MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405653485 · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5065258

What Matters for MBA Teaching Quality A Systematic Literature Review of Knowledge Delivery and Teaching Methods

2024· preprint· en· W4405653485 on OpenAlexaff
Lun Li, Linzhuo Wang, Tommi Kärkkäinen, Xiaoyu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Marketing Education
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Knowledge managementMedical educationPsychologyMathematics educationEngineering ethicsComputer scienceEngineeringMedicineEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MBA programs are fundamental to business schools, but recent declines in enrollment and the diminishing value of MBA qualifications, exacerbated by global economic uncertainty, have prompted schools to seek strategies for recovery. To address these challenges, it is crucial to enhance the content, delivery methods, and teaching approaches. Numerous studies highlight the importance of pedagogical content in optimizing MBA programs, as the knowledge conveyed is meant not only to be theoretical but also to guide students in their management practice. Our research demonstrates that combining case-based teaching from experiential learning with simulation-based methods from active learning significantly improves knowledge transfer. Through a systematic literature review, we developed a framework that aligns teaching methods with the content being taught. The findings suggest that accurately characterizing the curriculum content and balancing teaching methods based on different pedagogical approaches can enhance the effectiveness of MBA instruction. These strategies offer potential solutions to counter the current challenges faced by MBA programs and improve their overall impact. By adopting such methods, business schools can better meet the evolving needs of students and the demands of the global business environment.4o

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicManagement and Marketing EducationFrench-language works237,207