journal of marketing education 2007 chonko 111 21

http://jmd.sagepub.com/Journal of Marketing Education

http://jmd.sagepub.com/content/29/2/111The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0273475307302013 2007 29: 111Journal of Marketing Education

Lawrence B. ChonkoA Philosophy of Teaching . . . and More

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Journal of Marketing EducationAdditional services and information for

http://jmd.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://jmd.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jmd.sagepub.com/content/29/2/111.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Jul 30, 2007Version of Record >>

at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on August 30, 2012jmd.sagepub.comDownloaded from

This article presents one educators philosophic answer tothe question Why am I teaching? During the course ofthis article, principles of servant teachership are presented.In addition, some teaching approaches used by the authorare presented.

Keywords: philosophy; teaching; servant leadership; ser-vant teachership; teaching passion

In the midst of my 31st year of teaching college, a studentasked me a question that I had been asked many times,Why are you teaching? For some reason, perhaps age orfelt need to think introspectively, this question led me tothink about my teaching career. The students question pesteredme . . . like the song one cannot stop singing in ones mind.Naturally, this introspection took me to places where I hadnot been before. Unlike before, I began writing things downand organizing them . . . somewhat.

I had previously ventured into this arena, writing articleswith terms like quackery and curmudgeon and phrases likehow you can be in two places at once when you are not any-where at all. But I had never really tackled the question ofDo teachers need a philosophy of teaching? StephenBrookfield (1990) in The Skillful Teacher noted that there arefour primary values to be derived from a teaching philosophy:

1. A teaching philosophy serves a personal purpose. A distinc-tive organizing visiona clear picture of why you are doingwhat you are doing that you can call up at points of crisisiscrucial to your personality sanity and morale (p. 16).

2. A teaching philosophy serves a political purpose. It providesa sense that your position is grounded in a well-developedcarefully conceived philosophy of practice. . . . You aremore likely to gain a measure of respect for your thoughtful-ness and commitment, which is important both for your self-esteem and for your political survival (p. 17).

3. A teaching philosophy serves a professional purpose. A com-mitment to a shared rationale for college teaching is importantfor the development of a collective identity and, hence, forthe development of professional strengths among teachers(pp. 17-18).

4. A teaching philosophy serves a pedagogical purpose. Teachingis about making some kind of dent in the world so that the

world is different than it was before you practiced your craft.Knowing clearly what kind of dent you want to make in theworld means that you must continually ask yourself the mostfundamental evaluative questions of allWhat effect am Ihaving on students and their learning? (pp. 18-19).

The first, third, and fourth are most important to me in myservant teachership philosophy, the subject of this article.

SERVANT TEACHERSHIP:MY PHILOSOPHY AS AN EDUCATOR

The servant leadership literature has its roots inGreenleafs (1977) seminal work in which he asserted thatservant leaders must walk the talk of being servants first.Greenleaf characterized a servant leader this way:

It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve,to serve first. Then, conscious choice brings one to aspireto lead. That person is sharply different from one who is aleader first, perhaps because of need to assuage anunusual power drive or to acquire material possessions.(p. 27)

The servant leader takes great pains to ensure that othersneeds are a priority as depicted in Laubs (1999) definition,Servant leadership is an understanding and practice of lead-ership that places the good of those led over the self-interestof the leader (p. 308A). According to Page and Wong (2000),servant leadership incorporates the ideals of topics such asempowerment, total quality management, team building, par-ticipatory management, initiative, growth and development ofthe person, and a service ethic.

Several core principles of servant leadership are evidentfrom the servant leadership literature and can be applied tostudentsthe belief that all students have dignity and worth,that students are all interconnected, that there exists a real

A Philosophy of Teaching . . . and More

Lawrence B. Chonko

111

Lawrence B. Chonko, PhD (University of Houston), is the HollowayProfessor of Marketing at Baylor University. His research interests includeeducation, business ethics, sales force management, and managing andleading change.

Journal of Marketing Education, Vol. 29 No. 2, August 2007 111-121DOI: 10.1177/0273475307302013 2007 Sage Publications


112 AUGUST 2007

purpose of student affairs (Fiedler & Chemers, 1984). Thisdovetails with current thought about the roots of success oforganizationspeople (e.g., Collins 2001). Following aremy principles of servant teachership, based on these coreprinciples, that in my judgment are worth having and prac-ticing . . . I frequently struggle to live up to them.

SERVANT TEACHERSHIP PRINCIPLE 1:TEACHING MUST BE A SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITY

Education demands a broader focus than outcomes. In openlearning environments answers are appropriate. Studentsmust learn the questions and be given opportunities togrow . . . to think, reason, and muddle . . . with some bestpractice lessons and with opportunities for exploitation andexploration.

There is much talk about students being great assets forthe university (Duke, 2002; Elam & Spotts, 2004). A focuson students as assets must coincide with an equal focus onstudent learning and performance to provide a foundationfor student success and provide credence to the assertionthat students are assets. What if students leave the universityand do not meet employer/societal expectations? Do theylose their asset status? Do they then become a liability?

About 35 years ago, Neil Postman and Charles Weingartner(1971) authored a book titled Teaching as a SubversiveActivity. For these two authors, subversive teaching wasabout the conscious act of teaching by the inquiry method.As they explained,

The inquiry method is not designed to do better what olderenvironments try to do. It works you over in entirely differ-ent ways. It activates different attitudes and perceptions; itgenerates a different, bolder, and more potent kind of intel-ligence. Thus, it will cause teachers and their tests, and theirgrading systems, and their curriculum to change. It willcause college admission requirements to change. It willcause everything to change. (p. 27)

Unfortunately, as I engage in dialogue about teaching, itis my opinion that the inquiry method has not fully beenintegrated into marketing curricula. The inquiry methodfocuses on process, not product. Much marketing educa-tion focuses on product-like answers. Concomitantly andsadly, too many students think that they are pursuing aneducation to get answers. They want solutions they believewill help them in their first jobs. Because we as teacherscannot know what that first job is and students as a rulehave little practical experience, how can either judge theefficacy of a solution for that purpose? What students needto learn are the questions. With the inquiry approach, act-ing and experiencing are requirements, as is the provisionof introspective feedback, all contributing to the assetvalue of students.

SERVANT TEACHERSHIP PRINCIPLE 2:INQUIRING MINDS, WHETHER IN EVIDENCE

OR NOT, MUST DRIVE EDUCATIONI would like students to leave class more alert than whenthey came in at the end of a day and at the end of a term. Iwant them to be inquisitive, to question business ethics butrecognize that the vast majority of businesspeople strive toact ethically; to question the wisdom of planning, particu-larly if it is not backed by the rubber meets the road stuffof implementation; to question the wisdom of Ready! Fire!Aim!, which seems to be the way we laud entrepreneurs.This does not mean I want them to undress the world ofbusiness. It does mean that I want them to be inquisitive andthoughtful in ultimate service to people.

One ideal in serving students is to extol them to performin exceptional ways. In my freshmen introductory businessclass, student teams write comprehensive business plans,called the New Venture Challenge (NVC), and present themto the business community in a trade show format. Studentsmake choices, often without teacher consultation (e.g., thenature of their business, markets to be served, and their ownlevels of performance). Often, their plans exceed 100 pages,so students do work.

