DEBATE AS A METHOD FOR LEARNING IN AN MBA PROGRAM

Darrell D. Bowman, PhD

University of Indianapolis

School of Business

1400 East Hanna Avenue

Indianapolis, IN. 46227, USA

dbowman@uindy.edu

[Type text]

Abstract

Inspiring learning through active participation in a Master in Business Administration (MBA)

technology course is difficult. The traditional lecture and testing method reduces student learning

to a passive experience. For three years debates have integrated into an MBA course at the

University of Indianapolis to promote more participation for students and present more challenge

to learning. This paper presents the findings of research which investigated the effectiveness of

debates in the classroom.

[Type text]

Introduction to Teaching Technology Strategy to MBA Students

Presenting technology topics to students is always a challenge. Masters in Business

Administration (MBA) students are usually motivated for a number of reasons, including their

career maturity. According to Tatnall and Reyes (2005) the concepts of managing information

technology are abstract, making them hard to teach in the classroom. There is often an

insufficient frame of reference for students. Information Technology Strategy is not only dealing

with technology issues, and technology terms but also executive management issues, adding

another dimension of abstract concepts.

The teaching model for Information Technology Strategy to MBA students can use the

traditional lecture but keeping students engaged during lecture presents challenges. Students may

not have prepared well for discussion. The course at the University of Indianapolis is usually

taught in the evening when most students have completed a full day of work. Tactile learners,

also known as kinesthetic learners who learn with hands-on activities find lecture difficult as a

learning option (Burrell, Finch, Fisher, Rahim, & Dawson, 2011). It is a challenge to make

classroom sessions interesting to students and provide information of value. According to

Walker and Warhurst (2000) developing innovative learning opportunities in higher education

has become a key task for educators.

Problem Statement

The present perception of the purpose for higher education is to teach subject knowledge and

analytical skills, usually through lecture. Employers have expressed a desire to incorporate skills

such as team work, communication and presentation skills into the graduate curriculum (Walker

& Warhurst, 2005). Keeping graduate students interested in the study topics is as important as it

would be for a student of any age. According to Lyle (2008) dialogic teaching methods are a

[Type text]

good way to increase student interest in a topic and keep students engaged during classroom

sessions.

Classroom Debate at the University of Indianapolis

In 2011 structured debates were included as an assignment in the Information

Technology Strategy course in the MBA program at the University of Indianapolis (Uindy). The

goal for the debates was to create an experiential learning opportunity for students and provide

variety in the course. The debate teams were assigned the first week of the semester. Debate

topics were assigned to each team with one team assigned the Pro position and another team

assigned the Con position. Teams consisted of three or four team members, depending on the

number of people in the class. The debate format is described in appendix A.

Teams were allowed from two to 10 weeks to research and prepare for the debate. The

amount of time allowed depended on when the debate was scheduled within the semester. The

debate topics were topics related to the application of technology and usually students knew very

little about the topic before the assignment. Burrell, Finch, Fisher, Rahim, & Dawson (2011)

refer to the team approach in the classroom as cooperative learning. Cooperative learning is

students working together toward a common goal. In the debate the goal is victory. Victory in the

debate is decided by the audience, which are the students who are not debating at that time.

Team debates encourage collaborative skills by encouraging students to practice and

develop trust, leadership, decision-making, communication, and conflict management skills

(Burrell, et al, 2011). The Uindy debate structured students in the audience to evaluate and rate

each team’s performance after each debate presentation period. At the end of the debate the

points were added for each team and each audience member decided which team won the debate.

The Debate Moderator selected by the professor added the winning votes and announced the

[Type text]

winning team. The professor advised students that the winning team’s grade for the debate would

be higher than the losing team. However, the grade points awarded were based on criteria such as

presentation style, position points and professional appearance.

Walker & Warhurst (2000) discovered debates offered students the opportunity to engage

as learners, and so to develop subject knowledge by reinforcing some of the key themes of the

course.

Methodology

At the end of each semester students were asked to complete a debate survey form. The

primary purpose for the debate was to determine students’ favorability for debates in the class.

The debate questions were intentional kept simple and targeted student engagement in learning.

Survey Constructs:

1. I enjoyed researching and preparing for the debate.

2. I enjoyed participating in the debate presentation.

3. I was challenged while preparing for the debate.

4. I was challenged during the debate presentation.

5. I learned about a new technology or issue because of the debate.

6. The teamwork required by the debate helped me strengthen team skills.

7. I think the debate was an interesting method for learning.

8. The debate structure was good.

9. Before the debate I agreed with the position.

10. I changed my position on the topic after the debate.

11. I have participated in a debate before.

[Type text]

The survey also asked students to add comments to the survey. A scale of 1 to 5 was used for

questions 1 through 9. Questions 10 and 11 requested a “yes” or “no” response. Simple statistical

methods, such as averaging and counts were used to analyze the data collected. A total of 121

students were surveyed over seven 15 week semesters.

