UBIQUITOUS TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED LEARNING

OF COMPLEX FINANCIAL CONCEPTS

Pedagogy Improvement in Face-to-face and Online Teaching Environments

Irena Vodenska

, Lou Chitkushev

and Leo Burstein

Administrative Sciences Department, Metropolitan College, Boston University,

808 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA, U.S.A.

Computer Science Department, Metropolitan College, Boston University, Boston, MA, U.S.A

Department of Educational Research and Technology, Metropolitan College, Boston University, Boston, MA, U.S.A

Keywords: Face-to-face and Online Programs, Synchronous and Asynchronous Teaching, Technology Enhanced

Learning, Distance Education.

Abstract: Technology-based finance education is designed to fully engage students during lectures and individual

study times in order to increase their learning efficiency. Students are immersed in a new teaching

environment where the emphasis is on achieving high knowledge retention rate by synchronously presenting

the material through non-sequential links of learning objects such as graphics, multimedia files, and links to

external documents. While studying, students have possibilities to refer to earlier material when learning

more complex ideas in the later part of a lecture, as well as to relate to the material that may be following

the topics being introduced. The integrative technology-enhanced approach to learning provides students

with a possibility to maintain the overall view of the material, while absorbing detailed explanations of the

individual study components. We have conducted a preliminary pilot program testing this approach, and

found, based on student feedback, that the integrative technology-enhanced approach to teaching improves

student overall learning experience in face-to-face as well as in online courses. Moreover, course material

organization and instructor presentation of the material contribute significantly to the overall student

satisfaction while technology per se is not a statistically significant factor for overall course experience.

1 INTRODUCTION

A major challenge in teaching advanced finance

courses today is to fully engage students and to

increase the efficiency rate of learning important

financial concepts and risk management tools. Just

few years ago the world financial system was on the

brink of collapse creating a fundamental need for

finance graduates to thoroughly understand the

intricacies of complex financial and risk

management tools. At the time when we have seen

some of the most outrageous government rescue

interventions in the corporate world (Fender and

Gyntelberg, 2008), we strive to equip our students to

approach financial risk management meticulously

and methodically, in order to be prepared to face the

challenges of today’s financial industry.

There is a need to constantly upgrade and update

not only the course material to incorporate novel

concepts and risk management techniques, but also

to create a learning environment that introduces

effective approaches and utilize technological

advancements to facilitate meaningful teaching of

complex financial models, decision-making tools,

and structured financial products.

One of the goals of advanced finance education

is to teach students how to utilize existing financial

concepts and tools and to prepare graduates to have

analytical and flexible open minds to effectively

grasp new, innovative financial products and utilize

them appropriately in their workplace environments.

Sequential educational style has historically been

traditional and most common method of presenting

lecture material (Saunders, 2001). It is based on

presentation of different concepts to be learned in a

serial mode, one following the other, without

stressing the correlation and causality between

various topics. This is similar to a short-term

memory process, where relationship is established

only between consecutive topics. Despite the

138

Vodenska I., Chitkushev L. and Burstein L..

UBIQUITOUS TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED LEARNING OF COMPLEX FINANCIAL CONCEPTS - Pedagogy Improvement in Face-to-face and Online

Teaching Environments.

DOI: 10.5220/0003933001380143

In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU-2012), pages 138-143

ISBN: 978-989-8565-07-5

 2012 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

benefits of this widely adopted teaching style, it also

has number of drawbacks, especially for complex,

highly correlated relational subject matters, such as

finance.

One of the most significant shortcomings of

sequential teaching methods is a reduced knowledge

retention rate of novel concepts acquired in a lecture

format (Butler, 1992). Longer-term memory is

essential when students are building knowledge

based on material introduced in a finance lecture.

Hence, it is important to refer to earlier material

when learning more complex ideas in the later part

of the lecture. Equally important is to be able to

relate to the material that follows the topics being

introduced. In the sequential teaching environment

students often lose the thread of the presentation.

That can reduce the benefits of the lecture to a point

when students stop accepting and processing

information.

To address this limitation of sequential

classroom teaching techniques, we introduce

comprehensive computer-aided approach to

teaching, where the complete lecture is presented

interactively allowing students to learn the material

through various components that are linked in a non-

sequential way. This approach provides the students

with a possibility to maintain the overall view of the

material while the instructor explains the lecture

material building blocks in detail.

2 COMPREHENSIVE

TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED

LEARNING

The integrative technology-enhanced approach

matches well the teaching style of the instructor with

different learning preferences of individual students.

This methodology provides virtual step-by-step

instruction for a subgroup of students who prefer

learning the material by hearing and seeing the

concepts in a sequence. At the same time it gives an

opportunity to students who prefer the non-

sequential learning style to connect differently the

presented material objects. This approach allows

instructors to reach out and successfully teach much

broader population of students. Since some students

are passive and some are active learners (Rodrigues,

2004), they can choose the type of computer-aided

modules that correspond to their learning style. We

believe that giving students an opportunity to non-

sequentially navigate through the material will

provide immediate benefit to their understanding of

the presented concepts and may detect and correct

promptly certain misconceptions with instructor’s

assistance and feedback. Students will also be able

to study the material outside the classroom, at their

own pace, and to solidify their knowledge on their

own after the lecture. This approach will present a

possibility for students to benefit from both,

immediate and delayed knowledge transfer to obtain

solid conceptual understanding of the material by

developing improved retention skills over time

(Mathan and Koedinger, 2005).

In finance courses it is extremely important to

understand all the building blocks of risk

management or the decision-making process. If

students do not completely understand an important

theory or if they learn a model incorrectly, this

introduces confusion and potentially erroneous

understanding of the overall material. Needless to

say, this inaccurate understanding can trickle down

to future, more complex concepts and can lead to

incorrect solutions of multifaceted problems.