Too often, teachers, operating on directives from the uni-versity (perhaps read good teaching evaluation scores orresearch is paramount), set minimum standards. High stan-dards stretch students, challenge some, confound others, butalways provide wonderful opportunities to learn whether thestudents recognize it or not. Exceptional performance usu-ally results from discretionary effort of students who takeinitiative (e.g., Jaramillo & Spector, 2004). In my intro class,about three fourths of the materials students require to suc-cessfully navigate the NVC are taught in class or availablein an online text. The remaining one fourth provides stu-dents with discovery learning opportunities, consistent withTulgans (2004) concept of work transformations. Usefulmaterials may be discovered in The Wall Street Journal,which is required reading for the class. In general, for thematerial not specifically covered in class, students are coun-seled and encouraged to seek, use initiative, and learn to findand manage resources.

A teacher who encourages inquiry must also be inquisitive.A most rewarding aspect of servant teaching is an opennessthat teachers can learn from students. To teach is to learntwice, said Joseph Joubert (2006), French moralist and nov-elist. Our research background compels us to pose questionsabout various subjects and about teaching. It provides a disci-pline by which evidence is gathered and interpreted, resultsshared, and change made in teaching practices. Like research,the scholarship of teaching (a) requires discipline, (b) requiresexpertise in subject and teaching methods, (c) can be innova-tive, (d) can be replicated and enhanced, (e) can be evaluated,and (f) is significant in its impact on learners. For research to


contribute to student learning it must be brought into theclassroom in a meaningful way. The infusion of research can-not be restricted to results found by researchers. Questionsand process are most important. And it goes without sayingthat research must be related to the subject matter of the class,not simply presented for personal aggrandizement.

Henry Brooks Adams (2006), an American historian,journalist, and novelist, stated, A teacher affects eternity; hecan never tell where his influence stops. Many students findthe freedoms of working with the servant teachership styleterrifying. I had one student describe his experience as feel-ing like a deer in the headlights for 6-8 weeks. This feelingstarts on the first day of class, which is a full day, consistingof overviewing the course syllabus and presenting materialsneeded to navigate the NVC. The freedom of self-learningand the encouragement to make mistakes allow for manychoices and uncertainties, neither of which is high on the listof favorite things of students. In an atmosphere of freedomin which team decision making and performance are a largepart, teachers are better able in the longer term to influencethrough the transfer of leadership.

SERVANT TEACHERSHIP PRINCIPLE 3:SERVANT TEACHERS ARE STEWARDS

I strive to act as a steward. Stewardship has its roots in theGreek word oikonomia, the meaning of which is rooted inthe idea of a house manager. The steward was entrusted withthe responsibilities of managing the business affairs of thehousehold, including the financials, properties, and goods ofother servants. Stewardship is manifested in a teachers will-ingness to be accountable for the well-being of the largercommunity of students by acting in service to those in thecommunity. As stewards, servant teachers regard students asthose who have been entrusted to them to be energizedtoward growth.

To paraphrase Ralph Waldo Emerson, students are cap-tive in schools and college classrooms for 16 or more years.They can emerge with a belly full of words but not know athing. The things taught in schools and colleges are not theeducation but the means of education. I am afraid that toolittle stewardship occurs in a lecture-formatted, objectivetestingfocused pedagogy (Eggen & Kauchak, 2001; Smith& Van Doran, 2004). Fully scripted lectures are in my opin-ion unlikely to engage students and unlikely to serve theirneeds. A fully scripted lecture likely suffers in delivery froma lack of passion. If the sum total of a lecture is the con-veyance of knowledge and facts, then universities shouldfeel a moral obligation to replace teachers with videos andreduce tuition!

My lectures (classes of 200 to 250 students) challenge stu-dents with a mental work akin to weight training in whichlifted weight and/or repetitions increase as the lifter becomesmore proficient. Knowledge based on and assimilated with

prior knowledge raises the overall value of both old and newknowledge. Stewardship demands focus on student growthand development, my lectures providing multiple ways forstudents to understand and assimilate materials from multi-ple sources. My lectures correspond to the required readings,but the overlap in material coverage is minimal. Throughoutmy lectures, questions are posed to engage students andprovoke thinking (how does business reconcile long-termcustomer relationships with weekly, monthly, and quarterlysales goals?), leading statements are crafted (e.g., Movie Xgrossed $9 billion this weekend, which would require every-one on earth to see the movie at least twice in 3 days), stu-dents beliefs are challenged (e.g., they strongly believe thatpublished facts are truthful and created objectively), and stu-dents inconsistencies are questioned (e.g., how do they rec-oncile wanting precision in answers with their aversion tonumbers?).

In one instance, I informed students that the due date forthe NVC business plans had been accelerated by 2 weeks. Igave them a 1-week notice of the change. The rationale forchange was described as needs of business professionals.Some dialogue, flavored with student weeping and gnashingof teeth, ensued as students endeavored to argue their caseagainst this common business phenomenon. Naturally, thedeadline was not moved, but students who listened and par-ticipated learned valuable lessons about planning ahead, pro-crastinating, priorities, and crisis management.

The mediocre teacher tells. The good teacher explains.The superior teacher demonstrates. The great teacher inspires,said William Arthur Ward (2006), an American author, pastor,and teacher. It is illusory to think that learning only derivesfrom what one teaches. Nobody can teach the total content ofany significantly challenging course to anyone. Regarding stu-dents, the teacher faces the challenge of balancing learning andgrades such that students know the difference. Recall the manytimes we have heard students who lament, I learned morethan this C indicates.

Only through education does one come to be dissatisfiedwith his own knowledge, and only through teaching othersdoes one come to realize the uncomfortable inadequacy ofhis knowledge. Being dissatisfied with his own knowledge,one then realizes that the trouble lies with himself, and real-izing the uncomfortable inadequacy of his knowledge, onethen feels stimulated to improve himself. Therefore, it issaid, The processes of teaching and learning stimulate oneanother (Confucius as cited in OESNews, 2006).

Socrates (2006) proclaimed, I cannot teach anybody any-thing, I can only make them think. A contentious issue iswhether critical thinking is generalizable or subject specific.Teams can make a contribution to this debate. Teams representa forum for idea exchange (Amato & Amato, 2005) and anexcellent opportunity for growth and development of think-ing skills. Dialogue among student team members leadsto a greater propensity to develop critical thinking skills

JOURNAL OF MARKETING EDUCATION 113


114 AUGUST 2007

(Chickering & Gamson, 1987) and fosters an environment inwhich students grow by taking responsibility for learning (e.g.,Totten, Sills, Dighy, & Russ, 1991) and experiencing what islearned. Early in the NVC, students must develop a businessidea. That idea must be instructor approved for fit in the indus-try du jour; the number of similar ideas is limited. For exam-ple, in a semester in which childrens services was the focalindustry, 82 student teams participated. No more than 5 teamswere allowed to start any particular type of business (e.g., daycare, parties, hair care). When a teams initial ideas wereturned down due to saturation, the speed to market lessonpresented on the first day of class became real, as did the ideasof contingency plans, rethinking ideas, and transfer of learningfrom one idea to another (Erikkson & Hauer, 2004).

SERVANT TEACHERSHIP PRINCIPLE 4:ENGAGE STUDENTS IN A LIFETIME

LEARNING PARADIGMIt is imperative (and I often become frustrated about it) thatstudents embrace the importance of a learning vision.Servant teachership is about technique and method. It is alsoabout opening the learners heart to a lifetime of learningand human experience. Servant teachership is not a formulaor a program, it is a human activity that comes from theheart and considers the hearts of others.

In the intro class, students are provided a foundation forlearning of the knowledge and skills for which studentsshould receive considerable depth and breadth throughouttheir education. During the early days of the class, in discus-sions of mission, vision, and values statements, students areencouraged to create their own versions of these to serve asa guide for future course work, skills and knowledge devel-opment activities, extracurricular activities, and professionaland personal careers.

Strategic theory suggests two advantages of planningcontent and process (e.g., Weir, Kochhar, LeBeau, & Edgerley,2000). Content involves course choices. Process refers to thecreation, implementation, and analysis of learning opportunity.The ultimate goal of any education strategic plan is the sus-taining of competitive advantage . . . for the student. As anillustration of process, we cannot afford to forget that individ-ual students learn from small failures in order to build up aresilience needed to face future conditions. Learning throughfailure provides, according to Piaget (1950), the incentive tocreate a situation for disequilibrium. The imbalance motivatesa student to learn and invoke new concepts to avoid future fail-ures. Marketing educational activities should be such that stu-dents must collaborate, supporting the development of tacitknowledge and the ability to close their learning disequilib-rium by adapting rather than preconceiving. Students willlearn steps in processes (too often the students preconceivedversion of the answer), but the challenge is to instill in themthat these steps are not linear (disequilibrium creation).

An early step to helping students accomplish great things isto encourage realistic optimism associated with learning. Aconversation between Alice and the Mad Hatter in Wonderlandillustrates this:

Alice: Where I come from, people study what they are not goodat in order to be able to do what they are good at.

Mad Hatter: We only go around in circles in Wonderland, butwe always end up where we started. Would you mind explain-ing yourself?

Alice: Well, grown-ups tell us to find out what we did wrong,and never do it again.

Mad Hatter: Thats odd! It seems to me that in order to find outabout something, you have to study it. And when you studyit, you should become better at it. Why should you want tobecome better at something and then never do it again? Butplease continue.

Alice: Nobody ever tells us to study the right things we do.Were only supposed to learn from the wrong things. But weare permitted to study the right things other people do. Andsometimes were even told to copy them.

Mad Hatter: Thats cheating!Alice: Youre quite right, Mr. Hatter. I do live in a topsy-turvy

world. It seems like I have to do something wrong first inorder to learn from what not to do. And then, by not doingwhat Im not supposed to do, perhaps Ill be right. But Idrather be right the first time, wouldnt you. (Mackay, 2007)

Teachers are charged with providing guidance for students.Like Goldilocks and the three bears, teachership is akin togetting it just right. Too much guidance can result in micro-management and feelings of inadequacy on the part of stu-dents. Too little guidance may be viewed as abandonment ofresponsibilities and result in loss of trust and respect. In theintro class, students are provided with considerable guidance,but they must work to gain it. On the first day of class, studentsreceive a 20-page course syllabus, a 20-page NVC document,and a 10-page document on leading and managing teams.They are expected to read these and manage their class andteam experiences using wisdom presented in the documents.On the fourth class day, they take a quiz on these documents.They receive a grade, but the true purposes of the quiz aretwofold: (a) to stress that they are part of an organization andall organizations have policies and procedures and (b) toreduce (hopefully eliminate) time spent on addressing ques-tions that have already been answered in these documents.When students ask preanswered questions, the response theyreceive is Please (re)read the syllabus. In these ways, stu-dents are taught they must learn to accept responsibilities andaccountabilities for their own actions.

I like a teacher who gives you something to take home to thinkabout besides homework. (Lily Tomlin, 2006, as Edith Ann)

SERVANT TEACHERSHIP PRINCIPLE 5:TEACH TO NEEDS, NOT WANTS

I seek to serve as my students keeper, caring that studentslearn what they need (sometimes ignoring their wants) and


worrying that they are getting what they need. I cannot forcelearning on students or will learning to happen. I have learnedthat if I do for students, some of those students will do for oth-ers. I want students to have a sense of history. Ecclesiastestells us there is nothing new under the sun. There is muchtruth to be derived from this verse as it applies in todays busi-ness world despite the ever-sounding drumrolls signalingchange. Students must learn to make connections between thepast and the present . . . and the future. They must learn to rec-ognize the timely and the timeless and the relative value ofeach. For example, what are the real differences between aGoogle search and a library search?

History provides a timeless dimension to learning, allow-ing students and teachers to span the past to the current andprovide a bridge to the future. It provides a context fromwhich current and future issues can be understood (Bussiere,2005; Hollander, Rassuli, & Nevett, 1998; Jones et al., 2003;Kantrow, 1986; Nevett, 1991). Marketing decision makingimpacts organizations. Therefore, decision-making compe-tency is critical. It follows that to be effective in their chosenprofessions and communities, students need decision-makinglearning that incorporates a differentiation between the timelyand the timeless. One exercise that makes this point is to askstudents how many technologies I have used to do math orto write. The quantitative answer to this is more than 20. Thelesson is that if I could not add or write, no technologywould be useful. Timeless skills are needed and can beenhanced by timely technologies, methods, and process.

On the subject of student needs, much has been writtenand discussed about the importance of understanding ourstudents (e.g., McGlynn, 2005). The current student genera-tion represents a force that many assert will shape the futuresocial and economic fabric. It also presents unique chal-lenges to educators (e.g., Eisner, 2005). There is widespreadagreement that their uniqueness largely derives from tech-nology (e.g., Howe & Strauss, 2000; Tapscott, 1998). Theircompetency is described as an ability to employ broad digi-tal communication technologies to quickly and seamlesslyaccomplish many tasks (Gorman, Nelson, & Glassman,2004). Research ascribes the following traits to millenials:

They are brighter than previous generations15 points higherin raw intelligence than their counterparts of 50 years ago(Greenfield, 1998).

They have superior written communication skills (Tapscott,1998).

They work collaboratively, gathering information quickly andsharing it regularly (Howe & Strauss, 2000).

They respect diversity, value multiculturalism, and are resilient(Zemke, Raines, & Fitzpatrick, 2000).

They converse comfortably with adults (Tapscott, 1998). They may struggle in a relatively unsupervised environment

(Howe & Strauss, 2000).

Millenials also come with other features, the kind thatmight be described as what they do not need any more

ofhovering, soccer moms, trophy children focus, entitle-ment, attachment, instant gratification, and rescuing. Simplystated, the existence of these phenomena is the stuff that canundermine classroom equity, create expectationsperformancegaps, and foster a negative educational environment.

As millenials enter the workforce, four generations willbe working together: traditionalists born before 1945, boomersborn between 1945 and 1964, Generation X born between1965 and 1981, and the millenials (Martin & Tulgan, 2004).This merging of generations is more pertinent to educatorsthan a strict focus on the millenials. This is particularly trueif one considers education to be focused on lifetime learningor the learning of timeless skills rather than just a focus ontimely information. The lifetime or timeless nature ofeducation is required of millenials for learning to blend intoa workforce that is not completely similar to them. It isincumbent on teachers to provide the necessary learningopportunities for knowledge and skills development valuedby employers (Ackerman, Gross, & Perner, 2003; Young &Murphy, 2003). Thus, teaching to needs, not wants, is rein-forced by this requirement.

The scholarship of teaching requires that teachers engagein a constant and serious reflection about processes and out-comes (e.g., Athaide & Desai, 2005) and teaching method-gies (e.g., Hunt & Madhavaram, 2006; Wee, Kek, & Kelley,2003). Such reflection must include the teaching processundertaken by the teacher, the learning processes employedby students and the teacher himself or herself. And, suchreflection must take into account contextual influences suchas class size and role of class in the larger curriculum. Forexample, the NVC in its large-class format succeeds for tworeasons. Students do complete the work required, and in 15semesters, no team has turned in a late project, a wonderfuloutcome. Second, more than 100 business professionalseach semester engage in evaluating the students businessplans, a process allowing for feedback that one instructorcould not possibly hope to provide.

SERVANT TEACHERSHIP PRINCIPLE 6:STUDENTS ARE PEOPLE OF WORTH

I try to radiate confidence and faith at all times that is rootedin the worth of students, not in the arrogance of the teacher.One can learn much about teachership by listening and bydoing while in class and in any role played in the midst ofstudents. I practice encouragement and affirmation but chan-nel these toward real accomplishment and development ofstudents potential and facilitating personal growth.

Servant teachers are committed to the creation and growthof a learning environment that fosters mutual enrichment.Both teacher and students must emerge with more knowl-edge, greater skills, and increased commitment to makingsignificant contributions to something. The Japanese conceptof kyosei captures the essence of the teaching/learning part-nership. A translation of kyosei includes living and working



116 AUGUST 2007

together for mutual gain. Kyosei demands a dedication toservice and stewardship and the advancement of mutualinterests over self-interests.

I consider it unfortunate when teachers disdain out-of-classdialogue with student faces in the crowd that degenerate tojust that without contact outside the class. A collection of stu-dents, young and inexperienced as they are, has a vast knowl-edge and experience base that exceeds my own. Students arediverse, they ask questions, they make observations, they initi-ate challengesI learn much from them. Much of my writinghas originated with ideas that resulted from class discussionsor in-office discussions with students. W. Edwards Demingwas asked why he engaged in continuous refinement of hissystem of profound knowledge. His answer was, May I notalso learn?

Students should be encouraged to demonstrate divergentthinking (Getzels & Jackson, 1962). Convergent thinkinghelps students locate a single precise answer. Divergent think-ing encourages them to discover alternative solutions based onthe same information (Sternberg & Lunart, 1999). Divergentthinking is at the heart of cross-functional team activity(e.g., Anthony, DeMoranville, & Aurand, 2002; Crittendon &Wilson, 2006; DeMoranville, Aurand, & Gordon, 2000) and isevident in the number of unique NVC business ideas createdeach semester in the same industry. As Amos Bronson Alcott(2006), a self-educated American teacher and writer, asserted,The true teacher defends his pupils against his own personalinfluence. Ivan Welton Fitzwater (2003), teacher and writer,summed up my feelings about teaching very well:

I am a teacher! What I do and say are being absorbed byyoung minds who will echo these images across the ages.My lessons will be immortal, affecting people yet unborn,people I will never see or know. The future of the world is inmy classroom today, a future with the potential for good orbad. The pliable minds of tomorrows leaders will bemolded either artistically or grotesquely by what I do.Several future presidents are learning from me today; so arethe great writers of the next decades, and so are all the so-called ordinary people who will make the decisions in ademocracy. I must never forget these same young peoplecould be the thieves or murderers of the future. Only ateacher? Thank God I have a calling to the greatest profes-sion of all! I must be vigilant every day lest I lose one frag-ile opportunity to improve tomorrow.

SERVANT TEACHERSHIP PRINCIPLE 7:PRACTICE PATIENCE, TOLERANCE,

AND PROFESSIONALISMI would like to say I never complain about the actions (some-times read foolishness) of students, the ingratitude of mankind,or lack of appreciation in public. These are all part of teacherlife. To meet them head on and to overcome them and not fallto them is the final proof of servant teachership. The need forspeed, the need for instant gratification is insidious in its

undermining of true servant teachership. Servant teachership isa lifelong work. The man with a wheelbarrow full of applesapproached a stranger on the road. The stranger was asked,How long will it take me to wheel this barrow into the nexttown? The stranger answered, An hour if you take your time,all day if you hurry.

Piaget (1950) asserted that learning takes place in evolu-tionary stages. Equilibration is the learners attempt to create abalance between the learning environment (e.g., high stan-dards) and existing circumstances. Students respond to theworld by assimilating through the use of analytical tools, butunique experiences require accommodation or changes in cog-nition structures. Intellect develops as students seek to achievea balance between themselves and the learning environment.The students intellectual equilibrium constantly changes toprepare him or her for the next subject of disequilibrium.

In the intro class, emphasis is placed on learning to learnas a means by which students can contribute to creation andresolution of learning disequilibria. Learning to learn isviewed as more important than learning a fixed, static cur-riculum (Erikkson & Hauer, 2004). Because no teacher canreally know those equilibrium points for each student, it isimportant that sufficient challenge be provided so that all stu-dents are exposed to critical equilibria challenges. In the introclass, disequilibrium catalysts include a 30-chapter e-text, theNVC presented to business professionals, and The Wall StreetJournal with pop quizzes, all designed to provide opportuni-ties for students to deepen their knowledge and skills.

Once per semester, The Wall Street Journal quizzes areused to reinforce a lesson previously taught about jumping toconclusions and getting facts before making decisions. On aclass day immediately following a test, students come toclass and are treated to Christmas music (some kind of musicplays prior to every class). When the pop quiz is introduced,students moan, groan, cuss, and are generally unhappy, hav-ing just taken a test. After the usual pop quiz particulars, thefirst question informs them that they all have received a giftof 100 on this quiz. Euphoria sets in, and as teacher, I transi-tion from #@$%@#&^!% to hero in about 10 seconds. Wethen take a few minutes to remind the students about jump-ing to conclusions. The memory of this lesson stays withmany students for years.

It is a teachers purpose to change students knowledge(Smith & Van Doran, 2004). I count this as one among themany frustrations I have experienced on this exhilaratingteaching journey. Yet, there is one student phenomenon that isrecognizable and even appreciated within the halls of acad-eme. This phenomenon is the effort put forth by those goodstudents who want more learning, who seek challenging mod-ifications in their assignments, classes, and requirements. Thebusiness of students making an assignment ones own issomething skillful teachers often promote or encourage (cre-ating disequilibrium), and with good reason. The process stu-dents undertake to fit their college education to something


personally and/or professionally meaningful can originatefrom and/or lead to conscious, deliberate thoughts about theoverarching purposes of education as well as what is judgedworthwhile to energize ones efforts to learn. I assume (yes,foolishly) that all my students fit this mold and provide learn-ing opportunities accordingly.

In contrast to these good students, there are other stu-dents who seem to do anything to get out of schoolwork atall costs. Too few sanctions for poor performance seem tooccur in the classroom if published reports about grade infla-tion are to be believed. Too many students are unmotivatedby learning, choosing to expend their energy foolishly, favor-ing the serving of wants in the short term. They avoid classparticipation or class, cram for tests using updated (in real-ity often outdated) file systems, fail to complete assignments,buy papers from e-sources, avoid engagement in classroomparticipation activities, focus on grades not learning, andfocus on obtaining answers rather than researching the ques-tions. It is easy and tempting to stereotype these students asfailures. And I confess, I have done so out of frustration.Doing so fails to notice crucial differences among this groupof students who engages in these antilearning activities. Andwe thereby miss out on discovering who among this disinter-ested group may be searching for their own reasons for theirown education and may simply have not seen the light ofeducation at the time we encounter them.

What motivates students? In the intro class, we providemultiple motivatorsgrades, desire to learn, foundationalknowledge, desire to excel, cash prizes for performance, non-financial performance recognitions, opportunity to demon-strate excellence to business professionals, and possibleinternship opportunities. Could it be that for some studentsthe teacher is the motivational light and that light is too fre-quently shrouded or in the off switch position when itcomes to engaging students intellectually? This is one of thefocal points of the hidden curriculum (Snyder, 1971) inwhich it is asserted that schools do more than simply trans-mit knowledge.

SERVANT TEACHERSHIP PRINCIPLE 8:TRANSLATE KNOWLEDGE INTO ACTION

I view calculated risks as an essential attribute for studentsuccess. From the students perspective, information provi-sion, communication openness, and other such servantteacher characteristics may actually reduce the perception ofthe degree of risk associated with new ideas. Servant teach-ers are indeed conscientious about student risk. However,they reduce the personal risk associated with the voicingof different ideas about how teaching and learning should beconducted.

A teacher continuously asks, What do we mean by learn-ing? and What happens in a learning situation? Lets exam-ine one learning paradigmactive learning. For insight into

active learning, readers are referred to Smith and Van Doran(2004) and Silberman (1996). Successful active learners areresponsible for some of their own learning (Benbunan-Fich,Lozada, Pirog, Priluck, & Wisenblit, 2001; Lincoln, 2001;Taylor, Humphreys, Singley, & Hunger, 2004). Throughoutthe intro course, emphasis is placed on the importance ofperformance/results. Productivity and lessons learned fromdifferentiating effort and results make students special in theeyes of the business community. Hard work is emphasized andencouragedwork that creates positive results enough of thetime is the focus. Thus, the philosophy of the course is cap-tured by the following elements:

high expectations, no concern about lack of experience, learn by doing/trial and error, some structure, creating a business plan requires multiple competencies

(multitasking), creating a business plan requires teamwork, the NVC provides a foundation for future classes, creating a business plan helps students recognize what it takes

to start and manage a business, active participation teaches students more than passive listen-

ing (experiential), hard work has payoffs students may not recognize today

(instant gratification challenge).

My students must engage in self-regulation, define someof their own learning goals, and evaluate some of their ownachievement as they undertake the NVC. Many are ener-gized by their learning; their joy of learning leads to a pas-sion for solving problems. These learners are encouraged totake a strategic learning journey with guidance providedconcerning what to learn, how to learn, and the ability totransfer knowledge to solve problems creatively. Activelearning also involves being collaborativethat is, valuingand having the skills to work with others. When my studentsperceive little value added from shared learning experiences(e.g., dysfunctional teamseven though much learning canoccur here), it is more difficult for them to engage in activelearning activities (Barr & McNeilly, 2002). To enhance thevalue of the learning opportunities provided, business pro-fessionals who serve as judges hold sessions focused onwhat they expect from a business plan. Collaboration aroundtasks also often takes place with peers and mentors withinschool as well as with family members and others in the realworld outside of school, putting into practice the integratedinstruction that incorporates problem-based learning andcurriculum by project (e.g., Bobbitt, Inks, Kemp, & Mayo,2000; Graeff, 1997). In all these sessions the importance ofcollaborative team effort and the importance of being anexpert is reinforced (e.g., a student who creates the marketanalysis is the marketing expert) as well as being knowl-edgeable of all aspects of the business (e.g., the student who



118 AUGUST 2007

takes the lead on the financial aspects of the plan must knowthe major elements of the market analysis).

SERVANT TEACHERSHIP PRINCIPLE 9:I ACT AS A SERVANT FIRST

Servant teachership begins with a feeling that one wants toteach. College teaching is the profession I entered, althoughit seems that it may be now more adequately termed collegeresearch. I strive to ensure that the needs of students aretaken care of first. The testdo those students served growas peopledo they become wiser, freer, more autonomous,more likely themselves to become servant teachers?

Do we have evidence of education failure? Does the com-mon distinction between real world and the college expe-rience point to education failure? I do become angry when Ihear someone refer to their world as real and that what I amdoing in the college classroom is not. The knowledge andskills developmental aspects of my classes are real and theycan make a difference in the lives of students.

We have erred in my judgment by referring to students ascustomers (e.g., Floyd & Gordon, 1998; Mustafa & Chiang,2006; Stafford, 1994). We have contributed to the emergenceof a cadre of students who feel entitled to a degree becausethey have paid tuition. Entitlement leads to apathy, a key areaof improvement for todays student. Referring to students ascustomers reduces education to commodity status . . . every-one who pays gets an education. Nevertheless, in the samebreath, students will indicate they want an education to makea difference, somewhat oxymoronic to the commodity statusof entitlement education. I encourage students to understandthe value of an education, linking the college experience totheir future experiences as often and as deeply as possible. Forexample, I ask, What is the difference between an 18-year-old procrastinator and the 40-year-old procrastinator? Theanswers I get include two: (a) 22 years and (b) the 18-year-oldis more likely to change.

In the intro class, we seek to convey that the skills studentsare using in developing business plans can be used in manyendeavors. To emphasize, we use lessons from nonbusinessvenues like the Hobbit, Frodo Baggins, on his journey in TheLord of the Rings. The journey analogy serves to highlightmany of the skills needed to manage and lead teams and thatcan sharpen by active participation in the NVC:

devote proper time (homework is ok), devote proper effort (ditto), help of others (teamwork), optimistic (freshmen can write business plans), trust (lack skills in dealing with difficult people), persistence (students must stay with their project, start early,

unlike Frodo, and stay on course), wherewithal (students learn about resource and people

management),

sense of responsibility (students learn about the importance oftheir own performance, the responsibility for others, and theirresponsibility to others),

pay attention (know where you are headed, have a vision, whatyou need and observe as you go; without knowing where one isheaded, observation is rendered much less useful),

periodic rest stops (reflection time is useful), random tangents (take time to think, to muse, to daydream), make time to learn (manage time and self), flexible (be open to ideas and information).