Analysis

The first question of the survey; “I enjoyed researching and preparing for the debate”,

returned a response of 4.14 average points out of 5 points. This meant the majority of students

agreed that the debate research and preparation was an enjoyable activity. In a study by Gregory

and Holloway (2005) students reported they enjoyed participating in a debate during a graduate

course. Scott in 2008 found students who participated in structured debates enjoyed the process.

I was challenged while preparing for the debate returned an average of 4.19 students who

agreed. One student commented, “I think this was an excellent way to learn more about a topic.

It really required me to get prepared, so that we would be able to win the debate. I think it might

be a good idea to have each team do two debates during the semester instead of two case

studies.” Another student said, “I really enjoyed having the debates placed intermittently

through the semester. It was a refreshing change in learning styles and definitely a challenge.” At

times it is difficult for professors to challenge a student and keep the challenge interesting.

Therefore students who find an assignment challenging yet enjoyable means the assignment adds

value to the class.

The debate presentation delivers challenges different from debate preparation. Students

must utilize presentation skills and connect to the audience. The audience evaluates the

presenters and the audience opinions are factors in the students’ debate grade.

[Type text]

3.7

3.9

4.1

4.3

4.5

For the question, “I was challenged during the debate presentation”, a rating of 4.3 was

given by students. This overwhelmingly confirms the presentation stage of the debate was

challenging. One of the more interesting comments by a student said, “The debate was

terrifying, but very educational. The fact that one could not be completely prepared, but have to

react in the moment was the scary feature, but it was good experience. I think it is an important

component of the course.”

Students rated “I learned about a new technology or issue because of the debate”, 4.17 of 5

points. Students’ comments supported the effectiveness of the debate as a research tool. “The

debate was extremely interesting and helped me to actually learn about a new topic. It was a

good way to get to know my team members and work with them.” “I thought that the topics

(cloud computing and technology affecting business relationships) that we discussed were very

interesting and relevant to the class.” “I enjoyed working on the debate it allowed me to learn

about a new technology in a fun way.”

[Type text]

The survey question, “I think the debate was an interesting method for learning,” rated 4.52.

The comments from students also support the debate as an interesting way to learn. “I thought

the debate was a fun way to learn about a topic that will be important in the business world over

the next few decades. Doing research allowed me to find out about both sides, not just what I

was preparing to support.”

The debate format created stress during the presentation process. Stress is a fact of life in

business and being able to perform effectively during stress is good experience and valued by

business. Walker & Warhurst (2008) the debate grade contributes to student stress. Debaters

experience stress from the evaluations by their peers. “The pressure of the public presentation

(the form of assessment) seems to have influenced student effort”, (p.15). A student participant

in the Uindy debates stated, “It forced me out of my normal comfort zone, because it wasn’t a

typical Powerpoint presentation.” Another student said, “While debating a topic and

presentations in general are not high on my list of favorite things to do, I can recognize the value

in the critical thinking required participating in a debate.”

Debate participants were asked if their position on a debate topic changed after the

debate. Only 12 percent of the students stated they changed their position on the debate topic

after the debate.

[Type text]

Recommendation for Continued Research

It would be beneficial to determine if the debate caused the student audience to change

their position or belief on a debate topic. Additional research could be conducted to determine

the effectiveness of debate presentations as a persuasion tool. It would also be beneficial to

determine if debaters’ skills improve after a second debate. Gregory & Holloway (2005) claim

that debates can improve a student’s persuasion skills. Unless persuasion skills are measured it is

not conclusive that such skills truly are improved by debates.

Conclusion

Debates used in the Information Technology Strategy course in the University of

Indianapolis MBA program are an effective and out of the ordinary tool for learning in the

classroom. Debates provide experiential opportunities for teamwork, research, critical thinking,

persuasive speech, presentation skills and a self-guided approach to learning. Burrell, et. Al.

(2011) concluded that employers look for graduates who can apply knowledge and problem

[Type text]

17

104

Students Who Changed Po-sition After the Debate

YesNo

solving skills at work. They do not hire workers for their exposure to theories. Knowledge which

can be applied, benefits employers. Theories which cannot be applied are of little benefit.

