone-learning
experiences, 40 students from two
sections of the course with different
instructors expressed less confidence
in their retention of knowledge in
the areas of finance, accounting, and
economics. In comparison, areas of
management and marketing showed
a greater level of confidence. In the
classroom skills areas, speaking and
writing skills showed the highest levels of student confidence. Students
reported the least confidence in their
ability to do well on exams and in
open classroom discussion. The areas
of relatively greater confidence were
small-group discussions followed by
oralorformalpresentations.Itisinteresting that, per the average score, not
one of the classroom-learning activitieswasviewedbystudentsasinvolving a skill set of less-than-moderate
personal competence. The combination of feed-forward information and
feedbackinformationprovidedthrough
our in-depth interviews and revised
end-of-semester survey helped us to
better identify core-course areas and
capstone-course activities with which
morestudentsneededassistance.
Our in-depth interviews with students entering the capstone course led
to questions concerning how capstone
course instructors might better understand and cope with such student dispositionsinfluencingtheirlearningprocessesandoutcomesasrevealedinthe
interviews. Although aforementioned
dispositional measures might be used
by capstone faculty for early information on student dispositions, an instrumentcalledtheMotivatedStrategiesfor
Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) that
welaterdiscoveredseemedmoreuseful
forourpurposes(Pintrich,Smith,Garcia, & McKeachie, 1991). The MSLQ
provides various subscales that include
not only student perceptions of their
keydispositionsregardingacoursewith
higherorderlearninggoalsbutalsotheir
strategiesandperceivedskillsinpursuingthesecourse-learninggoals.
FurtherQuestionsandConcerns
Feed-forward approaches to assessment in the capstone business course
emphasize issues of student readiness
because these factors can affect learning outcomes. Our focus on student
readiness,includingnotonlytheirexistingknowledgeandskillsbutalsotheir
dispositions and strategies for pursuing higher order learning challenges,
appears to be a distinct contribution to
theemergingliteratureonteachingand
assessmentofcapstonebusinesscourses. However, several questions seem
to warrant further discussion and more
rigorousresearchapproaches
Onecriticalareainwhichmoreinvestigation is necessary is whether many
students actually are ready to tackle
theintegrativelearningdemandsofthe
capstone course. The basic assumption
at the heart of the capstone course is
thatstudentsbringknowledgeandskills
frompreviouscourseswiththemasthey
enterthecapstoneexperience.However,
theliteratureonlearningandknowledge
retention and our own experiences in
the classroom suggest that this degree
of confidence in student readiness for
certain capstone-learning challenges
might not be justified and should be
assessed. We must look at the relationshipbetweenlearningandretention
of core-course concepts and learning
inputs and outcomes in the capstone
course. What are the critical concepts
and skills that students must be taught
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
andthattheyshouldretainfrompreviouscoursestoassuretheirsuccessinthe
capstonecourse?
Onerecommendationrelatedtoefforts
toassessstudentreadinessforcapstone
courses is that educators and researcherssetupframeworksforextensiveand
continuingfeedbacktocore-coursefacultyconcerninghowwellpreparedstudents feel for the capstone experience.
Ifstudentsenteringcapstonecoursesdo
nothaveconfidenceintheirpossession
ofknowledgeandskillsbecauseofcore
business courses, and particularly if
theydonotscorewellenoughonexams
testingsuchlearning,itisimportantfor
educators and researchers to establish
better faculty dialogue on these issues
oflearningandretentionofknowledge.
In exploring these issues at our own
university, our capstone course faculty
members were not confident that corecourse faculty always introduced and
then reinforced the concepts that were
critical for retention and application in
the capstone course. The tendency for
classestobetextbookdriven,withfaculty focusing more on the quantity of
concept coverage from these textbooks
than on the quality of student learning
of basic concepts, can be problematic.
Thispushtocoveralotofmaterialcan
occasionally translate into limited prioritizationandreinforcementofcritical
conceptsandskills.
Dialogue among all faculty who
teach CBK courses, skills courses, and
capstonecoursesiscriticaltoeducators’
identifyingclearlythecoreconceptsand
skills that students should be expected
togainandretainduringtheirprograms.
Oncetheseconceptsandskillsareidentified,facultyshouldreinforcethiskey
material so that students can transfer
their learning to future courses. Identification, agreement, and focus on key
concepts and skills are only the beginning. Educators and researchers must
close the assessment loop concerning the degree to which students gain,
retain, and apply these basic concepts
and skills throughout the business program.Thisclosuredependsoneffective
feedback of assessment information to
faculty who teach core courses and on
linkage of this feedback to changes in
priorities and instructional methods in
thecorebusinesscourses.
Closing the assessment loop is not
easy. Effectively constructed exams
thatassessthedegreetowhichstudents
retainbasicfunctionalorcoreconcepts
andskillsareperhapsthemostobvious
element in assessing student readiness
forcapstonelearningexperiences.There
are arguments favoring standardized
field exams for business students and
those favoring customized exams that
drawonparticularknowledgeandskills
deemedimportantbycapstoneandcore
faculty in a business school. However,
both forms of testing, especially for
assessingstudentreadinessforentering
capstonecourses,tendtofocusmoreon
comprehension and retention of concepts than on higher order learning or
critical-thinking skills. We recommend
early exercises in capstone business
courses that assess student abilities to
recallconceptsandintegratethesebasic
business concepts for problem-solving
purposes, to diagnose student deficiencies for later capstone learning experiencesthattypicallyemphasizeandbuild
ontheseintegrativeskills.
Gatheringgooddataonstudentreadiness for the capstone course is only
one part of the problem. Such student
assessmentisoflittlevalueifindividual
facultymemberswhoteachcorecourses
arereluctanttousethedataforchange.
