Vignettes are instructional resources for experiential learning, which have been applied to train professionals in health sciences. Vignettes positively influence learning outcomes, learners’ perceptions, as well as ethical sensitivity in decision-making by promoting higher order thinking skills. At the University of Nairobi’s Department of Educational Communication and Technology, most instructors remain slow to embrace experiential learning and are inconsistent in applying vignettes in business ethics unit courses. This study examined the relationship between the use of vignettes and learners’ ethical sensitivity in decision-making at the Department. The article focuses on content of vignettes. Cross-sectional survey design guided the research process, and data were collected from 116 learners at the University of Nairobi in 2018. The study required quantitative data to assess learners’ perceptions on ethically sensitive issues, as well as qualitative data from interviews and focus group discussions. Results show vignettes derived from personal experiences, interviews and case studies were key influencers of learners’ ethical sensitivity in decision-making. The study concludes that the more learners appreciate the relationship between vignette content and ethical sensitivity in decision-making, the stronger the odds of making ethical decisions and vice versa. Inclusion of vignettes derived from the cited contents as an instructional approach is likely to improve the probability of learners making ethically sensitive decisions.
Published in | Teacher Education and Curriculum Studies (Volume 5, Issue 3) |
DOI | 10.11648/j.tecs.20200503.15 |
Page(s) | 66-80 |
Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Content, Vignettes, Ethical Sensitivity, Decision-making, Business Education, Business Ethics
[1] | Allibaih, M., & Khan, L. M. (2015). Weaving Together Peer Assessment, Audios and Medical Vignettes in Teaching Medical Terms. International Journal of Medical Education, 6, 172–178. |
[2] | Assudani, R. H., Manolis, C., Burns, D. J., & Chinta, R. (2011). The Effect of Pedagogy on Students’ Perceptions of the Importance of Ethics and Social Responsibility in Business Firms. Ethics & Behaviour, 21 (2), 103–117. |
[3] | Badua, F., Sharifi, M., & Mediavilla, F. M. (2014). What Makes a Top-Selling Textbook? Comparing Characteristics of AIS Textbooks. Journal of Education for Business, 89 (5), 257–262. |
[4] | Beard, C. (2010). The Experiential Learning Toolkit: Blending Practice with Concepts. Kogan Page Publishers. |
[5] | Best, J. W., & Kahn, J. V. (2016). Research in Education (10th ed.). Pearson India. |
[6] | Bryman, A., & Cramer, D. (1997). Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS for Windows: A Guide for Social Scientists. Routledge. |
[7] | Campbell, M., & Zegwaard, K. E. (2011). Values, ethics and empowering the self through cooperative education. Asia Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 12 (3), 205–216. |
[8] | Carroll, A. B. (1990). Principles of Business Ethics: Their Role in Decision Making and an Initial Consensus. Management Decision, 28 (8). https://doi.org/10.1108/00251749010006032 |
[9] | Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques. John Wiley & Sons. https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/19562201087 |
[10] | Cull, M., & Sloan, T. (2016). Characteristics of Trust in Personal Financial Planning. Financial Planning Research Journal, 2 (1), 12–35. |
[11] | Dagar, V., & Yadav, A. (2016). Constructivism: A Paradigm for Teaching and Learning. Arts and Social Sciences Journal, 7. https://doi.org/10.4172/2151-6200.1000200 |
[12] | Davis, S., DeZoort, F. T., & Kopp, L. S. (2006). The Effect of Obedience Pressure and Perceived Responsibility on Management Accountants’ Creation of Budgetary Slack. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 18 (1), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.2308/bria.2006.18.1.19 |
[13] | Dench, S., Iphofen, R., & Huws, U. (2004). An EU Code of Ethics for Socio-Economic Research. Institute for Employment Studies. |
[14] | Effelsberg, D., Solga, M., & Gurt, J. (2014). Transformational Leadership and Follower’s Unethical Behavior for the Benefit of the Company: A Two-Study Investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 120 (1), 81–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1644-z |
[15] | Emanuel, V., & Cross, V. (2012). Using Vignettes to Teach Stroke Care. Nursing Times, 108 (9), 20–22. PubMed. |
[16] | Freeman, R. E., Dunham, L., Fairchild, G., & Parmar, B. (2015). Leveraging the Creative Arts in Business Ethics Teaching. Journal of Business Ethics, 131 (3), 519–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2479-y |
[17] | Gray, D., Griffin, C., & Nasta, T. (2005). Training to Teach in Further and Adult Education (2nd edn). http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/816101/ |
[18] | Harland, T. (2014). Learning About Case Study Methodology to Research Higher Education. Higher Education Research & Development, 33 (6), 1113–1122. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.911253 |
[19] | Hughes, R., & Huby, M. (2002). The Application of Vignettes in Social and Nursing Research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 37, 382–386. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2002.02100.x |
[20] | Ismail, S., & Mohd Ghazali, N. A. (2011). Ethical Ideology and Ethical Judgments of Accounting Practitioners in Malaysia. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 13 (2), 107. https://doi.org/10.22146/gamaijb.5486 |
