Extending the Assessment Option
through Modern Simulations
Suresh L. Gamlath
West London Business School
suresh.gamlath@uwl.ac.uk
Aneesh Banerjee
Cass Business School
aneesh.banerjee.1@cass.city.ac.uk
Summary
• Background and brief history on use of computer
simulations in business education
• Two case studies:
– Using business simulations in teaching, learning and
assessment.
– In executive education (West London Business School)
• Small cohort; heavily supervised learning environment
• Also illustrates how a simulation software package can be adapted
to multiple uses using creative scoring
– In undergraduate education (Cass Business School)
• Large cohort; autonomous learning environment
• Discuss the possible future of simulation use in
education
Business Simulations in Education
A Brief History
• The Earliest Years 1956 – 1963
– Top Management Decision Simulation
• American Management Association © 1955
• Run on IBM 650
• The 60s
– Application to classroom use
– Academics started writing business games for
educational use
A Brief History contd …
• The 70s
– Expansion in use – inclusion of several areas
• David Kolb’s Experiential Learning
• The 80s
– Simulation and assessment of learning
• Parasuraman (1980)
– Simulation games are at best only as good as ‘traditional’ techniques in
making students learn the concepts.
– Simulation games teach students “something” other than what traditional
methods teach them; “something” that cannot be measured by traditional
tests
• The 90s
– Lack of significant relationship between cognitive learning and
simulation performance (Anderson & Lawton, 1992)
Business Simulations in Education
A Brief History contd …
• US Survey of AACSB member schools
Dale & Klasson (1962)
Roberts and Strauss (1975)
Faria (1987)
Faria and Nulsen (1995)
% Using Simulation Games
71%
95%
95%
98%
N
107
107
315
381
Faria & Nulsen (1996)
• Faria & Wellington (2004)
– 31% = current simulation game users
– 17% = former simulation game users
– 52% = never used simulation
UK Trends in Simulation Usage
• Lean et. al. (2006)
– Surveyed staff in UK HE.
– Gaming Simulations
•
•
•
•
Current users = 5.4%
Former users = 9.4%
Never used (would consider) = 64.4%
Never used (would not consider) = 20.8%
– Barriers:
• Resource availability
• Suitability for teaching subject
• Risk of using a simulation to teach
Simulations in the 21st Century Classroom
• Renewed emphasis
– Active learning, (Gentry et. al., 2006)
– Work-experience and employability, (Linser & Rashid, 2011)
• Performance in an externally valid simulation is due to
application of skill rather than simply luck.
– (Wellington and Faria, 1997) , (Gamlath, 2009)
– Traditional assessments tend to be rather blunt in measuring the
unique learning acquired through the simulation.
• Proposition:
– If a simulation is applied to deliver a high fidelity experience of a
phenomenon;
– Then learners will more likely acquire the skills and behaviours of their
‘real-world’ counterparts, through participation in the simulation.
– Assessment criteria should therefore focus on ‘real-world’ skills.
Use in Executive Education
• Getting credit managers to think more strategically
– Institute of Credit Management
• Students
– Middle - senior management level
– Average age 35
• SimVenture software powered two different
simulation assignments
– Corporate strategy and market valuation
– Inter-functional conflict
SimVenture Simulation Software
Corporate strategy and market valuation
•
•
•
•
Played in teams of 4-5
No roles specified - self-organisation
Annual General Meeting & Interim Report
Internal stock exchange
– 5 companies - periodic trading of shares
• 20% stake in each company
– Directors’ stock options
– Cannot change the % holding in each company
– Price of options can change in bidding
• Options exercised at very end of simulation
• 20% of course mark based on simulation score
Inter-functional conflict
• Team of 2-3 players
• Directors: Sales & Marketing; Finance;
Production
• Performance of each role is scored individually
– Sales & Marketing = Sales growth %
– Finance = Liquidity position %
– Production = Efficiency %
• Aim – to create conflict among functions.
Opinion Survey
5 = Strongly Agree …………….. 1 = Strongly Disagree
N=22
Achieving a high simulation score was important to me
4.8
I can easily relate the problems I encountered in the
simulation to my work place
4.5
I've gained new and useful skills as a result of the simualtion
3.2
Simulation experience helped me with my reflection
4.1
Simulation experience helped me with my literary research
2.4
Inter-functional conflict assignment
Assessment Criteria:
Simulation
Case Study
N=22
N=18
Diff.
Survey of Relevant Literature (Weight 40%)
69%
67%
2%
Critical reflection (Weight 40%)
64%
57%
7%
Presentation of report (Weight 20%)
76%
73%
3%
Team Effects
Round 1 – Individual
Each student wrote down list of five
factors in order of importance
These were classified into common
categories by researcher
N = 22
Round 2 – Team
Students were given a pre-list (as above)
and space to add ‘Other’
Two new categories – team
communication & Multi-tasking appeared
N = 22
SimVenture for Undergraduate
Education @ Cass
• Decision to use simulations for undergrads
– Functions of Organisations: Connections, Understanding and Strategy
(FOCUS Module)
– Collaboration with Suresh from UWL
• SimVen for decision making
– Across functions (finance, operations, sales and HR)
– In scenarios of conflict
– Short term tactical to longer term strategic
• Students
– 120 students
– 1st year undergraduates with no or little work experience
– 18 to 20 years age
Simventure as a ‘platform’ to create
market conditions
• Simulation setup
– 3 Stages
• PREP: Practice in your own time, get ready for live
• LIVE: Actual scenario
• REFLECT: Analyse the experience and learning
– 5 member team (CEO and 1 director each for fin, sales, HR and ops)
– Agree on the role of the CEO, strategy for the actual simulation based
on preliminary data
– 2 ‘LIVE’ sessions of 110 mins
• Record decisions in board minutes
• Annual financial reports
– Objective: To run the business for 24 months
• 15% marks on actual results
• 85% marks on quality of board minutes, reports and reflective learning report
The Cass Approach
PREP
LIVE
REFLECT
Familiarity
with the
system
PREP set the
foundation
The financial
results
Familiarity
with the
minutes &
reports
Quality of
minutes
The
shareholders
report
The
evaluation /
marking
scheme
Importance of
role
definitions
Connecting
the dots in an
organizational
set up
Managing
conflict
Outcome – Yet to receive formal
feedback
• High engagement & energy
– 99% attendance, over 3/4th came to class early
– Healthy competition between teams
– High standard of reports
Thank you for listening