Thus,successofthisapproachdepends
on the individual faculty’s learning
readiness.Thisreadinessmightinclude
faculty dispositions to expend effort to
linkstudentfeedbacktopossiblechanges in faculty priorities for particular
knowledge or skill applications. It also
involves individualized instructional
methodsthataccountforindividualstudentbackgroundsanddispositions.
Another area for investigation pertainstothekeytheoreticalperspectives
thatmightguideassessmentofthecapstone course. One such area is expectancytheory.Howdostudents’expectations affect their success in learning
outcomesinthecapstonecourse?How
difficult do they expect the class to
be?Howmuchdotheyexpecttohave
to study?What kind of grade do they
expect?Whatroleexpectationsdothey
havefortheinstructorandthemselves?
These student expectations and attitudesneedtobeanalyzedfortheircontinuing influence on student-learning
behaviors and outcomes in the capstone course. One approach would be
through microsurveys of students (a)
when entering the course, (b) about 4
weeksintoit,and(c)whenstudentsare
closetocompletingitandsomemeans
to link each of these microsurveys to
particular respondents. Bergen (2005)
recommendedmicrosurveysorsurgical
surveys for assessment purposes that
focus on relatively few issues and do
not require much time for students to
complete.
Another area that deserves examination is how educators and researchers
assessknowledgeretention,ability,and
the near and far transfers of learning.
How do we assure that we get good
information from student self-report
data?We have experimented with both
standardized and customized testing to
measure learning and retention of students’ knowledge during their business
programs. One dilemma that we have
encountered is the question of how to
get some students to take these exit
examsseriously.Ifscoresontheexams
carrynorewardsorconsequences,how
canweexpectstudentstoputforththeir
best efforts on the exams? If there are
to be rewards or consequences, what
shouldthesebetomotivatestudentsto
do their best and to assure that we get
goodassessmentdata?
Another student self-report issue
is the presence of Keillor’s (1989)
LakeWobegoneffect:“Allthewomen
are beautiful and all the children are
aboveaverage”(p.249).Collegestudents—because of earlier academic
successes, grade inflation, and external references such as parental messages—often do see themselves as
above average in many regards.As a
result,somestudentsviewthemselves
as more skilled and knowledgeable
than they actually are. Measures of
student readiness must take this into
account and find a way to focus on
realitiesandstudentperceptions.Surveys, unlike in-depth interviews, can
generatestudentresponsesthatdonot
necessarily reflect student introspection,activethought,orprecisereportingofpersonaldispositions.Foroverallcourseorprogramassessment,we
recommend both direct evidence of
learning,suchastesting,andindirect
January/February2008
145
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
evidence, such as student feedback
concerning their learning challenges
or obstacles through interviews and
surveys (e.g., Huba & Freed, 2000).
Assessment choices and their implementation by capstone-course faculty
do not occur in a vacuum. Both the
culture of the business school and
institution and external forces, such
asaccreditationdemandsorchanging
budgets,canconstrainorinfluencecertain assessment choices by capstone-
business faculty. However, capstonebusiness faculty who are more aware
of assessment approaches and potentials have more opportunity to influence choices for assessing both the
learning in the capstone course and
theoverallbusinessprogram.
Although the revised AACSB standards (2003) emphasize learning
outcomes in the assessment process,
educators and researchers must view
assessmentfromasystemicperspective
and focus not only on such outcomes.
Somethinglikea“balancedscorecard”
approach (Kaplan & Norton, 1992, p.
72) associated with learning assessment for a capstone course and for
an overall business program may be
appropriate.Intheend,anyassessment
approach should take into account the
linkage of outcomes (i.e., feedback
control) to more upstream measures
of both concurrent and feed-forward
controls. More research and guidance
concerning improved approaches and
measuresforassessmentarenecessary
for educators and researchers to pursue student-learning outcomes in the
capstonecoursefromamoresystemic,
multidimensionalperspective.
146
JournalofEducationforBusiness
NOTES
Dr. Stephen L. Payne’s research interests are
business ethics and management and ethics education.
Dr.JanFlynn’sresearchinterestsarebusiness
capstonecoursesandassessment.
Dr. J. Michael Whitfield’s research interests
arepedagogyandbusinesscapstonecourses,strategygovernanceissues,andstrategyissuesrelated
toentrepreneurship.
Correspondence concerning this article should
beaddressedtoDr.StephenL.Payne,Department
ofManagement,GeorgiaCollege&StateUniversity,CampusBox11,Milledgeville,GA31061.
E-mail:steve.payne@gcsu.edu
REFERENCES
Angelo,T.A.,&Cross,K.P.(1993).Classroom
assessmenttechniques:Ahandbookforcollege
teachers.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of
Business International. (2003). Assessment
Standards.RetrievedDecember15,2005,from
http://www.aacsb.edu/resource_centers/assess
ment/standards.asp
Baldwin, T. T., & Ford, K. J. (1988). Transfer
of training:A review and directions for future
research.PersonnelPsychology,43,63–105.
Bembenutty,H.,&Karabenick,S.A.(1998,February).Individualdifferencesinacademicdelay
ofgratification.PaperpresentedattheAnnual
MeetingoftheEasternPsychologicalAssociation,Boston,MA.(ERICDocumentReproductionServicesNo.ED422794)
Bergen,C.(2005).Evaluationandassessmenttools.
RetrievedOctober30,2005,fromhttp://www.carat
.umich.edu/carat/evaluation_assessment_tools
Brockett, R. G., & Hiemstra, R. (1991). Selfdirection in learning: Perspectives in theory,
research,andpractice.London:Routledge.