CONCLUDING REMARKSThere is (and has been) much scrutiny of college education

based on the perceived quality of college graduates. We as edu-cators may have had a part in creating that quality perception.One reason in my judgment is that teaching undergraduatescarries a lowly status in universities and among marketing edu-cators. Schools interested in winning ranking wars focus ongraduate education and research. All of the existing quality ofeducation rankings require schools to play a game on some-one elses designated field, by their rules, and under circum-stances in which being as good as is not enough. Mastery ofa discipline, of the theory underlying its practice, is necessaryfor excellence in teaching. Nevertheless, in many researchschools, students are likely to encounter graduate assistants inthe process of developing their teaching skills. Yet, the termteaching institutions is pejoratively linked with teachers whomay be very good teachers but whose mastery is judged lim-ited in degree and currency due to a lack of publication. I dis-agree with this generalization.

The management profession has engaged in introspectivedialogue about its contributions, asking if there is a dichoto-mous relationship between

the fairly well-developed ideology of heaping theory andpractice together in management education on the one handand the . . . increasingly obvious fact that the prevailingfocus of education for managerial leadership did not seem tobe contributing very much to the improvement of manage-ment practice. (Vaill, 1996, p. xii)

Consider the number of company failures, ethical lapses,and illegal activities cited in the media. Such circumstanceshave fostered concern about management theory and man-agement development and substance versus image (Gioia &Corley, 2002) and the ability of future managers to makejudgments in complex and ambiguous environments (Pfeffer& Fong, 2002). Is there a similar concern in marketing?Should there be?

As educators we must be careful not to impugn the teach-ing and learning processes by paying too much attention tothe unique traits and the like of a particular generation. Everystudent has an individual set of traits that determines atti-tudes, viewpoints, and expectations. The generation to whichthey belong is only one factor among many. What is more


important is the match between the student, what they learn,and their potential contributions. To that end, the followingsuggestions are offered.

Knowledge versus learning opportunity. Giacalone (2004)posed two servant-focused questions, What are the tran-scendent, aspirational goals of [marketing] education? andWhat ideals should our students aspire to achieve? (p. 416).These questions in one sense have been addressed by workfocused on learning outcomes (e.g., Clarke, Flaherty, &Mottner, 2001; Deeter-Schmelz, Kennedy, & Ramsey, 2002;Hamer, 2000; Marks, 2000; Young & Murphy, 2003). It isimperative that we revisit work on students skills and careers(e.g., Chonko & Roberts, 1996; John & Needel, 1989;McCorkle, Alexander, Reardon, & Kling, 2003) to begin withthe end in mind. Developing marketing professionals requiresfocus on learning opportunities, not just the disseminationof knowledge. Teaching falls well short of excellence if stu-dent learning is restricted to what occurs in the classroom.Teaching involves serious dangers if we describe a goodteacher as one who proffers via a clear, accurate, and evencaptivating presentation a seemingly terminal knowledge thatreduces inquisitiveness. Even more detrimental to students isthe circumstance in which they are charmed by and seeminglydefenseless against the teachers ostentatious display ofknowledge, where all arguments are reduced to an answer andstudents feel led to accept this one answer. A teacher mustrely on the scrutinized certainty that he or she is providing alearning opportunity that is necessary for students. This learn-ing opportunity relies on authoritative confidence. However,both teacher and student can fall prey to playing the gamewith the best intentions: The former pretends to teach, the lat-ter thinks he or she learns. This game playing is galvanized bythe students assumptive certainty that the teacher is the fontof all knowledge. Students may assume that what is taught,how it is taught, and why it is taught are determined by theteacherthe teacher thus is placed on a pedestal as an omnis-cient individual, exerting authority and being repository of aknowledge. Any hope of thought is banished.

A business plan focus. Marketing education should modelon the business plana curriculum should be a written doc-ument that describes a current state of affairs and the futureof marketing education in a department. As a business plan,the curriculum guides allocation of learning resources toallow students to optimize mastery of knowledge and devel-opment of skills and gain a comprehension that will assistthem as they begin professional careers. A business planprovides a foundation for the collecting and summarizing ofinformation. As a business plan, a curriculum should do thesame, defining learning goals, serving as a catalyst for organ-izing pedagogy, and informing students what they will learn,why they must learn, and how they can learn it. The curricu-lum as a business plan should provide learning redundancies

only where deemed necessary. Repetition is key to learning,but repetition must be tempered with the need for new infor-mation. Repetition of exposure to knowledge for example isless valuable than the repetition of exposure to and use of thatknowledge. In other words, a curriculum must be the resultof a collaborative planning and implementation effort thatsets out what students must learn and seeks to provide learn-ing opportunities in the most efficient and effective ways(Bobbitt et al., 2000; Elam & Spotts, 2004).

Modes of teaching. Selected modes of teaching shouldnot be driven by conformity to a culture of how this yearsstudents want to learn. Rather, teaching mode selectionmust be based on concrete evidence relating teaching modesto some desired learning outcomes (e.g., Bridges, 1999;Clow & Wachter, 1996; Davis, Misra, & Van Auken, 2000;Karns, 2005). Simply put, the array of factors related to stu-dent performance is often beyond the control of any teacherin any one classstudent cognitive ability (Cheung & Kan,2002; Harackiewicz, Baron, Tauer, & Elliot, 2002), studentpreferences for pedagogical style (Beets & Lobinger, 2001),learning styles (Karakaya, Ainscough, & Chopoorian, 2001),socioeconomic status (Saenz, Marcoulides, Jun, & Young,1999), and personality traits (Wolfe & Johnson, 1995). Howcan one teacher in one class accommodate all these aspectsof learning?

Rediscover a passion for teaching. Some teachers aretruly called to teach as illustrated by a variety of authorswho refer to this calling in many wayscalling, vocation,passion, spirituality, intrinsic motivation, fervent zeal(Durka, 2002; Freud, 1987; Hansen, 2001; Mayes, 2002;Noddings, 2002). According to Hansen (1995), a called pas-sionate teacher believes that teaching is leading others to

know what they did not know before, know what they could not do before, take on attitudes they did not have before, believe things they did not believe before.

Passionate teachers find their work deeply satisfying, havea desire to serve, and believe that to teach is to be filled withhope (Cuban, 1995). According to Hansen (2001), A teacherwho really knows and believes that teaching is worthwhilewill likely conduct him/herself differently from a teacher whohas lost faith in the endeavor or who resorts to expediency inthe face of challenge (p. 56). What unites passionate teach-ers is commitment to active learning and approach to the mis-sion of teaching (Fried, 1998). Olson (2003) noted,

We all need to find something about our teaching that mat-ters deeply to us, get passionate about it, and share that pas-sion. When we discover and explore our passions aboutteaching and learning and begin to share them with others,doors are opened, and the possibilities are endless. (p. 305)



120 AUGUST 2007

As noted by Freud (1987),

[Teaching] demands total devotion to its subject matter, as wellas providing rich and varied life experiences. It demands tightself-discipline and loose creativity. It demands openness topeople and absorption with ideas, protection of time andenergy, as well as endless commitment to students. It demandsboth solitude and many human encounters. (p. 134)

A passionate teacher is

someone truly enamored of a field of knowledge, or deeplystirred by issues and ideas that challenge our world, ordrawn to the crises and creativity of the young people whocome to class each dayor all of these. To be a passionateteacher is to stop being isolated within a classroom, to refuseto submit to a culture of apathy or cynicism, to look beyondgetting through the day. (Fried, 1998, p. 53)

Have we as a body of educators lost this passion to teachin an effort to play the research game? Has this lost passionled to marketing education being dumbed down? If theanswers are yes, we must find the courage to teach and seekto rekindle the passion to teach.