Saroyan, Dagenais, & Zhou (2009) discovered through research that pedagogical

methods such as lecture put students in a passive learning state but debates allow for experiential

learning. Experiential learning is more likely to be a more effective learning method for subjects

which are typically taught through lecture. A contrasting view, according to Tumposky (2004,

p.3) is that “classroom debate has not been proven to be an effective means for reaching goals

associated with critical thinking, such as peer interaction, analysis, and metacognitive

awareness.” However, Tumposky does not suggest a better method for teaching critical thinking,

such as peer interaction, analysis, and metacognitive awareness. Tumposky believes peer

interaction is more likely to occur in a non-structured environment where students feel

psychologically at ease.

The overall benefits of debate in the Uindy course were favorable and there are

opportunities for continued research.

[Type text]

References

Anderson, L. (2006). BUILDING CONFIDENCE IN CREATIVITY: MBA STUDENTS.

Marketing Education Review, 16(1), 91-96.

Black, L. W. (2005). Dialogue in the Lecture Hall: Teacher–Student Communication and

Students’ Perceptions of Their Learning. Qualitative Research Reports In

Communication, 6(1), 31-40. doi:10.1080/17459430500262125

Boyd, M. P. (2012). PLANNING AND REALIGNING A LESSON IN RESPONSE TO

STUDENT CONTRIBUTIONS. Elementary School Journal, 113(1), 25-51.

Boyd, M., & Markarian, W. C. (2011). Dialogic teaching: talk in service of a dialogic stance.

Language & Education: An International Journal, 25(6), 515-534.

doi:10.1080/09500782.2011.597861

Brown, R., & Murti, G. (2003). Student Partners in Instruction: Third Level Student Participation

in Advanced Business Courses. Journal Of Education For Business, 79(2), 85-89.

Burrell, D., Finch, A., Fisher, J., Rahim, E., & Dawson, M. (2011). THE USE OF ENGAGING

AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING INNOVATIVE TEACHING PRACTICES FOR

GRADUATE STUDENTS. Review Of Higher Education & Self-Learning, 3(11), 45-53.

Gregory, M., & Holloway, M. (2005). The Debate as a Pedagogic Tool in Social Policy for

Social Work Students. Social Work Education, 24(6), 617-637.

doi:10.1080/02615470500182132

Lantis, J. S. (2004). PEDAGOGY IN INTERNATIONAL STUDIES Ethics and Foreign Policy:

Structured Debates for the International Studies Classroom. International Studies

Perspectives, 5(2), 117-133. doi:10.1111/j.1528-3577.2004.00162.x

[Type text]

Lyle, S. (2008). Dialogic Teaching: Discussing Theoretical Contexts and Reviewing Evidence

from Classroom Practice. (Cover story). Language & Education: An International

Journal, 22(3), 222-240. doi:10.2167/le778.0

McNair, V., & Clarke, R. (2007). Effective technology and design teaching: getting it right in the

classroom. International Journal Of Technology & Design Education, 17(3), 271-290.

doi:10.1007/s10798-006-9003-3

Morton, J. J., & Rosse, M. M. (2011). Persuasive presentations in engineering spoken discourse.

Australasian Journal Of Engineering Education, 17(2), 55-65.

Reznitskaya, A. (2012). Dialogic Teaching: Rethinking Language Use During Literature

Discussions. Reading Teacher, 65(7), 446-456. doi:10.1002/TRTR.01066

Saroyan, A., Dagenais, J., & Zhou, Y. (2009). Graduate students’ conceptions of university

teaching and learning: formation for change. Instructional Science, 37(6), 579-600.

doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9071-8

Scott, S. (2008). Perceptions of Students' Learning Critical Thinking through Debate in a

Technology Classroom: A Case Study. Journal Of Technology Studies, 34(1), 39-44.

Short, F., & Martin, J. (2011). Presentation vs. Performance: Effects of Lecturing Style in Higher

Education on Student Preference and Student Learning. Psychology Teaching Review,

17(2), 71-82.

Starkey, L. (2012). Teaching and Learning in the Digital Age. Routledge, Taylor & Francis

Group.

Tatnall, A., & Reyes, G. (2005). Teaching IT Project Management to Postgraduate Business

Students: A Practical Approach. Journal Of Information Technology Education, 4153-

166.

[Type text]

Tessier, J. T. (2009). Classroom Debate Format. College Teaching, 57(3), 144-152.

Tobias, A. J. (1997). Management of technology degrees challenge MBAs. Electronic

Engineering Times (01921541), (937), 105.

Tumposky, N. (2004). The Debate Debate. Clearing House, 78(2), 52-55.