Cvercko, S. L. (1995).An analysis of the determinantsofnearandfartransferoflearningin
a management-training program. Dissertation
Abstracts International, 56 (02), 520A. (UMI
No.9519882)
Goldstein,I.L.(1993).Traininginorganizations:
Needsassessment,development,andevaluation
(3rded.).PacificGrove,CA:Brooks/Cole.
Guglielmino, L. M. (1978). Development of the
self-directedlearningreadinessscale.DissertationAbstractsInternational,38,6467A.
Halpern,D.F.,&Hakel,M.D.(2003).Applying
the science of learning to the university and
beyond.Change,35(4),36–42.
Howell, W. C., & Cooke, N. J. (1989). Training
the human information processor: A review
of cognitive models. In I. L. Goldstein (Ed.),
Traininganddevelopmentinorganizations(pp.
121–182).SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.
Huba, M. E., & Freed, J. E. (2000). Learner-
centeredassessmentofcollegecampuses:Shiftingthefocusfromteachingtolearning.NeedhamHeights,MA:Allyn&Bacon.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance.HarvardBusinessReview,70,71–79.
Keillor, G. (1989). Leaving home. New York:
Viking.
May, G. L., & Kahnweiler, W. M. (2000). The
effect of mastery practice design on learning
and transfer in behavior modeling training.
PersonnelPsychology,53,353–374.
McCracken,G.(1988).Thelonginterview.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.
McCune,S.K.,Guglielmino,L.M.,&Garcia,G.
(1990).Adultself-directioninlearning:Apreliminarymeta-analyticreadinessscale.InH.B.
Long(Ed.),Advancesinself-directedlearning
research (pp. 145–156). Norman: Oklahoma
Research Center for Continuing Professional
andHigherEducation.
Payne,S.L.,Whitfield,J.M.,&Flynn,J.(2002).
Assessingthebusinesscapstonecoursethrough
a method based on the SOTL and the stakeholderprocess.JournalofEducationforBusiness,78,69–74.
Pintrich,P.R.,Smith,D.A.,Garcia,T.,&McKeachie, W. J. (1991). Motivated Strategies
for Learning Questionnaire. Ann Arbor, MI:
NationalCenterforResearchtoImprovePostsecondaryTeachingandLearning.
Royer, J. M., (1979). Theories of the transfer of
learning.EducationalPsychologist,14,53–69.
Schmitt, N. (2004). Readiness for training standards: Development and validation. Retrieved
November 28, 2005, from http://www.nagb.
org/release/schmitt.doc
Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing.PsychologicalReview,84,127
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Capstone Business Course Assessment: Exploring
Student Readiness Perspectives
Stephen L. Payne , Jan Flynn & J. Michael Whitfield
To cite this article: Stephen L. Payne , Jan Flynn & J. Michael Whitfield (2008) Capstone
Business Course Assessment: Exploring Student Readiness Perspectives, Journal of Education
for Business, 83:3, 141-146, DOI: 10.3200/JOEB.83.3.141-146
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.83.3.141-146
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 54
View related articles
Citing articles: 9 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 11 January 2016, At: 23:05
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
CapstoneBusinessCourseAssessment:
ExploringStudentReadinessPerspectives
STEPHENL.PAYNE
JANFLYNN
J.MICHAELWHITFIELD
GEORGIACOLLEGE&STATEUNIVERSITY
MILLEDGEVILLE,GEORGIA
ABSTRACT.Inadditiontoassessment
ofstudent-learningoutcomesincapstone
businesscourses,anassessmentconcernis
studentreadinessforthesetypicalcapstone
experiences.Areviewofboth(a)theliteratureonlearningretentionorapplication
andstudentdispositionsforundertaking
significantlearningchallengesand(b)
theauthors’preliminarydatacollection
andanalysisledtheauthorstoquestion
traditionalassumptionsregardingintegrativelearningpotentialsforsomestudents
enteringthecapstonebusinesscourse.The
authorsrecommendformsoffeed-forward
controls,concurrentcontrols,andfeedback
controlsforcapstonecoursestoenable
businesseducatorstoassessstudentlearningfromamoresystemicperspective.
Keywords:capstonebusinesscourses,
learningassessment,learningreadiness,
learningretention,studentdispositions
Copyright©2008HeldrefPublications
C
oncernformoreeffectiveassessment or assurance of learning is
evidentinrecentAssociationtoAdvance
CollegiateSchoolsofBusinessInternational(AACSB;2003)guidelines.Capstone courses within business schools
offeruniqueassessmentpotentials.The
capstoneexperiencecanbeviewedasa
keyassessmentopportunityforevaluatingoverallstudent-learningoutcomesin
abusinessschool.
Unlike commercially available or
locallyconstructedcomprehensivefield
exams for measuring student knowledge of business school concepts, the
capstone course provides an option to
measure such students’ knowledge and
theextenttowhichstudentsarecapable
ofdemonstratinghigherordercognitive
dimensionsoflearning,suchassynthesisandevaluationofbusinessconcepts.
The capstone course experience also
offers assessment potentials regarding
the affective and skills-based dimensionsofstudentlearning.
Since 2000, we have used a stakeholder approach and the scholarship
of the teaching and learning processes
(Payne, Whitfield, & Flynn, 2002) to
assess the capstone course in our business school. From the perspective of
control theory (Wiener, 1948), most of
ourearlyassessmenteffortsinthecapstone course focused on feedback controls or after-the-fact information from
sources such as surveys, grades, cap-
stonefailurerates,andstudentscoreson
a national comprehensive business exit
exam.Althoughtheseinitiativesprovided useful information, we recognized
that additional forms of control would
provide a more integrated perspective
onoverallstudentlearningrelatedtothe
capstonecourse.Tothisend,webegan
to reconsider concurrent controls with
a focus on the learning processes in a
student’scapstonecourseexperience.