REFERENCESAckerman, D. S., Gross, B. L., & Perner, L. (2003). Instructor, student and

employer perceptions on preparing marketing students for changingbusiness landscapes. Journal of Marketing Education, 21, 25-33.

Adams, H. B. (2006). H. B. Adams quotations. Retrieved July 27, 2006,from www.Memorablequotations.com/adams2.htm

Alcott, A. B. (2006). Quotations by A. B. Alcott. Retrieved July 27, 2006,from www.quotationspage.com/quotes/A_B_Alcott

Amato, C. H., & Amato, L. H. (2005). Enhancing student team effective-ness: Application of Myers Briggs personality assessment in businesscourses. Journal of Marketing Education, 27, 41-51.

Anthony, R. F., DeMoranville, C. W., & Aurand, T. W. (2002). Faculty edu-cation: The key to gaining acceptance of cross-functional business pro-grams. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 2, 25-36.

Athaide, G. A., & Desai, H. B. (2005). Design and implementation of aninterdisciplinary marketing/management course on technology and inno-vation management. Journal of Marketing Education, 27, 239-249.

Barr, T. F., & McNeilly, K. M. (2002). The value of students classroomexperiences from the eyes of the recruiter: Information, implications,and recommendations for marketing educators. Journal of MarketingEducation, 24, 168-173.

Beets, S. D., & Lobinger, P. G. (2001). Pedagogical techniques: Student per-formance and preferences. Journal of Education for Business, 76, 231-235.

Benbunan-Fich, R., Lozada, H., Pirog, S., Priluck, R., & Wisenblit, J.(2001). Integrating information technology into the marketing curricu-lum: A pragmatic paradigm. Journal of Marketing Education, 23, 5-15.

Bobbitt, L. M, Inks, S. A., Kemp, K. J., & Mayo, D. T. (2000). Integratingmarketing courses to enhance team-based experiential learning. Journalof Marketing Education, 22, 15-24.

Bridges, E. (1999). Experiential learning and customer needs in the under-graduate marketing research course. Journal of Marketing Education,21, 51-59.

Brookfield, S. (1990). The skillful teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Bussiere, D. (2005). Forensic marketing: The use of the historical method in

a capstone marketing course. Journal of Marketing Education, 27, 61-67.

Cheung, L. L. W., & Kan, A. C. N. (2002). Evaluation of factors related tostudent performance in a distance-learning business communicationcourse. Journal of Education for Business, 77, 257-263.

Chickering, V. W., & Gamson, Z. E. (1987). Seven principles for good prac-tice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.

Chonko, L. B., & Roberts, J. A. (1996). An innovative introduction to busi-ness course: Marketing the skills that marketing majors (and others)will need for success. Marketing Education Review, 6(3), 53-76.

Clarke, I., Flaherty, T. B., & Mottner, S. (2001). Student perceptions ofeducational technology tools. Journal of Marketing Education, 23,169-177.

Clow, K., & Wachter, M. (1996). Teaching methodologies used in basicmarketing: An empirical investigation. Journal of Marketing Education,18(1), 48-59.

Collins, J. (2001). Level 5 leadership: The triumph of humility and fierceresolve. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 67-76.

Crittendon, V. L., & Wilson, E. J. (2006). An exploratory study of cross-functional education in the undergraduate marketing curriculum. Journalof Marketing Education, 28, 81-86.

Cuban, L. (1995). Forward. In D. T. Hansen (Ed.), The call to teach. NewYork: Teachers College Press.

Davis, R., Misra, S., & Van Auken, S. (2000). Relating pedagogical prefer-ence of marketing seniors and alumni to attitude toward the major.Journal of Marketing Education, 22, 147-154.

Deeter-Schmelz, D. R., Kennedy, K. N., & Ramsey, R. P. (2002). Enrichingour understanding of student effectiveness. Journal of MarketingEducation, 24, 114-124.

DeMoranville, C. T., Aurand, W., & Gordon, G. L. (2000). The deliveryof an undergraduate, cross-functional business principles program:One universitys continuing journey. Marketing Education Review,10, 29-41.

Duke, C. (2002). Learning outcomes: Comparing student perceptions of skilllevel and importance. Journal of Marketing Education, 24, 203-217.

Durka, G. (2002). The teachers calling: Spirituality for those who teach.New York: Paulist Press.

Eggen, P. D., & Kauchak, D. P. (2001). Strategies for teachers: Teaching,content and thinking skills (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Eisner, S. P. (2005). Managing Generation Y. SAM Strategic ManagementJournal, 70, 4-15.

Elam, E., & Spotts, H. (2004). Achieving marketing curriculum integration:A live case study approach. Journal of Marketing Education, 26, 50-65.

Eriksson, L. T., & Hauer, A. M. (2004). Mind map marketing: A creativeapproach in developing marketing skills. Journal of Marketing Education,26, 174-187.

Fiedler, F. E., & Chemers, M. M. (1984). Improving leadership effective-ness: The leader match concept. New York: John Wiley.

Fitzwater, I. W. (2003). Only a teacher? Retrieved July 27, 2006, fromwww.salem.k12.va.us/south/teacerh/lounge/only.htm

Floyd, C. J., & Gordon, M. E. (1998). What skills are most important? A com-parison of employer, student, and staff perceptions. Journal of MarketingEducation, 20, 103-109.

Freud, P. (1987). The passion and challenge of teaching in teachers, teach-ing, and teacher education (M. Okazawa-Rey, J. Anderson, & R. Trevor,Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review.

Fried, R. (1998). The heart of the matter in kaleidoscope: Readings in edu-cation (K. Ryan & J. M. Copper, Eds.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Getzels, J. W., & Jackson, P. W. (1962). Creativity and intelligence:Explorations with gifted students. New York: John Wiley.

Giacalone, R. A. (2004). A transcendent business education for the 21stcentury. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3, 415-420.

Gioia, D. A., & Corley, K. G. (2002). Being good versus looking good:Business school rankings and the circean transformation from substanceto image. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1, 107-120.

Gorman, P., Nelson, T., & Glassman, A. (2004). The millenial generation:A strategic opportunity. Organizational Analysis, 12, 255-270.


Graeff, T. R. (1997). Bringing reflective learning to the marketing research:A cooperative learning project using intergroup critique. Journal ofMarketing Education, 19, 53-64.

Greenfield, P. M. (1998). The cultural evolution of IQ. In U. Nasser (Ed.),The rising curve: Long-term gains in IQ and other measures (pp. 81-123). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature oflegitimate power and greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.

Hamer, L. O. (2000). The additive effects of semistructured classroom activ-ities on student learning: An application of classroom-based experientiallearning techniques. Journal of Marketing Education, 22, 25-34.

Hansen, D. T. (1995). The call to teach. New York: Teachers College Press.Hansen, D. T. (2001). Exploring the moral heart of teaching: Toward a

teachers creed. New York: Teachers College Press.Harackiewicz, J. M., Baron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2002).

