Exploring teaching methods in Marketing: Traditional approach Vs Modern approach

By: Hanani binti Abd Ghani (M2 !22 !"#$%

Abstract

Little research has been carried out in the area of exploring teaching methods in marketing: Traditional Vs Modern approach. Criticism: Traditional education focuses on teaching, not learning. The main purpose of this research was to investigate the effectiveness of teaching method in learning marketing using traditional approach and modern approach and also to test how these methods are related to participations of students in classes and their result achievement in midterm test. I compare traditional approaches such as reading, writing and presenting with modern approach such as using compare and contrast diagram, mind map learning, and computer learning (graphics) when conducting marketing classes. The target population for this little research consisted of students from Universiti Tuanku bdul !ahman "UT !# at $ampar, %erak. The sampling frame was a list of &' students which is (' male and (' female students from stream ) "art * social science# and stream + "management * accounting#. ,ased on stream average marks for -tream ) is higher compare to -tream + for the first test however students for -tream + performance for the second test is better compared to -tream ) students. .or gender result, an average mark for male students is lower compare to female students for the first test and the same thing happened for the second test performance.

&hapter 'ne

(ntrod)ction

!*! Backgro)nd o+ the research

Little research has been carried out in the area of exploring teaching methods in marketing: Traditional Vs Modern approach. lthough some researcher have paid attention more to modern approach instead of traditional approach in learning progress, little is known about the effectiveness of modern approach compared to traditional approach if researches didn/t make similarities and comparison on both methods. ma0or point of differences between traditional approach and modern approach in teaching marketing sub0ects is the involvement of students in classes and the results achieved b1 students. This is because based on research made b1 Carrol, !. T. "&''2# innovation in teaching generall1 refers to renewing, changing or creating more effective processes, products or wa1s of doing things.

!*2 ,)rpose o+ these research

The main purpose of this research was to investigate the effectiveness of teaching method in learning marketing using traditional approach and modern approach and also to test how these methods are related to participations of students in classes and their result achievement in midterm test.

!*" ,roblem statements To further our understanding, I explored teaching methods such as traditional approach and modern approach to identif1 the result of satisfaction and dissatisfaction.

The research 3uestions driving this stud1 are as follows: 4hat are the methods can be used for both traditional and modern approaches5 4hat are the effectiveness in learning when using traditional and modern approaches5 6ow traditional and modern approaches affecting student participation in classes5 6ow traditional and modern approaches affecting students results in midterm test5

To investigate these 3uestions, I compare traditional approaches such as reading, writing and presenting with modern approach such as using compare and contrast diagram, mind map learning, and computer learning (graphics) when conducting marketing classes.

!*$ -esearch ob.ecti/es

7ore specificall1, the research aimed to achieve the following specific research ob0ectives: To compare the differences between traditional approach and modern approach.

To identif1 the effectiveness of using traditional approach and modern approach in teaching marketing.

To investigate whether using traditional and modern approaches affecting student participation in classes.

To test students/ achievement in marketing classes after teaching marketing using traditional and modern approaches when answering midterm test.

!*0 'rgani1ation o+ the paper

The rest of this article is structured as follows8 first, the extent literatures on traditional and modern approaches are review. This is followed b1 a description of the research methods and procedures used in the stud1. The results of our in3uir1 are then discussed. .inall1, implications, limitations, and direction for future research are offered.

&hapter T2o

3iterat)re -e/ie2

2*! (ntrod)ction o+ Traditional approach and modern approach

Traditional

education,

also

known

as back9to9basics, conventional

education or customar1 education, refers to long9established customs found in schools that societ1 has traditionall1 deemed appropriate. -ome forms of education reform promote the adoption of progressive education practices, a more holistic approach which focuses on

individual students: needs and self9expression. Traditional teacher9centered methods focused on rote learning and memori;ation.

Criticism: Traditional education focuses on teaching, not learning.

7odern approach is a progressive education which emphasi;es s on hands9on activit1, group activities and presentation in the class hours. The materials use to do an1 of the pro0ect given is based on instruction and will be using an1 available resource including internet, librar1 and outside experts. In the new wa1 of education st1le, there are more focusing on the significant attention to social development, including teamwork, interpersonal relationships, and self9 awareness.