There are three basic types of management controls that are covered in
introductory management textbooks:
feed-forward, concurrent, and feedback controls. In this application, controls can be established before (feed-
forward),during(concurrent),andafter
(feedback) student work or learning in
the classroom. We explored feed-forward controls to understand issues of
students’ readiness for undertaking the
higher level and integrative-learning
activities in the capstone course. Our
exploration of issues of student readiness involved questions concerning
(a) the extent to which students have
the necessary background knowledge,
skills, and dispositions to succeed in
the capstone course (i.e., feed-forward
control) and (b) whether students are
able to apply those skills, knowledge,
anddispositionstothecapstoneexperience(i.e.,concurrentcontrol).Therehas
been significant scholarship on assessing learning outcomes and processes.
January/February2008
141
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
Much less has been written about the
influenceofstudents’readinessontheir
successful outcomes in more advanced
andintegratedlearningenvironments.
Inthisarticle,wesummarizeconcepts
fromtheliteratureonlearningreadiness
thatarerelevanttoanintegratedcontrol
theory approach to overall assessment
ofthecapstonecourse.Wealsodescribe
pilot processes that we investigated to
gain different assessment-related student feedback and recommend that
educators undertake a more systemic
approachtoassessmentofthecapstone
learningexperience.
IssuesofStudentRetention
andDispositions
Two key concerns related to assessment of students’ readiness for a capstonebusinesscourseare(a)theirretentionofrelevantknowledgeandskillsand
(b) their disposition or motivation for
retrievingandapplyingsuchknowledge
and skills for the demands for higher
levellearninginacapstonecourse.The
efforts of previous researchers in variousacademicfieldshaveledustoboth
ofthesereadinessconcerns.
RetentionofKnowledgeandSkills
A key assumption underlying the
design of academic programs in most
business schools is that students who
successfully complete core courses in
functionalbusinessareasshouldbeable
toretainandapplysuchknowledgeand
skillseffectivelyforintegrativeorcapstone business courses. On the basis
of student feedback from our existing
assessmentsurveysandpersonalexperiencesinteachingcapstonecourses,we
began to question the extent to which
actualstudentretentionandapplication
of learning from core courses justified
faith in this conventional assumption.
In exploring issues related to studentlearning retention and readiness, we
foundacademicscholarshipinthefields
of cognitive psychology particularly
helpful. Cognitive psychologists have
conducted research on the degree to
which students hold in memory previously encountered information and the
degree to which they can then access
and transfer this previous learning for
new challenges (May & Kahnweiler,
142
JournalofEducationforBusiness
2000).Royer(1979),forexample,contrasts “near transfer” (p. 54) and “far
transfer”(p.55)oflearning.Neartransfer of learning occurs when a stimulus
thatissimilartoanearlieroneproduces
roughlythesamelearnedresponse.Far
transferinvolvesstudentretention,synthesis,andcreativeapplicationoflearning from several previous experiences
for somewhat different or just-related
stimuliorchallenges.
Other learning models in the field
of cognitive psychology describe an
advanced stage of learning. At this
advanced stage, there is a depth of
retained knowledge and skills and an
“automaticity”(Goldstein,1993,p.110)
in accessing earlier learning (Howell
& Cooke, 1989; Shiffrin & Schneider,
1977). This automaticity allows the
conscious mind to focus on different
aspects of new and more integrative
or demanding learning tasks. May and
Kahnweiler (2000) stressed that inadequate initial learning can be a major
handicapforstudentsstrivingformore
advanced stages of transfer of knowledgeandskills.Withoutsomedepthof
initiallearning,studentsdonothavethe
capacitytoretrieveneededconceptsor
skills and are not prepared for higher
orderlearninginadvancedcourses.
InfluenceofStudentLearning
Dispositions
Learning is a function not only of
individuals’existingorretainedknowledge and skills but also their dispositions for future learning. Individual
studentdispositionstowardlearningare
keyelementsinanysystemicoverview
of assessment in the capstone course.
Baldwin and Ford (1988) examined
knowledgeretentionandlearningtransfer from a perspective of personnel
psychology and training. The actual
learning of participants in their study
wasstronglyaffectedbyboththeindividual characteristics of learners and
the elements of the learning environment. Among the particular individual
characteristicsidentifiedasimportantto
learning were dispositions such as the
individual’sneedforachievement,locus
of control, confidence, desire to succeed, and perception of the particular
benefitsofthetrainingprogram.
A key element necessary for knowledge retention and transfer of learning,
accordingtoHalpernandHakel(2003),
isself-efficacy,thebeliefinone’sselfto
accomplishthetaskathand.Beyondpsychometricinstrumentsorscalesformeasuring self-confidence or self-efficacy,
a course assessment tool that Angelo
andCross(1993)describedisa“courserelated self-confidence” (pp. 275–279)
survey for college students. However,
self-confidence alone—without other
dispositional measures, such as selfcontrol—appears to have limited value
in predicting actual learning outcomes.
Excessive self-confidence, for example,
canoccasionallyreducethecognitiveor
affectivedissonancethatisoftenassociated with many higher learning challenges. Cvercko (1995) explored the
concept of trainee motivation for learningbyusingaframeworkofexpectancy
theory. Investigating variables associated with expectancy theory, she found
that these variables were predictive of
near and far transfers of learning in a
management training program. Schmitt
(2004)exploredmeasuresofhighschool
student readiness for college-learning
experiences, borrowing from this personnelpsychologyandtrainingliterature
and also applying an expectancy theory
approach(Vroom,1964).