Predicting success in college: A longitudinal study of achievement goalsand ability measures as predictors of and performance from freshman yearthrough graduation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 562-575.

Hollander, S. C., Rassuli, K., & Nevett, T. R. (1998). Marketing history.Journal of Macromarketing, 18(1), 6-7.

Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millenials rising: The next great genera-tion. New York: Random House.

Hunt, S. D., & Madhavaram, S. (2006). Teaching marketing strategy: Usingresource-advantage theory as an integrative theoretical foundation.Journal of Marketing Education, 28, 93-105.

Jaramillo, F., & Spector, P. E. (2004). The effect of action orientation on theacademic performance of undergraduate marketing majors. Journal ofMarketing Education, 26, 250-260.

John, J., & Needel, M. (1989). Entry-level marketing research recruits: Whatdo recruiters need? Journal of Marketing Education, 11(1), 68-73.

Jones, D., Brian, G., & Monieson, D. D. (2003). Early development of thephilosophy of marketing thought. Journal of Marketing, 54, 102-113.

Joubert, J. (2006). Joseph Joubert quotes. Retrieved July 27, 2006, fromwww.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/Joseph_Joubert.html

Kantrow, A. M. (1986). Why history matters to managers. HarvardBusiness Review, 64(1), 81-88.

Karakaya, F., Ainscough, T. L., & Chopoorian, J. (2001). The effects ofclass size and learning style on student performance in a multimedia-based marketing course. Journal of Marketing Education, 23, 84-90.

Karns, G. L. (2005). An update of marketing student perceptions of learn-ing activities: Structure, preferences, and effectiveness. Journal ofMarketing Education, 27, 163-171.

Laub, J. A. (1999). Assessing the servant organization: Development of theorganizational leadership assessment (OLA) instrument. DissertationAbstracts International, 60, 308A.

Lincoln, D. (2001). Marketing educator Internet adoption in 1998 versus2000: Significant progress and remaining obstacles. Journal ofMarketing Education, 23, 103-116.

Mackay, H. (2007). Getting it right the next time. Retrieved April 11, 2007,from uniontimes.com

Marks R. B. (2000), Determinants of student evaluations of global meas-ures of instructor and course value. Journal of Marketing Education,22, 108-119.

Martin, C., & Tulgan, B. (2004). Managing the generation mixPart II.Retrieved July 27, 2006, from www.topechelon.com

Mayes, C. (2002). The teacher as an archetype of spirit. Journal ofCurriculum Studies, 34, 699-718.

McCorkle, D. E., Alexander, J. F., Reardon, J., & Kling, N. D. (2003).Developing self-marketing skills: Are marketing students prepared forthe job search? Journal of Marketing Education, 25, 196-207.

McGlynn, A. P. (2005, December). Teaching millenials, our newest cul-tural cohort. Education Digest. Retrieved July 27, 2006, from www.eddigest.com

Mustafa, S. T., & Chiang, D. (2006). Dimensions of quality in higher edu-cation: How academic performance affects university students teacherevaluations. Journal of the American Academy of Business, 8, 294-303.

Nevett, T. (1991, July). Historical investigation and the practice of market-ing. Journal of Marketing, 55, 13-23.

Noddings, N. (2002). Educating moral people: A caring alternative tocharacter education. New York: Teachers College Press.

OESNews. (2006). For your information. Retrieved July 27, 2006, fromwww.oesnews.com/resources/quotations

Olson, D. (2003). Psychological theory and education reform: How schoolreaches the mind and society. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Page, D., & Wong, P. T. P. (2000). Conceptual framework for measuringservant leadership. In B. Senyo & S. K. Adjibolooso (Eds.), The humanfactor in shaping the course of history and development (pp. 106-128).Boston: University Press of America Inc.

Pfeffer, J., & Fong, C. T. (2002). The end of business schools? Less successthan meets the eye. Academy of Management Learning and Education,1, 78-95.

Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. London: Routledge andKegan.

Postman, N., & Weingartner, C. (1971). Teaching as a subversive activity.New York: Dell Publishing Co.

Saenz, T., Marcoulides, G. A., Jun, E., & Young, R. (1999). The relationshipbetween college experience and academic performance among minoritystudents. International Journal of Education Management, 13, 199-207.

Silberman, M. (1996). Active learning: 101 strategies to teach any subject.Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Smith, L. W., & Van Doran, D. C. (2004). The reality-based learningmethod: A simple method for keeping teaching activities relevant andeffective. Journal of Marketing Education, 26, 66-74.

Snyder, B. R. (1971). The hidden curriculum. New York: Knopf.Socrates. (2006). Socrates quotes. Retrieved July 27, 2006, from

http://en.thinkexist.com/quotes/SocratesStafford, T. F. (1994). Consumption values and the choice of marketing elec-

tives: Treating students like customers. Journal of Marketing Education,16(2), 26-33.

Sternberg, J., & Lunart, T. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects andparadigms. In J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3-15).Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation.New York: McGraw-Hill.

Taylor, S., Humphreys, M., Singley, R., & Hunter, G. (2004). Business stu-dent preferences: Exploring the relative importance of Web manage-ment in course design. Journal of Marketing Education, 26, 42-49.

Tomlin, L. (2006). Lily Tomlin quotes. Retrieved July 27, 2006, fromwww.Brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/lily_tomlin.html

Totten, S. T., Sills, T., Dighy, A., & Russ, P. (1991). Cooperative learning:A guide to research. New York: Garland.

Tulgan, B. (2004). Trends point to a dramatic generational shift in thefuture workforce. Employment Relations Today, 30(4), 23-31.

Vaill, P. B. (1996). Learning as a way of being. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Ward, W. A. (2006). W. A. Ward quotes. Retrieved July 27, 2006, from

www.thinkexist.com/english/author/W_A_Ward/author_4347_1.htmlWee, L. K-N., Kek, M. A. Y-C., & Kelley, C. A. (2003). Transforming the

marketing curriculum using problem-based learning: A case study.Journal of Marketing Education, 25, 150-162.

Weir, K., Kochhar, A., LeBeau, S., & Edgerley, D. (2000). An empiricalstudy of the alignment between manufacturing and marketing strate-gies. Long Range Planning, 33, 831-848.

Wolfe, R. N., & Johnson, S. D. (1995). Personality as a predictor of collegeperformance Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 177-185.

Young, M. R., & Murphy, J. W. (2003). Integrating communications skillsinto the marketing curriculum: A case study. Journal of MarketingEducation, 25, 57-70.

Zemke, R., Raines, C., & Fitzpatrick, B. (2000). Generations at work:Managing the clash of veterans, boomers, Xers, and nexters in yourworkplace. New York: AMACOM, American Management Association.



/ColorImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorImageDict > /AntiAliasGrayImages false /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict > /GrayImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayImageDict > /AntiAliasMonoImages false /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict > /AllowPSXObjects false /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox false /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName (http://www.color.org) /PDFXTrapped /Unknown

/SyntheticBoldness 1.000000 /Description >>> setdistillerparams> setpagedevice

journal of marketing education 2007 chonko 111 21

Documents