[21] | Jonson, E. P., McGuire, L. M., & O’Neill, D. (2015). Teaching Ethics to Undergraduate Business Students in Australia: Comparison of Integrated and Stand-Alone Approaches. Journal of Business Ethics, 132 (2), 477–491. |
[22] | Kidwell, R. E., & Valentine, S. R. (2009). Positive Group Context, Work Attitudes, and Organizational Misbehavior: The Case of Withholding Job Effort. Journal of Business Ethics, 86 (1), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9790-4 |
[23] | Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2017). Experiential Learning Theory as a Guide for Experiential Educators in Higher Education. A Journal for Engaged Educators, 1 (1), 7–44. |
[24] | Koleva, S. P., Graham, J., Iyer, R., Ditto, P. H., & Haidt, J. (2012). Tracing the Threads: How Five Moral Concerns Help Explain Culture War Attitudes. Journal of Research in Personality, 46 (2), 184–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.01.006 |
[25] | Manolis, C., Burns, D. J., Assudani, R., & Chinta, R. (2013). Assessing Experiential Learning Styles: A Methodological Reconstruction and Validation of the Kolb Learning Style Inventory. Learning and Individual Differences, 23, 44–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.10.009 |
[26] | Massoudi, M. (2010). Learning and Teaching Ethics through Stories: A Few Examples from the Buddhist Tradition. Creative Education, 01 (01), 18–24. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2010.11004 |
[27] | Mazanec, J. A. (2005). New Methodology for Analyzing Competitive Positions: A Demonstration Study of Travelers’ Attitudes Toward Their Modes of Transport. Tourism Analysis, 9 (1). https://doi.org/info:doi/10.3727/108354205789807283 |
[28] | McDonald, R. (2015). Leveraging Change by Learning to Work with the Wisdom in the Room: Educating for Responsibility as a Collaborative Learning Model. Journal of Business Ethics, 131 (3), 511–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2477-0 |
[29] | McGee, R. W. (2011). The Ethics of Tax Evasion: Perspectives in Theory and Practice. Springer Science & Business Media. |
[30] | McLeod, S. (2017). Kolb’s Learning Styles and Experiential Learning Cycle | Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/learning-kolb.html |
[31] | Miller, A., Shoptaugh, C., & Wooldridge, J. (2011). Reasons Not to Cheat, Academic-Integrity Responsibility, and Frequency of Cheating. The Journal of Experimental Education, 79 (2), 169–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220970903567830 |
[32] | Morrison, R. L., Stettler, K., & Anderson, A. E. (2004). Using Vignettes in Cognitive Research on Establishment Surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, 20 (2), 319–340. |
[33] | Myers, J. L., Well, A., & Lorch, R. F. (2010). Research Design and Statistical Analysis. Routledge. |
[34] | Nachmias, C. F., & Nachmias, D. (1996). Research Methods in the Social Sciences. St. Martin’s Press. |
[35] | Odundo, P. A., & Gunga, S. O. (2013). Effects Of Application Of Instructional Methods On Learner Achievement In Business Studies In Secondary Schools In Kenya. International Journal of Education and Research, 1 (5), 1–22. |
[36] | Oluoch, P. M., Odundo, P. A., & Mwangi, J. (2019). Value of Vignette Contexts in Ethical Decision Making Among Business Education Students at the University of Nairobi. Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Researcg (IJIR), 5 (2), 66–76. |
[37] | Oluoch, P. M., Odundo, P. A., Mwangi, J., & Oyier, C. R. (2018). Types of Vignettes and Ethical Decision-Making among Business Education Students. International Journal of Business and Management, 13 (10), 249. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v13n10p249 |
[38] | Omwenga, E. I. (2006). Pedagogical Issues and E-learning Cases: Integrating ICTs into Teaching and Learning process. Nairobi: School of Computing and Informatics, 11. |
[39] | Pan, Y., & Sparks, J. R. (2012). Predictors, Consequence, and Measurement of Ethical Judgments: Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Business Research, 65 (1), 84–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.02.002 |
[40] | Petocz, P., & Dixon, P. (2011). Sustainability and Ethics: Graduate Dispositions in Business Education. Asian Social Science, 7 (4), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v7n4p18 |
[41] | Petrina, S. (2004). Curriculum and Instruction for Technology Teachers. Online: Http://Www. Cust. Educ. Ubc. ca/Programs/Tsed/Research/Books. |
[42] | Qualters, D. M. (Ed.). (2010). Bringing the Outside in: Assessing Experiential Education: New Directions for Teaching and Learning. In C. Wehlburg, Experiential Education: Making the Most of Learning Outside the Classroom (pp. 55–62). John Wiley & Sons. |
[43] | Rindfleisch, A., Malter, A. J., Ganesan, S., & Moorman, C. (2008). Cross-Sectional Versus Longitudinal Survey Research: Concepts, Findings, and Guidelines: Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (3), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.45.3.261 |
[44] | Sarfo, F. K. (2007). Educational Technology Accra (K. I. Adentwi, Ed.). Wilas press. |
[45] | Stedham, Y., & Beekun, R. I. (2013). Ethical Judgment in Business: Culture and Differential Perceptions of Justice Among Italians and Germans. Business Ethics: A European Review, 22 (2), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12018 |
[46] | University of Nairobi Annual Report 2018. (2018). University of Nairobi. http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/handle/11295/106525 |