2*2 4i++erences bet2een traditional approach and modern approach

Topic

Traditional approach

Modern approach

%erson

Teacher9centered instruction8 focus -tudent9centered instruction, focus on on teaching not learning learning not teaching Learning, retention, accumulation of valuable knowledge * skills

7ain <b0ective 6igh test scores, grades, graduation

Classroom Teaching methods

-tudents matched b1 age, and -tudents d1namicall1 grouped b1 interest possibl1 also b1 abilit1. ll students or abilit1 for each sub0ect, with the in a classroom are taught the same possibilit1 of different groups each hour material. of the da1. 7odern education emphasi;es: Traditional education emphasi;es:
5

=irect instruction and lectures -eatwork -tudents learn through listening and observation

6ands9on activities -tudent9led discover1 >roup activities

7aterials

Instruction based on textbooks, %ro0ect9based instruction using an1 lectures, and individual written available resource including Internet, assignments librar1 and outside experts 7emori;ation of facts, ob0ective Understanding the facts, application of information8 Correct knowledge is facts, anal1sis, evaluation, Innovation8 paramount Critical thinking is paramount .ocus on independent learning. -ignificant attention to social -ociali;ing largel1 discouraged development, including teamwork, except for extracurricular activities interpersonal relationships, and self9 awareness. and teamwork9based pro0ects. -tudents often address teachers formall1 b1 their last names. The -tudents and teachers ma1 work together teacher is considered a respected role as collaborators. model in the communit1. -tudents should obe1 the teacher.

Content

-ocial aspects

-tudent and teacher relationship

2*" 'ther research by researchers

!esearch made b1 %atrick Carmack title traditional education ?s modern education stated that there are man1 views regarding education and its purposes, depending upon one/s perspective. ?irtuall1 no one an1 longer sees education as an end in itself. @ducation is a means to an end. Therefore an1 change in the end aimed at will necessaril1 be reflected in the means of education selected. If educator/s goal is onl1 to produce good coal miners who will work until the1 drop
6

and cause no problems, then their means of education will be a simple affair. If, however, educator/s goal is to produce well9rounded, cultured gentlemen and ladies, capable of addressing an1 problem or situation in life with the maximum likelihood both of success and personal happiness, then the means of education to do so will be a much more complicated affair. n1 change of means ma1 affect the achievement of the end.

Method used To define the root word of this thesis:/ method/. In the definitions of this term, 4ebster/s Third Aew International =ictionar1 often uses expressions such as Ba procedure or process for attainingC a goal or Ba s1stematic procedure, techni3ueC or Ba set of rulesC ver1 often related to a science or art "7ethod#. In agreement with this 4ebster/s definition, 6unkis claims that Bmethods have form and consistenc1,C and later on draws attention to the form b1 stating that methods Bhave definite steps or stages and sub9behaviors that are recurrent and applicable to various sub0ect mattersC. s 6enson states, some examples of methods are: a lecture, a simulation game, a case stud1, or an in3uir1.

&hapter Three

Methodology

"*! (ntrod)ction This chapter illustrates the stud1 design, approach, and methodolog1 that were used to stud1 the differences between lecturer in universit1 and college in term of 3ualit1 and teaching performance. 3ualitative research design was chosen for this stud1 because it has the abilit1 to capture a deeper understanding of participants/ lives experienced "!ossman * !allis, (DDE# and to understand the process that people used to construct meanings. Fualitative research such as closed 3uestion and open9ended 3uestionnaires is useful for studies at the individual level, and to find out, in depth, the wa1s in which people think or feel.

"*2 5ampling

The target population for this little research consisted of students from Universiti Tuanku bdul !ahman "UT !# at $ampar, %erak. The unit of anal1sis was the individual student. The sampling frame was a list of &' students which is (' male and (' female students from stream ) "art * social science# and stream + "management * accounting# line for session -eptember9 =ecember &'(G. <f the &' students, H male * H female students are from stream ) and H male * H female students are from stream + involved in this little surve1. fter researcher conducting classes using traditional approach such as presenting, reading and writing and modern approach such as using mind map, internet, diagram and computer graphic, midterm test was given to students to test their understanding in learning marketing. The resulting sample can be described as a convenience sample.

List of respondents are as table provided below:

Table "*!: 3ist o+ -espondents 5t)dents 7ale .emale T'TA3 5tream 6 (Art 7 5ocial 5cience% H H ! 5tream 8 (Management 7 Acco)nting% H H !

"*" 4ata &ollection The 3uestion "chapter (, &, I, J# was tested using a convenience sample of approximatel1 &' students in Universiti Tuanku =epartment "6<=# from bdul !ahman, $ampar. =ata for this little research was ccountanc1 collected after all students completed the midterm test. ,efore conducting test, each 6ead of rt and -ocial -cience department and 7anagement * department permission was obtained. To avoid the potential bias owing to the use of non9 probabilit1 sampling, this test was conducted twice after each approach "traditional and modern# is used. ( hour was given to each student to answer mid9term test and test was conducted in lab H and classroom.

"*$ 4ata Analysis 7arketing 7idterm test is prepared based on chapter one "introduction to marketing#, chapter two "strategic planning in marketing#, chapter six "product development and testing# and chapter seven "product life c1cle control#. In this test consist of (H structured 3uestions that must be answered in I' minutes time.

-tudents for -tream ) " rt * -ocial -cience# manage to complete first test "after traditional approach was conducted# within H' minutes K I' minutes, however the1 completed second test "after modern approaches was conducted# within G' minutes K 2H minutes. .or -tream + students "7anagement * ccounting# mange to complete first test after traditional approach was conducted# within HH minutes K I' minutes and three "G# of them "& males * ( female# don/t have enough time to complete the 3uestions given, however the1 completed second test "after modern approaches was conducted# within GH minutes K HH minutes. 7anagement time is as table provided below8

Table "*2: Management time 5tream Gender &ompleted 2ithin: &ompleted 2ithin: &ompleted 2ithin: 0!m 9 : m H H G 2 4idn;t completed in : m ' ' & ( H H H H Total

" m 9 $ m $!m 9 0 m <irst test (a+ter traditional approach 2as cond)cted% 5tream 6 " rt * -ocial -cience# 5tream 8 "7anagement 7ale .emale 7ale .emale ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

* ccounting# 5econd test (a+ter modern approach 2as cond)cted% 5tream 6 7ale G & .emale 2 ( " rt * -ocial -cience# 5tream 8 "7anagement * ccounting# 7ale .emale ( & & &

' ' & (

' ' ' '

H H H H

10

&hapter <o)r

Analysis
Table 2.( below provides a profile of respondents in term of name list, stream and gender. The results indicate that marks for second test "after modern approaches was conducted such as using diagram, mind map and computer# is higher compare to first test marks "after traditional approach was conducted such as reading, writing and presenting#. .or -tream ) " rt * -cience# the highest marks for the first test is GE marks and 2J marks for the second test. .or -tream + "7anagement * ccounting# the highest marks for the first test is 2D marks and H' for the second test. 6igh marks for the first test is 2D marks "for both stream ) * +# and H' marks for the second test "for both stream ) * +# while the lowest marks for the first test is (( marks and G2 marks for the second test. Table $*!: 5t)dents list 5tream 5tream 6 Gender 7ale 7ale 7ale 7ale 7ale .emale .emale .emale .emale .emale 7ale 7ale 7ale 7ale 7ale .emale .emale .emale =ame >oi %ei 4en Lee -hun +an -;e +u Ling +ong Lee +en Chan +ong Loong lice -anthia !ani Teoh -hea Ae1 Low Mhao Lie @laine >an $ok !en Te1 @e @rn Tong $ok -oon %ung T;1 Ch1uan Cheah -hao Lin >an -hirle1 Tan Chee %ing Lim Fiao Loe <irst test marks G( &I G( G& G' GJ GE G' &2 GE "!> !! 22 G' &H &J (E && $# 5econd test marks 2H GE 2J 2H 2G 2G 2I 2( GJ 2I $!" GE 2D 2J 2I 2J "$ G2 0
11

Total Marks 5tream 8

.emale .emale Total Marks

41nona $oh -hin @ri

2E GJ "!!

H' 2E $$"

Table 2.& below provided average marks for marketing sub0ects based on stream. .or -tream ), an average first test mark is G(.J and 2G.( for the second test with a difference of ((.2. .or -tream +, an average first test mark is G(.( and 22.G for the second test with a difference of (G.&. ,ased on the table provided below, we can see that average marks for -tream ) is higher compare to -tream + for the first test however students for -tream + performance for the second test is better compared to -tream ) students.

Table $*2: A/erage marks based on stream 5tream 5tream 6 " rt * -ocial -cience# 5tream 8 "7anagement * ccounting# <irst test ("!>?! % @ "!*> ("!!?! % @ "!*! 5econd Test ($"!?! % @ $"*! ($$"?! % @ $$*"

Table 2.G below shows the performance for -tream ) * + students based on gender. .or male students, the highest mark for the first test is 22 marks while 2D marks is for the second test. The lowest mark for the first test is (( marks and GE marks for the second test. ,ased on the table 2.G below, this show that result for the second test is higher compare to the first test with a differences of ('2 marks.

Table $*": A/erage marks based on gender (male% 5tream 5tream 6 A Male " rt * -ocial -cience# <irst test G( &I G( G& G' !! $$ 5econd Test 2H "B 2J 2H 2G GE $#
12

5tream 8 A Male "7anagement * ccounting#

Total Marks

G' &H &J !:B

2J 2I 2J 2>2

Table 2.2 below shows the performance for -tream ) * + students based on gender. .or female students, the highest mark for the first test is 2D marks while H' marks is for the second test. The lowest mark for the first test is (E marks and G2 marks for the second test. ,ased on the table 2.G below, this show that result for the second test is higher compare to the first test with a differences of D2 marks.

Table $*$: A/erage marks based on gender (<emale% 5tream 5tream 6 A <emale " rt * -ocial -cience# <irst test GJ GE G' &2 GE !B && $# 2E GJ ""! 5econd Test 2G 2I 2( GJ 2I "$ G2 0 0 2E $2#

5tream 8 A <emale "7anagement * ccounting#

Total Marks

Table 2.H below provided average marks for marketing sub0ects based on stream. .or male students, an average first test mark is (I.E and &J.& for the second test with a difference of ('.2. .or female students, an average second test mark is GG.( and 2&.D for the second test with a difference of D.E. ,ased on the table provided below, we can see that average marks for male students is lower compare to female students for the first test and the same thing happened for the second test performance. This show that female students result is better compared to male students result.

Table $*0: A/erage marks based on gender

13

Gender Male <emale

<irst test (!:B?! % @ !:*B (""!?! % @ ""*!

5econd Test (2>2?! % @ 2>*2 ($2#?! % @ $2*#

&hapter <i/e

4isc)ssion 7 &oncl)sion

0*! Ad/antages and disad/antages o+ Traditional approaches Ad/antages

>ives the instructor the chance to expose students to unpublished or not readil1 available material. llows the instructor to precisel1 determine the aims, content, organi;ation, pace and direction of a presentation. In contrast, more student9centered methods, e.g., discussions or laboratories, re3uire the instructor to deal with unanticipated student ideas, 3uestions and comments.

Can be used to arouse interest in a sub0ect. Can complement and clarif1 text material. Complements certain individual learning preferences. -ome students depend upon the structure provided b1 highl1 teacher9centered methods.

.acilitates large9class communication.

4isad/antages

%laces students in a passive rather than an active role, which hinders learning.
14

@ncourages one9wa1 communication8 therefore, the lecturer must make a conscious effort to become aware of student problems and student understanding of content without verbal feedback.

!e3uires a considerable amount of unguided student time outside of the classroom to enable understanding and long9term retention of content. In contrast, interactive methods "discussion, problem9solving sessions# allow the instructor to influence students when the1 are activel1 working with the material.

!e3uires the instructor to have or to learn effective writing and speaking skills.

0*!*! Method )se +or traditional approach (presentationC readingC 2riting%

<ne of approach under traditional approach is through presentation. 7ost of the time presentation is using 7icrosoft %ower %oint. @ven though it places audience "students# in a passive role but it compliment and clarif1 text material. -tudents can get a lot of information through presentation.

15

<ther approach under traditional methods are reading * writing. .or this approach normall1 lecturers will explain in class all the content for each chapter. -tudents will take note and ask 3uestion if the1 seek for clarification regarding an1 chapter. This method is onl1 involving one9wa1 communication and students will easil1 get bored.

0*2 Ad/antages and disad/antages o+ Modern approaches Ad/antages To make learning meaningful ble to thin in picture To perceived visual words accuratel1 To be able to think in G dimension and to transform one perception 4isad/antages =ifficult to facilitate large class communication Aot clarif1 all information Aot all students can adapt this kind of learning

16

0*2*! Method )se +or traditional approach (presentation )sing diagramC mind map 7 graphic )sing comp)ter%

.or this approach student will make a presentation using diagram "less word but effective#. @ven though he did not clarif1 all information but his classmate can understand all the content for each chapter better and make learning meaningful.

Learn 7arketing using computer "graphic# and internet in order to get more information. !esearch made that theor1 sub0ect will be more effective if the learning process involving graphic.

17

7ind map is use to show the overall content for each chapter. -tudents give a good response sa1ing that the1 can see clearl1 the overall ob0ective for each chapter.

18

fter lecturer finished teaching all students using two approaches "traditional and modern#, students from -tream ) and -tream + was tested b1 answering mid9term test in Lab H and classroom. .or this test, students must answer all structure 3uestions which consist of chapter (, &, I, * J. =uration given was ( hour "I' minutes#. This test was conducted twice, ( test after traditional approach and ( more test after lecturer delivered lesson using modern approach. The results for each student are stated in Chapter 2: nal1sis.

19

0*" &oncl)sion

Tablet %Cs, compact computers that allow 1ou to write notes directl1 onto the screen with a special pen, replace the archaic pro0ector. 4ith the tablet technolog1 allow lecturers to make notes on charts and spreadsheets and send them directl1 to their students: %Cs and he will get a feedback from each student. .rom the above, we can make out that the Information and communication technolog1 has made man1 innovations in the field of teaching and also made a drastic change from the old paradigm of teaching and learning. -o, teaching depends upon successful mode of communication and Innovation though we mean the changes that we propose to be included in our medium of communication or even inclusion of some other elements in communicating information. I recommend that the teaching would be highl1 effective if the teacher start to use the recent multimedia technologies like usage of computers extensivel1 or some modifications in the conventional mode of teaching and even a diagram prepared b1 using an1 software. The use of computers ma1 be ver1 well practiced in the environment where the use of such technolog1 is highl1 possible, but there must be some sort of innovation which can also be practiced in an environment where such use of technolog1 is on its wa1 to growth. I believe that the core ob0ective of teaching is passing on the information or knowledge to the minds of the students. ob0ective of teaching. n1 method using computers or modif1ing the existing conventional chalk9talk method are innovative if the1 ultimatel1 serve the attainment of core

0*$ 3imitation o+ research s the weaknesses that are explained in this research work are purel1 the views and perceptions of the researchers and which could not be generali;ed. @ven the modifications suggested might suffer from other limitations. The researchers tr1 to suggest some useful modifications which could be tried b1 teachers as innovative to get maximum results.

20

:* -e+erences 7 Appendix

http:NNen.wikipedia.orgNwikiNTraditionalOeducation

http:NNen.wikipedia.orgNwikiN7odernOeducation

http:NNen.wikipedia.orgNwikiNCriticalOthinking

http:NNis.muni.c;NthNEIDH&NffOmOb(N7gr=iplomka,oumova.pdf

http:NNcreatel1.comN.ree9$(&9@ducation9Templates

21