Inthefieldofandragogy,orthestudy
ofadultlearning,researchershaveintroducedanddevelopedscalesandmeasures
to focus on various student dispositions
related to learning. The concept of selfdirectedlearningreadinessisoneexample. McCune, Guglielmino, and Garcia
(1990) stated that the Self-Directed
Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS),
developed initially by Guglielmino
(1978), appears to measure student
dispositions such as love of learning,
self-conceptasaneffectiveindependent
learner, tolerance of risk, ambiguity
and complexity in learning, creativity,
viewoflearningasalifelongandbeneficial process, initiative in learning,
self-understanding, and acceptance of
responsibility for one’s own learning.
BrockettandHiemstra(1991)described
a more restricted approach than the
SDLRS that measures the assumption of personal responsibility or the
self-control of students in response to
various learning challenges. Related
instrumentsorscalesthatmightprovide
feed-forward information on student
dispositionorreadinessincludevarious
forms of emotional intelligence (Tucker, Sojka, Barone, & McCarthy, 2000)
and the Academic Delay of Gratification Scale (Bembenutty & Karabenick,
1998). We used the latter instrument
and a motivational skills-and-strategies
questionnaire to assess students’ motivationaltendencies,cognitivestrategies,
andself-regulatorylearningstrategiesto
obtainacademicachievement.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
MethodandResults
Backgroundreadingandexperiencein
teaching the capstone course led us to
question the degree to which some of
ourstudentsretainedknowledgefromthe
commonbodyofknowledge(CBK)businesscoursesandthedegreetowhichsome
ofourstudentsweredisposedtoundertake
the higher learning challenges of most
capstonecourses.Toexploretheseissues,
wedevelopedseveralpreliminarylinesof
inquiry regarding the levels of retention
anddispositionsthatourstudentsbrought
tothecapstonecourse.
Core-CourseRetentionAnalysis
Oneofthefirstquestionsweinvestigated was the extent to which students
retained basic concepts that they had
earlier seemed to comprehend in their
CBKcourses.Toaddressthisquestion,
we enlisted the aid of colleagues who
teachCBKcourses.Inall,50undergraduatestudentsintwosectionsofanintroductorymanagementcourseand36studentsintwosectionsofanintroductory
businessfinancecoursetookexamsfor
gradedcreditearlyinthespringsemesterof2005.Individualinstructorsdeveloped and administered these multiple-
choice or short-answer exams as part
of their normal course activities and
covered basic course concepts deemed
important by the instructor.At the end
of that semester, instructors readministeredthesamequestionscoveringthese
concepts to see how much information
the 86 students had retained over the
course of the semester. Students were
notinformedthattheywouldberetested
ontheinitialinformation.
Usingasimplemeasureofthenumber
of questions answered correctly by the
samestudentonbothinitialandfollowuptests,wefoundthat,onaverage,only
70%ofthequestionsansweredcorrectly
onthefirsttestwereansweredcorrectly
in later testing. Even with its limited
natureandwithoutgreatrigor,thisindicationofthelackofknowledgeretention
atthissimplelevelinourCBKcourses
raisedconcern.Multiple-choiceorfill-inthe-blankquestionsusuallytargetlower
levellearningorbasicrecallofconcepts
orvocabulary.Evenatthisbasiclevelof
learning,resultssuggesta30%decrease
intheretentionrateofcore-courseconceptsoverthespaceofonlyweeksorless
than 2 months. If students are retaining
only70%oftheirlowerlevelcore-course
knowledge over this short time span, it
is not realistic to expect that students
enter the capstone experience, usually
the last course in their college career,
with a minimal base in some fields for
thehigherorderlearningnecessarytobe
successfulatthecapstonelevel.
Although more rigorous study
wouldbeneededforverificationofor
inference beyond these local results,
we argue that initial learning of key
core-course concepts needs to be
significantly reinforced or improved
for students to perform better in the
capstone course. This is particularly
important because more serious erosion of knowledge will most likely
occur in the time between completion
of the CBK courses and entry into
the capstone course. If some students
do not learn core-course concepts and
if those concepts are not reinforced
throughouttheCBKcurriculumtopromote retention and deeper learning,
then serious constraints exist against
higher level learning that is based on
analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of
core-courseconcepts.Thisassumption
ofstudents’abilitytoengageinhigher
order integrated learning is central to
the role of the capstone course in the
business school curriculum. Without
a focus on quality and depth of learning at the lower CBK course levels
and without better feed-forward controlsystemstoassessstudentlearning
and retention from these lower level
courses,educatorsandresearchersmay
have to reconsider the idea of the traditionalcapstonecourseanditsrolein
studentlearning.
MotivationandDispositionalAnalysis
The literature on individual attitudes, motivations, and dispositions
toward learning and learning outcomes
encouraged us to explore perceptions
thatstudentshadregardingtheirexperiences with core and capstone courses.
Weconductedin-depthinterviewswith
studentsenteringcapstonecoursesconcerning their perceived learning goals,
perceivedobstaclesinthepathoftheir
learning,andideasofhowfacultymight
help them overcome these obstacles.
We disseminated information regarding interview opportunities to students
throughe-mailprecedingthecourseand
through announcements in initial sessionsofthecapstonecourse.Weasked
studentstovolunteerfortheinterviews
andpaidthem$10fortheirtime.Atotal
of 12 students volunteered in the time
frame allotted and was interviewed by
another faculty member teaching the
capstone course. All interviews were
taped with student permission. Most
interviews lasted between 45 and 60
min. The university’s institutional
review board approved the questions
and procedures used to gather this
information. The interviews were transcribed from the tapes and analyzed
by using a qualitative process for indepth or intense interviews suggested
byMcCracken(1988).
