Competition in Monopoly: Teaching-Learning Process of Financial Statement Analysis to Information Technology Management Students

Competition in Monopoly: Teaching-Learning Process of Financial Statement Analysis to Information Technology Management Students

Vijayakumar Bharathi S. (Symbiosis Centre for Information Technology, Symbiosis International University, India) and Mugdha Shailendra Kulkarni (Symbiosis Centre for Information Technology, Symbiosis International University, India)
DOI: 10.4018/IJICTE.2020070106

Abstract

This research article investigates the impact of using a Monopoly Board Game (MBG) in the teaching-learning process of financial statement analysis (FSA) to information technology management students, who earlier had little or no finance or accounting prior educational background. The subjects were students (N=159) in an Indian University. The study; first, narrated the process of administering MBG; second, quantitatively analyzed the learning experience through a structured questionnaire to validate the research objectives. The study resulted in the creation of three factor-clusters namely cognizance, collaboration, and enthusiasm which impacted students' MBG learning experience over the traditional teaching-learning methods. Results showed that factors relating to cognizance are more impacting than collaboration and enthusiasm. In the future, this research can be extended to advanced finance courses and can be integrated with relevant educational theories that underpin teaching-learning processes in higher education to other disciplines.
Article Preview
Top

1. Introduction

Exploring and executing creative teaching methods have been the excitement for educators since the distant past (Davies et al., 2013). Educators need to seek pedagogies that can engage the students and foster the process of learning and retention (Becker et al., 2017; Cook-Sather, 2018). How effectively the teacher's contact sessions are engaging enough to facilitate students' learning? How can the teacher orchestrate the classroom conduct to bring out the symphony of knowledge? Several research studies have reinforced the need for a radical shift of the classroom from a teacher-centric cellar to the participant-centric arena (Kim and Davies, 2014). Simulations and online game-based learning have also contributed their share in the learning excitement considerably over the recent past (Kapp, 2012; Abdul Jabbar and Felicia, 2015). If one remembers the pre-computer times, hard-board games were one of the favourite indoor activities which contained the required infrastructure and the objects all in a single box. Some of the board games about trade and commerce-enabled players to not only enjoy the game actively but also understand the underlying business concepts. Administration of board games in classroom teaching fosters collaboration among peers, decision-making skills and creates an engaging classroom environment (Aburahma and Mohamed, 2015; Kangas et al., 2017). Integrating games into pedagogies is imperative to achieve learning outcomes effectively. Games are an integral part of the human experience since evolution and are independent of culture, race, and times. There are challenges in modern-day education, in particular in information technology management education where students aspire to become techno-managers in the information technology industry. Majority of the students who opt for a techno-managerial MBA (Master of Business Administration) are predominantly engineers of computer science and electronics. One of the critical challenges is how to excite these engineers to learn specific management courses such as accounting, statistics, research methodology, and operations research. Though traditional teaching pedagogies such as chalk-and-talk, case studies, and practices have contributed to the classroom experience on the courses stated above, there is a need to adopt innovative ways of teaching-learning to compliment learning excitement and learning retention.

There is less awareness among academia and the industry about the significance of bringing out the right mix of head and hands-on learning. Research works in the past have addressed the failure to bring in suitable interactive teaching approaches which have resulted in learners' boredom, deterrence, and resource wastages. Board games though accepted to be one of the most popularly played games (Bell, 1979; Wolfe, 1993; Gobet et al., 2004; Ramani and Siegler, 2008), its usefulness has not yet been amplified beyond the realms of in-house/in-door entertainment and as a time-pass fulfillment. Alhough board games have gained momentum in the educational field, a vast majority of them are still confined only to young children or at the primary to high school levels (Ramani et al., 2012; Laski and Siegler, 2014). Useful teaching-learning experience should motivate, endow, and instigate student engagement, which is evident generally in all realms of education, yet specifically to topics/courses/curriculum, which are technical and complex.

The Monopoly Board Game (MBG) originated during the early 20th century, is one of the most iconic board games of all times. A real estate trading game, it has always consciously been of a favourite pastime activity during a family gathering, and subconsciously the game can also demonstrate us a lot about certain commercial activities such as cash flows, personal finance, and investments.

Hence, the research questions defined are as under:

  • What factors impact the students of the MBA (IT Business Management) to accept the monopoly board game (MBG) as an interesting way of learning and retaining Finance knowledge?

  • How can board game foster a different learning environment compared to the traditional teaching learning environment?

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Reset
Open Access Articles
Volume 17: 4 Issues (2021): Forthcoming, Available for Pre-Order
Volume 16: 4 Issues (2020): 3 Released, 1 Forthcoming
Volume 15: 4 Issues (2019)
Volume 14: 4 Issues (2018)
Volume 13: 4 Issues (2017)
Volume 12: 4 Issues (2016)
Volume 11: 4 Issues (2015)
Volume 10: 4 Issues (2014)
Volume 9: 4 Issues (2013)
Volume 8: 4 Issues (2012)
Volume 7: 4 Issues (2011)
Volume 6: 4 Issues (2010)
Volume 5: 4 Issues (2009)
Volume 4: 4 Issues (2008)
Volume 3: 4 Issues (2007)
Volume 2: 4 Issues (2006)
Volume 1: 4 Issues (2005)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing