management information system 2

Insights from industry Standardizing the MIS course: benefits and pitfalls C. Bryan Foltz Margaret T. O’Hara and Harold Wise Introduction The American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) established a basic core requirement for management information systems (MIS) in 1969. Since 30 years, no specific guidelines have been set as to what topics this course will cover, and the course topics vary greatly among various institutions (Stephens and O’Hara, 2001). Some institutions split the required MIS core course into two separate courses. The first course typically covers the more common application software packages (i.e. Word, Excel, and PowerPoint). In recent years, some schools have greatly reduced or even eliminated teaching word processing in the class since so many high school students are now trained to use some word processing application. The course may also cover some basic computer concepts (hardware, software and telecommunications) and usually fulfills the university technology requirements. This skills-based course is typically offered to first or second year students. The second course is directed toward business students and fulfills the technology and information systems requirements that are specific to the business school or college. As such, the course focuses more on using information technology to solve business problems and the strategic use of information systems. Instead of covering the basic software applications, a database management system (DBMS) and limited DB project may be at the center of the course. Establishing guidelines for a database project is challenging to the instructor for numerous reasons, including: varying educational levels of the students, varying business knowledge of the students, and different business majors and interests among the students. Another challenge for the instructor is developing a comprehensive project suitable for the class without investing time that should be spent on other activities, such as research. Moreover, since universities frequently offer multiple sections of this class taught by multiple faculty members, maintaining consistency of course objectives across all sections is very important. In this paper, guidelines for developing a database project appropriate to all levels of business students are presented. First, the MIS undergraduate core courses in the literature are briefly examined, followed by specifics about the course at one university, including the problems encountered while teaching it. Next, a semesterlong database project is introduced as a solution to these problems. Detailed notes on creating such a project, including that for an online class, are also The authors C. Bryan Foltz, Margaret T. O’Hara and Harold Wise are all based at the College of Business, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina, USA. Keywords Information systems, Databases, Curricula, Universities Abstract Although many universities require courses in management information systems for their business majors, little information exists as to what objectives should be included in the course, and the course topics vary greatly across institutions. Differences in course objectives even exist within schools if multiple sections of the course are taught by different faculty. Typically, a significant portion of the class is devoted to database concepts. In many cases, the course requirements include developing a database for a small business. This database project can consume faculty time and resources, especially if student teams choose their own projects and no guidelines exist for faculty reference. In this paper, guidelines for developing a standardized database project that challenges students while freeing up faculty resources are presented. Experiences in dealing with these projects in both face-to-face and online classes at one university are detailed. Electronic access The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1065-0741.htm Campus-Wide Information Systems Volume 21 · Number 4 · 2004 · pp. 163–169 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited · ISSN 1065-0741 DOI 10.1108/10650740410555043 163 Standardizing the MIS course: benefits and pitfalls Campus-Wide Information Systems Volume 21 · Number 4 · 2004 · 163–169 C. Bryan Foltz, Margaret T. O’Hara and Harold Wise provided. Finally, the benefits realized by the university, faculty and students in using this project for the last three years are discussed. the fore in recent years. The chair of the top technologies task force, Roman Kepczyk stated: Technology is now so inextricably tied to our business and personal lives that the ability to use it effectively and efficiently is a true source of concern (CFO.com staff, 2002, p. 1) The introductory course in the literature Considering that the second MIS class is often the only opportunity non-MIS business majors have to learn about IS/IT within an organization, it is surprising that very little attention has been paid to it at most universities. In the last six years, the MIS curriculum has undergone two major revisions (the IS 2002 and 1997 model curricula), but this course has received little attention in formal study. What attention the course has received has been with respect to revisions and updates as a part of the broader MIS major, rather than as a standalone course within a business school. In the IS 2002 model curriculum for the undergraduate IS degree, the authors state: The use of information is pervasive in society. . .. While many organizations provide some user training in information technology, graduates who are capable users may have a comparative advantage in their employment (Gorgone et al., 2003, p. 3). Clearly, the MIS course takes on new meaning and importance to all business students. The MIS core course(s) at one university All AACSB-accredited universities and colleges are required to offer one MIS course to business students. Many business schools, including this university, split the requirement into two separate courses – one taken in the first year and the other in the third year. The lower level course focuses primarily on basic computer concepts and computer literacy skills. Since the course does “double duty” and fulfills the university technology requirement, more than 60 sections of the class are offered each year. Two other colleges on campus offer a similar course for more than 21,000 students in the university. Thus, many of the students in a particular class section (up to 95 percent in this experience) are not business majors. In this class, enhanced word processing concepts, spreadsheet concepts including decision-making and scenario analysis, presentation graphics, and basic computer concepts are covered. In the last year, database concepts and software have been introduced and the coverage of word processing reduced, since most students arrive at university with word processing experience from high school. While the database coverage is minimal, students are at least exposed to the basic relational DB concepts, along with table and query construction. The second MIS course (MIS-2) is intended primarily for business majors, although computer science majors often take the course as well. Students taking this course (officially a third year course at this university) are actually at various points in their college career. Database coverage is extensive, and students are expected to work in a team to develop a small working business-related database. The database project and related work comprise about 50 percent of the course. Since the class is not a Systems Analysis course, a full-scale project is not expected. Instead, students need to use the project to learn and appreciate the capabilities of a database. It has long been recognized that employers prefer MIS graduates whose knowledge is not limited to technology (Ehie, 2002; Maier and Gambill, 1996). Some studies of IS education suggested that the course work was not reflecting the real world needs of business (Gill and Hu, 1999). Given the ubiquitous nature of IT in today’s firm, it is reasonable to assume that employers would also prefer non-MIS graduates whose knowledge includes technology. As early as 1993, recognizing the “pervasiveness of systems concepts and technology in business”, an MIS course that focused on spreadsheet and database software was implemented in the accounting major at one school (Hardy et al., 1993). The Boston chapter of the society for information management (SIM) found that requisite IS skills were shifting to those related to integrating technology with the firm and moving away from programming skills. A 1993 NSF study confirmed this finding (Zack, 1998). During the last ten years, business organizations have become increasingly dependent upon information, with technology now an integral part of every functional area, and technology management has become a critical skill for the general business manager (Stephens and O’Hara, 1998). In some schools, the accounting curriculum has been revised to put more of an emphasis on information systems. The CPA exam will contain a greater focus on technology beginning in 2003 (Brenner et al., 2002). Finance is another area in which technology has come to The problems In each semester, six or seven sections of the MIS-2 class are offered, and three or four faculty 164 Standardizing the MIS course: benefits and pitfalls Campus-Wide Information Systems Volume 21 · Number 4 · 2004 · 163–169 C. Bryan Foltz, Margaret T. O’Hara and Harold Wise members are involved. In an entire school year, including summer, as many as ten faculty members will take class. The sections are filled rapidly with a variety of students. Those students planning an MIS concentration must take the course as soon as possible, as it is a prerequisite to all other MIS courses. Any graduating senior who has not had the course is guaranteed a spot in the class, and the course is opened to all other seniors first. Scattered among the rest of the students are those who managed to register when the seats were open. Student issues Students taking an MIS concentration need a more extensive introduction to databases to prepare them for their DB and Systems Analysis courses. Yet, as they represent less than 10 percent of the total class population, it is difficult to concentrate too much on their needs. Seniors in the class have taken or are enrolled in the Strategy (Policy) course and have a broader business perspective than the first semester juniors in the class. Moreover, most of the students have little or no real-world business experience with computers, and many of them struggle to see the relevance of an MIS course to “their” major. While none of these issues is unusual or impossible to overcome, they do add to the complexity of the course. Although many students believe that they know a great deal about computers and information technology, their experience is often limited to playing computer games, typing a term paper using word processing software, or more recently, surfing the Internet. They do not adequately understand business basics outside a textbook, and they have difficulty in understanding the concept of a multi-user system. They are bound by what is sometimes referred to as the “Ctrl-Alt-Delete” syndrome – where every problem can be solved by simply rebooting the system. Faculty issues Although MIS-2 is a core course, with clearly stated objectives, the instructors often have different expectations regarding student achievement and course content. MIS faculty bring varied backgrounds to the university – some have extensive programming experience, some have extensive DB experience, and still others have managerial experience. Thus, their approach to the major DB project varied greatly. There were two basic approaches to the student project. Either the student teams selected and developed their own project, or the faculty member assigned all teams the same project. When student teams selected their own projects their interest in the class was often enhanced, but it presented a burden for the instructor with two class sections, each with eight teams. Among the problems that arose were: explaining and applying Porter’s model to 16 separate projects, developing ER diagrams for a variety of businesses, and monitoring and grading the projects at various levels of development. Although extensive DB design and systems analysis are not expected in this class, students still need to begin with a solid and correct data model. Developing a project for students to work on was not a perfect solution, either, especially for newly-hired faculty members and for those who had not taught the course recently. These faculties either invested significant advance time and effort in preparing for the course by developing (and testing) the entire group project before it was distributed to the students, or they spent extra time and effort during the semester trying to stay a step or two ahead of their students. Although the university is primarily a teaching school, faculty are still expected to conduct high-quality research, and this adds another constraint to the time allotted for class preparation. Moreover, a new project had to be created every semester so that cheating opportunities were minimized. University issues Like most schools, this university has had its share of budget woes. Cutbacks abound, and faculty are always asked to curb expenses as much as possible. While computer-supported instructional tools (such as Blackboard) seemingly help cut copy costs, students still printed most of their notes without fee in the school computer labs. Costs were simply transferred from one area of the university to another. What was needed was a solution that: (1) reduced faculty time invested in the course; (2) minimized student differences while maximizing their learning potential; and (3) maintained or reduced costs for the university. The solution In the past, some faculty members shared semester project material among themselves; however, there was no formal method for doing so. Different sections of the MIS-2 course would thus complete different semester projects at different levels of difficulty. Further, most faculty created their own supplemental materials, and used university resources (i.e. the copiers) to develop learning packets. Mid-semester of fall 2000, two faculty members decided to share their supplemental materials for the course. Initially, these materials were visualized as enhancing or replacing the access textbook being used in the course. 165 Standardizing the MIS course: benefits and pitfalls Campus-Wide Information Systems Volume 21 · Number 4 · 2004 · 163–169 C. Bryan Foltz, Margaret T. O’Hara and Harold Wise Later in the semester, the faculty members decided to further standardize the project guide for the next semester. Before an appropriate project guide could be written, however, the faculty members had to formalize the entire process. They need to agree on the general nature of the semester project, the number and type of assignments it contained, and the overall degree of difficulty. These decisions were based on the existing material and past experience. The project guide and supplemental material were then packaged together and reproduced by the university bookstore. The final project packet included the guide itself, a three-ring binder, and a zip disk, and cost less than $20. During the first semester in which the project guide was used, the guide was revised and enhanced, and a new project was developed. One enhancement was the addition of standardized grading sheets to help faculty to coordinate the different sections and let students know exactly what is expected from them on each assignment. Another enhancement was more detailed descriptions of requirements and expectations. The project packet has been revised and enhanced each subsequent semester. After three years, there are now six “standard” projects that are rotated each semester. These projects include databases for a bookstore, a video rental store, and a party rental shop. occasional server and network failures, also cause challenges for an online course. One of the more critical issues is system availability during a quiz or exam, or while submitting homework. The students become quite frustrated if they are unable to access the system to complete or submit an assignment. Flexibility on the instructor’s part goes a long way to resolving this type of issue. Pedagogical issues Another major challenge encountered while converting the MIS-2 class to an online format involved pedagogical issues. Two different sets of pedagogical challenges were encountered. The first issue involved teaching the theoretical concepts covered in the MIS-2 course. Many textbook publishers attempt to overcome this by providing online support and supplements, some of which can be incorporated directly into the online teaching software. Although this approach may provide the student with additional information about specific topics, it does not help to highlight topics or materials. In a face-to-face class, the instructor can easily tell students to pay particular attention to certain sections of the text. In an online class, it is not that easy. Instructors can overcome this challenge by simply providing a written set of learning objectives for each topic. In this manner, student learning efforts can be focused on the most relevant portions of the text and supplemental materials. The second pedagogical issue encountered during the conversion process proved more difficult to solve. Teaching access to MIS-2 students is difficult enough in a face-to-face setting. Providing comparable quality of instruction in an online course is much more difficult as the instructor cannot easily demonstrate software use. Two possible solutions were considered: a synchronous chat session using an electronic whiteboard for demonstration purposes or an asynchronous demonstration utilizing recordings made from the instructor’s monitor. While most face-to-face courses rely on synchronous communications, one of the major benefits of an online course is the freedom from such scheduled sessions. Therefore, the second solution was selected. Unfortunately, Blackboard does not include a facility for recording monitor activity. The project guide proved invaluable in solving this issue. Although a large number of commercial reference guides are available for access, the project guide incorporates a section customwritten to support students in the MIS-2 course. This section provides a good overview of techniques normally discussed in the classroom. Online courses Recently, one section of the MIS-2 course moved to an online status. This presented a new set of technological, pedagogical, and administrative challenges. The process of converting MIS-2 into an online class was greatly simplified by the existence of the project guide. Since the course had already been standardized, converting to an online format only required solutions to issues such as those presented here. Technological challenges As one might expect, many of the challenges encountered in converting the MIS-2 course to an online format involve technology. One of the most frustrating challenges involves student’s lack of basic technical skills. Although students are required to take an introductory computer course before taking the MIS-2 course, many have difficulty with basic tasks such as copying files from disk to disk or dealing with e-mail attachments. While this type of difficulty is frustrating in any section of MIS-2, it becomes crucial in the online setting. General technological issues, such as 166 Standardizing the MIS course: benefits and pitfalls Campus-Wide Information Systems Volume 21 · Number 4 · 2004 · 163–169 C. Bryan Foltz, Margaret T. O’Hara and Harold Wise For the online section, the project guide material was supplemented by monitor recordings created using Camtasia Studio. Using this (or similar) software, instructors are able to create annotated movies demonstrating the use of access or any other software. Since the project guide already included a discussion about using access, the monitor recordings were created as a visual online appendix. Although file size must be carefully managed, this approach offers a number of benefits. First, the online demonstrations are consistent with the project guide, thus providing a visual explanation of written steps. Second, the students are able to work at their own convenience, rather than logging on at some set time. Finally, the students can easily watch the videos as many times as necessary. Standardization benefits and results The results of standardizing this course were very interesting and included a course contest, simplified preparation for faculty, and course standardization for students with little variance between sections. Simplified faculty preparation By far the greatest benefit to faculty has been the reduced amount of time spent on class preparation. Availability of the project guide, with a pre-selected project, resulted in an easier overall course preparation (i.e. syllabus and assignment scheduling), lessened preparation time for each class meeting and generally less stress for all instructors. It also enabled instructors to easily substitute for each other when the need arose. Each new project is developed before the semester with input from every MIS-2 instructor who wants to participate. The project guide necessitates that the project must be completed well in advance so that the printed guide can be prepared for student purchase. This requirement forces completion on a timely basis. It then gives each instructor adequate time to fine tune the teaching method for the project and to develop teaching examples. Course contest Most semesters, a course contest is conducted to showcase the best group from each course section. Prior to the project guide, judging the contest was a challenge because of variation of project difficulty level across groups. Some groups had a complex database with a simplified interface, while others had simple database with an exceptional interface. Each student group now has an equal chance to compete, because all groups in all sections begin their efforts from the same basic project. Thus, the judges are able to compare the groups objectively, based on the enhancements that each group adds to the database. A real benefit of this contest was that it was used as a “motivator” within each section. Many sections encouraged the groups to compete for the top group position by offering an exemption to the final exam. The final project grade for that group would also be the final exam grade. This motivated many groups to do their best resulting in a good project and ultimately learning the material. Course standardization for students It is not unusual for students, when pre-registering for the next semester, to choose instructors they feel, who would offer the best chance for the best grade with the least amount of work. Since all sections teach the same project, cover the same General administrative issues Establishing effective communications between the instructor and students is vital to the success of any online course. Many methods exist and can be used quite successfully, either alone or in combination. For example, telephone, e-mail, discussion boards, and instant messaging provide a solid set of tools. However, the MIS-2 course adds another dimension to the need for effective communications. Students must also exchange current copies of their access database files. This exchange can be done by e-mail, by passing diskettes, or by using Blackboard. Many students in the face-to-face sections have difficulty in ensuring that only the most current file is exchanged. This problem becomes even worse in the online format. In a face-to-face section, instructor discussion can help to overcome this issue. In the online section, instructions within the project guide helped to address the problem. Scheduling is the second major administrative issue encountered while converting the MIS-2 course to an online format. Although Blackboard offers an online testing facility, the exams for this course are offered in a face-to-face setting (online exams are also provided when needed). However, students are highly encouraged to attend the face-to-face exams so that the instructor can answer questions as needed. This is particularly important for the second exam, which, at this university, is a hands-on access exam administered in the computer lab. Since no specific time slots are allocated for the course, the exam is planned around student schedules. Realistically, instructors may need to offer two exam periods, one during the day and the other in the evening. The lack of a specific time slot also complicates scheduling the final exam. 167 Standardizing the MIS course: benefits and pitfalls Campus-Wide Information Systems Volume 21 · Number 4 · 2004 · 163–169 C. Bryan Foltz, Margaret T. O’Hara and Harold Wise material, and administer the same technical hands-on database exam, all students receive the same opportunity for success without one having an advantage over another. This results in sections being equally filled with students selecting sections based on day and time only. Many students, when access to their instructor is impractical, will approach another instructor teaching the same course for help when needed. Resources are much more available for all students taking the MIS-2 course because variance between sections is very small. Students also know, in advance, when their assignments are due. Thus, they are able to schedule their workload better. Other results and benefits Another benefit of standardizing the course is reduced copy costs for the department because handouts are no longer being prepared by instructors. Instead, packets are prepared and sold at the bookstore. The success of standardizing this course has led some faculty to begin looking at areas where other courses can be impacted in much the same way. which each instructor can track the author and manager of the database. Computer-savvy students, however, can easily change this information, and once one team learns the information is there, the news spreads quickly to other teams. A more subtle approach is to change data in a single field for one record in one table of the database. It is best if this field is never scheduled to be used in any reports or queries the students are required to develop. For example, the number in the field for a secondary phone might be listed as 328.2245 in one instructor’s DB, 328.2345 in the next, 328.2445 in the next. Summary The MIS-2 course previously presented significant challenges for faculty trying to balance their research and teaching efforts. Required to teach database concepts by using a semester long project, faculty were often stretched thin trying to prepare for this class and meet other professional obligations. By developing a standard project guide and creating a set of database projects to be rotated through six semesters, course preparation time and cost were greatly reduced. Standardization across multiple sections taught by different faculty was also achieved. Further details on the project guide and the projects are available from the authors. On-going issues Several areas still present a challenge for those teaching the course. One challenge results from the varying levels of student experience, interests and background within a single class section. As noted above, a second semester sophomore and a graduating senior have vastly different experiences – both academically and in the real world. Although the instructor gains some classroom instructional time by using the project manual, explaining, for example, the intricacies involved in “selling” a system – the politics, the cost-benefit analyses, and the balancing of all stakeholder interests, are still a daunting task. Since limiting the time frame within which students can take the course is not an acceptable solution, there is no viable solution to this issue. Another issue that many faculty must deal with is dishonesty. While rotating the projects through a three-year cycle reduces the chance of reusing older DBs (especially since the technology changes so rapidly), opportunities for cheating still arise during a single semester. When seven class sections all use the same project, weeding out and eliminating cheating is always a challenge. While most students will not share projects within the same instructor’s classes, it is often very tempting for groups to “share” their projects with teams in other instructor’s classes. Several ways of checking for “borrowed” work exist. Each Microsoft Access database has a properties sheet (see file, database properties) on References Brenner, V., Surynt, T., Augustine, F. and Stryker, J. (2002), “The joint accounting/e-business technology major: an inter-disciplinary approach to curriculum development”, Proceedings of The Informing Science and IT Education Conference, Cork, Ireland, pp. 137-44. CFO.com Staff (2002), “Top ten tech needs of finance”, available at: www.cfo.com/article/1,5309,7182%7C%7CBS%7C% 7C67,00.html (accessed 4 October 2003). Ehie, I.C. (2002), “Developing a management information systems (MIS) curriculum: perspectives from MIS practitioners”, Journal of Education for Business, Vol. 77 No. 3, pp. 151-7. Gill, T.G. and Hu, Q. (1999), “The evolving undergraduate information systems education: a survey of US institutions”, Journal of Education for Business, Vol. 74 No. 5, pp. 289-94. Gorgone, J.T., Valacich, J.S., Feinstein, D.L. and Davis, G.B. et al. (2003), “Foreword”, Database for Advances in Information Systems, Vol. 34 No. 1, p. vi. Hardy, J., Deppe, L. and Smith, J. (1993), “A curriculum for the 1990s and beyond”, Management Accounting, Vol. 15 No. 3, p. 66. Maier, J.L. and Gambill, S. (1996), “CIS/MIS curriculums in AACSB-accredited colleges of business”, Journal of Education for Business, Vol. 71 No. 6, pp. 329-33. Stephens, C. and O’Hara, M. (2001), “The core information technology course at AACSB schools: consistency or 168 Standardizing the MIS course: benefits and pitfalls Campus-Wide Information Systems Volume 21 · Number 4 · 2004 · 163–169 C. Bryan Foltz, Margaret T. O’Hara and Harold Wise chaos?”, Journal of Education for Business, Vol. 76 No. 4, pp. 181-4. Stephens, C. and O’Hara, M. (1998), “Information technology for rising executives: MBA curriculums at AACSB accredited schools”, Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference of the Academy for Information Management, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 63-75. Zack, M.H. (1998), “An MIS course integrating information technology and organizational issues”, The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 73-87. Further reading Goff, J. (2002), “What CFOs really think about technology”, available at: www.cfo.com/article/ 1,5309,6617,00.html?f ¼ related (accessed 4 October 2003) Havelca, D. (2003), “Predicting software self efficacy among business students: a preliminary assessment”, Journal of Information Systems Education, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 145-52. 169