Of the 12 students interviewed, 8
emphasized learning knowledge and
skills necessary for success in future
work settings as a primary goal for all
coursework,includingworkinthecapstone course. A few students stressed
shorter term and more specific goals
suchasgettingagoodgrade,keepinga
scholarship,orpassingacertifiedpublic
accountant (CPA) exam. Other goals
mentionedby1or2individualsincluded areas of skill development such as
time management, speaking and communicating in business contexts, and
knowledgeofcurrentbusinessenvironmentsorevents.
Among the most common learning
barriers mentioned by students were
difficultyinretainingmaterialcovered,
both in earlier courses and in courses
within the semester, not enough time
for necessary study, and faculty who
had not required integrative or higher
January/February2008
143
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
order learning. Other barriers identified were laziness in individual studentsandalackoftheirownabilityto
thinkcritically.Severallearningbarriers
mentionedbystudentsinvolvedfacultyrelated concerns. Among those issues
mentionedbythestudentswerelackof
clarityoflearninggoalsforsomecourses,lackofeffectivefacultyfeedbackon
studentassignments,lackofintegration
ofconceptsacrosscourses,andfaculty
teaching methods that do little to help
theretentionofknowledge.
In particular, students were asked
what,ifany,obstaclesexistedforthem
infourtypesoflearningactivitiescommon in the capstone course: classroom
discussion, team projects, traditional
testing, and written assignments. Several students stated that they were shy
or lacked the confidence necessary to
speak or interact significantly in openclassroomdiscussions.Abouthalfofthe
students reported having had generally
positive group-learning experiences,
but more than half of the respondents
reported group-learning experiences
that were frustrating and involved difficultbarriersforthemtoovercome.
Most of the students interviewed
indicated concerns about testing as a
learning barrier for them. For written
assignments, several students reported
encountering obstacles such as vague
assignment goals, lack of a rubric in
evaluations of assignments, lack of
feedbackontheseassignments,lackof
adequatestudentknowledgeonhowto
conductresearch,difficultyofthecritical-
thinkingdemandsofsomeassignments,
and difficulty expressing their ideas
appropriately.
All students we interviewed made
comments concerning how faculty
could remove obstacles in the path
of their learning goals. Generally, the
students prefaced their comments by
indicatingoverallsatisfactionwithcurrent business-faculty practices and that
their suggestions applied to few faculty members. Suggestions for faculty
includedincreasedclarityandrelevance
of learning expectations, better feedback on student work, and improved
facultyattitudesofcareforstudentsand
towardhelpingstudents.
Results from our initial efforts to
collect and analyze data related to
144
JournalofEducationforBusiness
student retention and dispositions led
to specific changes in our planning
and assessment activities in the capstonecourse.Additionalquestionsand
broader concerns regarding overall
assessmentwerealsoraised.
Discussion
DirectImplicationsofResearch
Since 2000, we have been collecting
information from capstone students at
the end of each semester and asking
themwhichCBKareastheyfoundthemselvesrevisitingandstudyingmoreduringthecapstonecourse.Onthebasisof
ourretentionanalysisandin-depthinterviews, we revised our previous assessment survey to include two new items
askingstudentsto(a)ratetheirperceived
level of knowledge retention from core
orfunctionalcourseareasand(b)evaluatetheirperceiveddegreeofcompetence
infivecommontypesoflearningactivitiesinbusinesscapstonecourses.
Asaresultoftheircapstone-learning
experiences, 40 students from two
sections of the course with different
instructors expressed less confidence
in their retention of knowledge in
the areas of finance, accounting, and
economics. In comparison, areas of
management and marketing showed
a greater level of confidence. In the
classroom skills areas, speaking and
writing skills showed the highest levels of student confidence. Students
reported the least confidence in their
ability to do well on exams and in
open classroom discussion. The areas
of relatively greater confidence were
small-group discussions followed by
oralorformalpresentations.Itisinteresting that, per the average score, not
one of the classroom-learning activitieswasviewedbystudentsasinvolving a skill set of less-than-moderate
personal competence. The combination of feed-forward information and
feedbackinformationprovidedthrough
our in-depth interviews and revised
end-of-semester survey helped us to
better identify core-course areas and
capstone-course activities with which
morestudentsneededassistance.
Our in-depth interviews with students entering the capstone course led
to questions concerning how capstone
course instructors might better understand and cope with such student dispositionsinfluencingtheirlearningprocessesandoutcomesasrevealedinthe
interviews. Although aforementioned
dispositional measures might be used
by capstone faculty for early information on student dispositions, an instrumentcalledtheMotivatedStrategiesfor
Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) that
welaterdiscoveredseemedmoreuseful
forourpurposes(Pintrich,Smith,Garcia, & McKeachie, 1991). The MSLQ
provides various subscales that include
not only student perceptions of their
keydispositionsregardingacoursewith
higherorderlearninggoalsbutalsotheir
strategiesandperceivedskillsinpursuingthesecourse-learninggoals.
FurtherQuestionsandConcerns
Feed-forward approaches to assessment in the capstone business course
emphasize issues of student readiness
because these factors can affect learning outcomes. Our focus on student
readiness,includingnotonlytheirexistingknowledgeandskillsbutalsotheir
dispositions and strategies for pursuing higher order learning challenges,
appears to be a distinct contribution to
theemergingliteratureonteachingand
assessmentofcapstonebusinesscourses. However, several questions seem
to warrant further discussion and more
rigorousresearchapproaches
Onecriticalareainwhichmoreinvestigation is necessary is whether many
students actually are ready to tackle
theintegrativelearningdemandsofthe
capstone course. The basic assumption
at the heart of the capstone course is
thatstudentsbringknowledgeandskills
frompreviouscourseswiththemasthey
enterthecapstoneexperience.However,
theliteratureonlearningandknowledge
retention and our own experiences in
the classroom suggest that this degree
of confidence in student readiness for
certain capstone-learning challenges
might not be justified and should be
assessed. We must look at the relationshipbetweenlearningandretention
of core-course concepts and learning
inputs and outcomes in the capstone
course. What are the critical concepts
and skills that students must be taught
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
andthattheyshouldretainfrompreviouscoursestoassuretheirsuccessinthe
capstonecourse?