Ulinski, M., & O'Callaghan, S. (2002). A Comparison of MBA Students' and Employers'

Perceptions of the Value of Oral Communication Skills for Employment. Journal Of

Education For Business, 77(4), 193.

Visser, J., & Visser, Y. (2004). Ambiguity,Cognition,Learning, Teaching,and Design.

Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 48(1), 40-43.

Walker[*], M., & Warhurst, C. (2000). `In most classes you sit around very quietly at a table and

get lectured at...:' debates assessment and student learning. Teaching In Higher

Education, 5(1), 33.

Wineburg, S., & Schneider, J. (2009). Was Bloom's Taxonomy Pointed in the Wrong Direction?.

Phi Delta Kappan, 91(4), 56-61.

[Type text]

Appendix AClassroom Debates1

Introduction

The classroom debates are exercises designed to allow you to strengthen your skills in the areas of leadership, interpersonal influence, teambuilding, group problem solving, and oral presentation. Debate topics and position statements are outlined below. Groups may sign up on a first come, first served basis, by specifying both the debate topic and the position desired (i.e., Pro or Con). Note that all groups must have signed up for the debate by the date denoted in the class schedule. All group members are expected to participate in the research, development, and presentation of your debate position. Preparation will require substantial library research. Each participating member will receive the same group grade.

Debate Format

7 minute Position Presentation - Pro7 minute Position Presentation - Con

5 minute Work Period

5 minute Rebuttal - Pro5 minute Rebuttal - Con

3 minute Work Period

3 minute Response - Pro3 minute Response - Con

2 minute Work Period

2 minute Position Summary - Pro or Con2 minute Position Summary - Pro or Con

Tallying of Ballots/Announcement of Winner

Appendix A

1

[Type text]

Debate Procedure

The debate will take the form of timed individual and/or group presentations and responses separated by timed group work periods. The rules applied may deviate from the formal rules of debating. When questions arise, the judgment of the instructor will provide the definitive ruling.

Prior to the beginning of the class period, both teams are to position their desks facing the room. Each team is to write its team name, debate position, and debate position statement on the blackboard behind their desks. Note that absolutely no changes may be made to the position statements presented below. You must argue them exactly as written!

Team members may speak either from their desks or from the podium, as they desire. Audiovisuals may be used at any time, including, but not limited to, handouts, flipcharts, transparencies, slides, audio and videotapes, etc. While a team is not required to use all of the time allocated to each debate component, speakers must stop immediately when the allocated time runs out. Team members are prohibited from speaking to the audience or opposing team except at the times specifically allocated to them. Thus, there can be no immediate, reciprocal interchange of comments between the teams. The sequence of the position summaries will be determined by a random procedure at the conclusion of the final work period. Note that no new information may be introduced during the summary. Doing so may result in disqualification of the offending group. If either team feels that their opponents are introducing new information during the summary, they may challenge them immediately and request a ruling from the instructor.

Selection of Winner(s) and Allocation of Points

The instructor reserves the right to allocate fewer than the default or class voted points to a group, if, in his opinion, the quality of preparation and/or presentation was inadequate.

Debate "Winners" will be selected in two ways, as follows:

Audience Vote: Class members in the audience will vote by secret ballot for a debate winner. Votes are to be based upon presentation quality only, and not upon personal agreement or disagreement with the position espoused. At the conclusion of each component of the debate, class members will be asked to assign a point rating along with explanatory comments to each team for their performance during that component. When the debate is over, the point ratings will be summed. Whichever team has the higher sum will be the winner on that ballot. After all ballots are collected, the number of votes for each team will be announced. Whichever team has more votes will be the winner. In the event of a tie, the instructor’s vote will decide the winner.

Instructors' Vote: The instructor will also evaluate both teams according to the above procedures and criteria, and select his choice for the winner.

[Type text]

Appendix A

DEBATE BALLOT

Debate ______________________________________________ Class _____________

Name of Evaluator ____________________________________ Date _____________

1 2 3 4 5 Poor Fair Average Good Excellent

PRO CON7 Minute Position Presentation

Rating = ____ Comments:

Rating = ____ Comments:

***** 5 Minute Work Period *****

5 Minute Rebuttal

[Type text]

Rating = ____ Comments:

Rating = ____ Comments:

Appendix AContinued on Reverse ---------->

***** 3 Minute Work Period *****

3 Minute Response

Rating = ____ Comments:

Rating = ____ Comments:

***** 2 Minute Work Period *****

2 Minute Position Summary

Rating = ____ Comments:

Rating = ____ Comments:

[ ] Total Points [ ] Total Points

Circle Winner Below:

[Type text]

PRO CONGeneral Comments:

Signature of Evaluator:

[Type text]