[47] | Weiss, J. W. (2014). Business Ethics: A Stakeholder and Issues Management Approach (6th ed.). Berrett-Koehler Publishers. |
[48] | Wuensch, K. L. (2010). Logistic Regression with SPSS, 2006. http://core.ecu.edu/psyc/wuenschk/spss/logistic.sav |
APA Style
Prisca Mary Oluoch, Paul Amollo Odundo, John Kamau Mwangi. (2020). Content of Vignettes and Ethical Sensitivity in Decision-Making: Case of Undergraduate Business Education Learners at University of Nairobi, Kenya. Teacher Education and Curriculum Studies, 5(3), 66-80. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.tecs.20200503.15
ACS Style
Prisca Mary Oluoch; Paul Amollo Odundo; John Kamau Mwangi. Content of Vignettes and Ethical Sensitivity in Decision-Making: Case of Undergraduate Business Education Learners at University of Nairobi, Kenya. Teach. Educ. Curric. Stud. 2020, 5(3), 66-80. doi: 10.11648/j.tecs.20200503.15
AMA Style
Prisca Mary Oluoch, Paul Amollo Odundo, John Kamau Mwangi. Content of Vignettes and Ethical Sensitivity in Decision-Making: Case of Undergraduate Business Education Learners at University of Nairobi, Kenya. Teach Educ Curric Stud. 2020;5(3):66-80. doi: 10.11648/j.tecs.20200503.15
@article{10.11648/j.tecs.20200503.15, author = {Prisca Mary Oluoch and Paul Amollo Odundo and John Kamau Mwangi}, title = {Content of Vignettes and Ethical Sensitivity in Decision-Making: Case of Undergraduate Business Education Learners at University of Nairobi, Kenya}, journal = {Teacher Education and Curriculum Studies}, volume = {5}, number = {3}, pages = {66-80}, doi = {10.11648/j.tecs.20200503.15}, url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.tecs.20200503.15}, eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.tecs.20200503.15}, abstract = {Vignettes are instructional resources for experiential learning, which have been applied to train professionals in health sciences. Vignettes positively influence learning outcomes, learners’ perceptions, as well as ethical sensitivity in decision-making by promoting higher order thinking skills. At the University of Nairobi’s Department of Educational Communication and Technology, most instructors remain slow to embrace experiential learning and are inconsistent in applying vignettes in business ethics unit courses. This study examined the relationship between the use of vignettes and learners’ ethical sensitivity in decision-making at the Department. The article focuses on content of vignettes. Cross-sectional survey design guided the research process, and data were collected from 116 learners at the University of Nairobi in 2018. The study required quantitative data to assess learners’ perceptions on ethically sensitive issues, as well as qualitative data from interviews and focus group discussions. Results show vignettes derived from personal experiences, interviews and case studies were key influencers of learners’ ethical sensitivity in decision-making. The study concludes that the more learners appreciate the relationship between vignette content and ethical sensitivity in decision-making, the stronger the odds of making ethical decisions and vice versa. Inclusion of vignettes derived from the cited contents as an instructional approach is likely to improve the probability of learners making ethically sensitive decisions.}, year = {2020} }
TY - JOUR T1 - Content of Vignettes and Ethical Sensitivity in Decision-Making: Case of Undergraduate Business Education Learners at University of Nairobi, Kenya AU - Prisca Mary Oluoch AU - Paul Amollo Odundo AU - John Kamau Mwangi Y1 - 2020/07/04 PY - 2020 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.tecs.20200503.15 DO - 10.11648/j.tecs.20200503.15 T2 - Teacher Education and Curriculum Studies JF - Teacher Education and Curriculum Studies JO - Teacher Education and Curriculum Studies SP - 66 EP - 80 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2575-4971 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.tecs.20200503.15 AB - Vignettes are instructional resources for experiential learning, which have been applied to train professionals in health sciences. Vignettes positively influence learning outcomes, learners’ perceptions, as well as ethical sensitivity in decision-making by promoting higher order thinking skills. At the University of Nairobi’s Department of Educational Communication and Technology, most instructors remain slow to embrace experiential learning and are inconsistent in applying vignettes in business ethics unit courses. This study examined the relationship between the use of vignettes and learners’ ethical sensitivity in decision-making at the Department. The article focuses on content of vignettes. Cross-sectional survey design guided the research process, and data were collected from 116 learners at the University of Nairobi in 2018. The study required quantitative data to assess learners’ perceptions on ethically sensitive issues, as well as qualitative data from interviews and focus group discussions. Results show vignettes derived from personal experiences, interviews and case studies were key influencers of learners’ ethical sensitivity in decision-making. The study concludes that the more learners appreciate the relationship between vignette content and ethical sensitivity in decision-making, the stronger the odds of making ethical decisions and vice versa. Inclusion of vignettes derived from the cited contents as an instructional approach is likely to improve the probability of learners making ethically sensitive decisions. VL - 5 IS - 3 ER -