Onerecommendationrelatedtoefforts
toassessstudentreadinessforcapstone
courses is that educators and researcherssetupframeworksforextensiveand
continuingfeedbacktocore-coursefacultyconcerninghowwellpreparedstudents feel for the capstone experience.
Ifstudentsenteringcapstonecoursesdo
nothaveconfidenceintheirpossession
ofknowledgeandskillsbecauseofcore
business courses, and particularly if
theydonotscorewellenoughonexams
testingsuchlearning,itisimportantfor
educators and researchers to establish
better faculty dialogue on these issues
oflearningandretentionofknowledge.
In exploring these issues at our own
university, our capstone course faculty
members were not confident that corecourse faculty always introduced and
then reinforced the concepts that were
critical for retention and application in
the capstone course. The tendency for
classestobetextbookdriven,withfaculty focusing more on the quantity of
concept coverage from these textbooks
than on the quality of student learning
of basic concepts, can be problematic.
Thispushtocoveralotofmaterialcan
occasionally translate into limited prioritizationandreinforcementofcritical
conceptsandskills.
Dialogue among all faculty who
teach CBK courses, skills courses, and
capstonecoursesiscriticaltoeducators’
identifyingclearlythecoreconceptsand
skills that students should be expected
togainandretainduringtheirprograms.
Oncetheseconceptsandskillsareidentified,facultyshouldreinforcethiskey
material so that students can transfer
their learning to future courses. Identification, agreement, and focus on key
concepts and skills are only the beginning. Educators and researchers must
close the assessment loop concerning the degree to which students gain,
retain, and apply these basic concepts
and skills throughout the business program.Thisclosuredependsoneffective
feedback of assessment information to
faculty who teach core courses and on
linkage of this feedback to changes in
priorities and instructional methods in
thecorebusinesscourses.
Closing the assessment loop is not
easy. Effectively constructed exams
thatassessthedegreetowhichstudents
retainbasicfunctionalorcoreconcepts
andskillsareperhapsthemostobvious
element in assessing student readiness
forcapstonelearningexperiences.There
are arguments favoring standardized
field exams for business students and
those favoring customized exams that
drawonparticularknowledgeandskills
deemedimportantbycapstoneandcore
faculty in a business school. However,
both forms of testing, especially for
assessingstudentreadinessforentering
capstonecourses,tendtofocusmoreon
comprehension and retention of concepts than on higher order learning or
critical-thinking skills. We recommend
early exercises in capstone business
courses that assess student abilities to
recallconceptsandintegratethesebasic
business concepts for problem-solving
purposes, to diagnose student deficiencies for later capstone learning experiencesthattypicallyemphasizeandbuild
ontheseintegrativeskills.
Gatheringgooddataonstudentreadiness for the capstone course is only
one part of the problem. Such student
assessmentisoflittlevalueifindividual
facultymemberswhoteachcorecourses
arereluctanttousethedataforchange.
Thus,successofthisapproachdepends
on the individual faculty’s learning
readiness.Thisreadinessmightinclude
faculty dispositions to expend effort to
linkstudentfeedbacktopossiblechanges in faculty priorities for particular
knowledge or skill applications. It also
involves individualized instructional
methodsthataccountforindividualstudentbackgroundsanddispositions.
Another area for investigation pertainstothekeytheoreticalperspectives
thatmightguideassessmentofthecapstone course. One such area is expectancytheory.Howdostudents’expectations affect their success in learning
outcomesinthecapstonecourse?How
difficult do they expect the class to
be?Howmuchdotheyexpecttohave
to study?What kind of grade do they
expect?Whatroleexpectationsdothey
havefortheinstructorandthemselves?
These student expectations and attitudesneedtobeanalyzedfortheircontinuing influence on student-learning
behaviors and outcomes in the capstone course. One approach would be
through microsurveys of students (a)
when entering the course, (b) about 4
weeksintoit,and(c)whenstudentsare
closetocompletingitandsomemeans
to link each of these microsurveys to
particular respondents. Bergen (2005)
recommendedmicrosurveysorsurgical
surveys for assessment purposes that
focus on relatively few issues and do
not require much time for students to
complete.
Another area that deserves examination is how educators and researchers
assessknowledgeretention,ability,and
the near and far transfers of learning.
How do we assure that we get good
information from student self-report
data?We have experimented with both
standardized and customized testing to
measure learning and retention of students’ knowledge during their business
programs. One dilemma that we have
encountered is the question of how to
get some students to take these exit
examsseriously.Ifscoresontheexams
carrynorewardsorconsequences,how
canweexpectstudentstoputforththeir
best efforts on the exams? If there are
to be rewards or consequences, what
shouldthesebetomotivatestudentsto
do their best and to assure that we get
goodassessmentdata?
Another student self-report issue
is the presence of Keillor’s (1989)
LakeWobegoneffect:“Allthewomen
are beautiful and all the children are
aboveaverage”(p.249).Collegestudents—because of earlier academic
successes, grade inflation, and external references such as parental messages—often do see themselves as
above average in many regards.As a
result,somestudentsviewthemselves
as more skilled and knowledgeable
than they actually are. Measures of
student readiness must take this into
account and find a way to focus on
realitiesandstudentperceptions.Surveys, unlike in-depth interviews, can
generatestudentresponsesthatdonot
necessarily reflect student introspection,activethought,orprecisereportingofpersonaldispositions.Foroverallcourseorprogramassessment,we
recommend both direct evidence of
learning,suchastesting,andindirect
January/February2008
145
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:05 11 January 2016
evidence, such as student feedback
concerning their learning challenges
or obstacles through interviews and
surveys (e.g., Huba & Freed, 2000).
