BGA | BUSINESS IMPACT
‘Knowledge was assumed to flow from teacher to student, and the “truth” was controlled by the institution. Students paid
to access this truth’
12
2. Methodology: ‘Unidirectional knowledge transfer’ . Professors and academics shared their expert knowledge with students who would listen, take notes and then reproduce the same information to pass exams. The simple absorption of facts and knowledge by students was the measure of success, rather than the ability to think, debate or create alternative insights. Questions and debate, if any, were limited to after- lecture Q&As and occasional tutorials. 3. Impact: ‘Linear learning’ . Courses were taught in a linear fashion, chronologically and in terms of content. Methods and theories would build on each other in lectures within a set timetable of weeks/months. Testing of knowledge at the end was proof that the learner had been ‘educated’ and impact was measured by the learner’s retention of classroom content.
fixed, structures were clear, and testing was based on theories and models. If we break down the Business School experience into ‘content’, ‘methodology’ and ‘impact’, we can characterise this model as follows:
1. Content: ‘Sage on the stage’ . Traditionally, subject-area professors with years of academic research would teach
content in a lecture setting on campuses that felt like exclusive ‘seats of learning’. Topics were traditional, from accounting to finance, strategy or marketing, reflecting then- prevalent corporate structures in the world’s major economies. Knowledge was assumed to flow from teacher to student, and the ‘truth’ was controlled by the institution. Students paid to access this truth, with little opportunity to challenge the status quo.
Made with FlippingBook - Share PDF online