Assessment choices and their implementation by capstone-course faculty
do not occur in a vacuum. Both the
culture of the business school and
institution and external forces, such
asaccreditationdemandsorchanging
budgets,canconstrainorinfluencecertain assessment choices by capstone-
business faculty. However, capstonebusiness faculty who are more aware
of assessment approaches and potentials have more opportunity to influence choices for assessing both the
learning in the capstone course and
theoverallbusinessprogram.
Although the revised AACSB standards (2003) emphasize learning
outcomes in the assessment process,
educators and researchers must view
assessmentfromasystemicperspective
and focus not only on such outcomes.
Somethinglikea“balancedscorecard”
approach (Kaplan & Norton, 1992, p.
72) associated with learning assessment for a capstone course and for
an overall business program may be
appropriate.Intheend,anyassessment
approach should take into account the
linkage of outcomes (i.e., feedback
control) to more upstream measures
of both concurrent and feed-forward
controls. More research and guidance
concerning improved approaches and
measuresforassessmentarenecessary
for educators and researchers to pursue student-learning outcomes in the
capstonecoursefromamoresystemic,
multidimensionalperspective.
146
JournalofEducationforBusiness
NOTES
Dr. Stephen L. Payne’s research interests are
business ethics and management and ethics education.
Dr.JanFlynn’sresearchinterestsarebusiness
capstonecoursesandassessment.
Dr. J. Michael Whitfield’s research interests
arepedagogyandbusinesscapstonecourses,strategygovernanceissues,andstrategyissuesrelated
toentrepreneurship.
Correspondence concerning this article should
beaddressedtoDr.StephenL.Payne,Department
ofManagement,GeorgiaCollege&StateUniversity,CampusBox11,Milledgeville,GA31061.
E-mail:steve.payne@gcsu.edu
REFERENCES
Angelo,T.A.,&Cross,K.P.(1993).Classroom
assessmenttechniques:Ahandbookforcollege
teachers.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of
Business International. (2003). Assessment
Standards.RetrievedDecember15,2005,from
http://www.aacsb.edu/resource_centers/assess
ment/standards.asp
Baldwin, T. T., & Ford, K. J. (1988). Transfer
of training:A review and directions for future
research.PersonnelPsychology,43,63–105.
Bembenutty,H.,&Karabenick,S.A.(1998,February).Individualdifferencesinacademicdelay
ofgratification.PaperpresentedattheAnnual
MeetingoftheEasternPsychologicalAssociation,Boston,MA.(ERICDocumentReproductionServicesNo.ED422794)
Bergen,C.(2005).Evaluationandassessmenttools.
RetrievedOctober30,2005,fromhttp://www.carat
.umich.edu/carat/evaluation_assessment_tools
Brockett, R. G., & Hiemstra, R. (1991). Selfdirection in learning: Perspectives in theory,
research,andpractice.London:Routledge.
Cvercko, S. L. (1995).An analysis of the determinantsofnearandfartransferoflearningin
a management-training program. Dissertation
Abstracts International, 56 (02), 520A. (UMI
No.9519882)
Goldstein,I.L.(1993).Traininginorganizations:
Needsassessment,development,andevaluation
(3rded.).PacificGrove,CA:Brooks/Cole.
Guglielmino, L. M. (1978). Development of the
self-directedlearningreadinessscale.DissertationAbstractsInternational,38,6467A.
Halpern,D.F.,&Hakel,M.D.(2003).Applying
the science of learning to the university and
beyond.Change,35(4),36–42.
Howell, W. C., & Cooke, N. J. (1989). Training
the human information processor: A review
of cognitive models. In I. L. Goldstein (Ed.),
Traininganddevelopmentinorganizations(pp.
121–182).SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.
Huba, M. E., & Freed, J. E. (2000). Learner-
centeredassessmentofcollegecampuses:Shiftingthefocusfromteachingtolearning.NeedhamHeights,MA:Allyn&Bacon.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance.HarvardBusinessReview,70,71–79.
Keillor, G. (1989). Leaving home. New York:
Viking.
May, G. L., & Kahnweiler, W. M. (2000). The
effect of mastery practice design on learning
and transfer in behavior modeling training.
PersonnelPsychology,53,353–374.
McCracken,G.(1988).Thelonginterview.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.
McCune,S.K.,Guglielmino,L.M.,&Garcia,G.
(1990).Adultself-directioninlearning:Apreliminarymeta-analyticreadinessscale.InH.B.
Long(Ed.),Advancesinself-directedlearning
research (pp. 145–156). Norman: Oklahoma
Research Center for Continuing Professional
andHigherEducation.
Payne,S.L.,Whitfield,J.M.,&Flynn,J.(2002).
Assessingthebusinesscapstonecoursethrough
a method based on the SOTL and the stakeholderprocess.JournalofEducationforBusiness,78,69–74.
Pintrich,P.R.,Smith,D.A.,Garcia,T.,&McKeachie, W. J. (1991). Motivated Strategies
for Learning Questionnaire. Ann Arbor, MI:
NationalCenterforResearchtoImprovePostsecondaryTeachingandLearning.
Royer, J. M., (1979). Theories of the transfer of
learning.EducationalPsychologist,14,53–69.
Schmitt, N. (2004). Readiness for training standards: Development and validation. Retrieved
November 28, 2005, from http://www.nagb.
org/release/schmitt.doc
Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing.PsychologicalReview,84,127