We tested the integrated approach to learning

within both, face-to-face and online formats, and

demonstrated that this methodology can be modified

to fit both of these different environments. For

example, in online classes, we preserve the

traditional component of teaching by using tablet

computers in addition to already prepared integrative

lecture material (Hoppe et al., 1999, Turban and

Muhlhauser, 2007). In face-to-face classes, we

utilize technology to bring the integrative approach

to teaching in the classroom.

Within the integrative technology-enhanced

approach to teaching, students are given an

opportunity to focus on individual teaching

components while learning sophisticated financial

models and obtaining a thorough understanding of

multifaceted economics concepts.

In Figure 1 we illustrate how the integrative

approach to teaching corresponds better to real

world corporate and economic systems, by showing

the difference between sequential and interconnected

network-like flow of links among learning objects.

2.1 Teaching with Non-sequentially

Linked Learning Modules

Instructors use multiple screens and enhanced

presentation tools to link the learning components

delivered non-sequentially within a lecture. The

objects are connected in a network where directional

links exist to successfully navigate through the

required material. This teaching approach keeps

student attention to multiple lecture

UBIQUITOUSTECHNOLOGY-ENHANCEDLEARNINGOFCOMPLEXFINANCIALCONCEPTS-Pedagogy

ImprovementinFace-to-faceandOnlineTeachingEnvironments

139

Real world system relations compared to

sequential and integrative teaching approaches

a) c)

Figure 1: a) shows a real world system where links exist

among all the nodes in the graph; b) illustrates example of

sequential instruction where certain links (A-C, A-D, and

B-D) are missing; c) represents a comprehensive

integrative approach to delivering complex financial

concept teaching material. This approach corresponds

closely to real life systems, where there is a high level of

connectedness among various system components.

components simultaneously instead of focusing on

only one at a time. Figure 2 shows an example of

using multiple screens presented simultaneously to

teach option valuation using the Binomial Tree

approach.

Although, the integrated technology-enhanced

approach to teaching brings benefits to students,

based on our experience, it also creates additional

burden to instructors, who experience approximately

20-25% increase in their workload. This overload is

a result of the need to create the video or audio

objects, to link the lecture objects appropriately, and

to learn how to utilize new technologies.

Introducing cutting edge integrative technology-

enhanced teaching approach keeps the students

abreast with new developments in the financial

industry, especially in the fast-paced advances in the

area of financial risk management.

The non-sequentially linked lecture components

could represent 1) embedded lecture notes 2)

hyperlinks to additional learning sources, 3) links to

outside applications such as PowerPoint, Excel, or

Access, or 4) pointers to pre-recorded multimedia

objects either developed by the instructor or

accessed on the Web.

The integrative teaching model can work well in

large or small groups or in laboratory or practical

classes where students need to deliver computational

results based on a set of learning objects by

planning, developing, and managing their own

learning (Bourner and Flowers, 1999).

The comprehensive computer-aided teaching

approach is becoming more attractive to students

because it relates better to the advanced multimedia

technologies they use in their daily lives. Students

nowadays are accustomed to multitasking and rapid

switching between various information-providing

devices, such as smart phones and iPads. They are

used to browsing between applications like email

and Internet browsers, music and video downloads,

various social media sites, or getting access to online

shopping, travel booking, and making restaurant

reservations. This trend is expected to continue,

which could make the integrative approach to

learning a preferred teaching model.

2.2 Data Analysis and Methodology

We tested the integrated technology-enhanced

approach to teaching, by conducting a pilot study of

overall student experience for three finance courses,

delivered in online and face-to-face formats in 2011.

We also performed a comparative analysis of the

courses included in the pilot study and previously

delivered courses from fall 2009 to fall 2011. During

this period we studied student feedback for 15

graduate finance courses with total enrolment of 645

students. Out of the 15 courses, 9 were face-to-face

and 6 were delivered in an online format. The online

courses had 464 students enrolled, while the face-to-

face courses had 181 students. To evaluate student

satisfaction rating, we surveyed students about their

overall course experience. The survey questions

were organized in 4 groups evaluating the course,

the instructor, the technology, and teaching

assistants if applicable. The questions were rated on

a 5-level Likert scale from 1-negative/strongly

disagree to 5-positive/strongly agree. We selected 3

survey questions 1) course material organization; 2)

instructor’s ability to present material; and 3) use of

technology to conduct our analysis. We selected

these questions because they closely relate to the

course delivery style. The survey response rate was

41% for online courses and 90% for face-to-face

courses or total of 350 students. We performed

regression analysis for 95% confidence level by

designating the Overall course experience as a

dependent variable, and Course material

organization, Instructor’s ability to present course

material, and Use of technology as dependent

variables. We demonstrate in Figure 3 that Course

material organization is statistically significant

factor with a p-value of 0.00007 < 0.05 and it is an

important determinant of overall course satisfaction

CSEDU2012-4thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation

140

Figure 2: Example of multiple-screen lectrure delivery format which allows students to see the overall lecture material at all

times with a possibility to zoom in and out of specific screens.

Figure 3: Overall course experience vs. Course material

organization for fall 2009 to fall 2011. (Statistically

significant for p < 0.05 at 95% confidence level).

with R-square of 0.7121.

In addition, Figure 4 shows that Instructor’s

ability to present course material also offers

significant explanatory power to the Overall student

course satisfaction with p-value of 0.000006 and R-

square of 0.8010.

While the Course material organization and

Instructor’s ability to present material are

statistically important factors for Overall course

experience, in Figure 5 we show that Use of

technology is not statistically significant factor for

Figure 4: Overall course experience vs. Instructor’s ability

to present material for fall 2009 to fall 2011. (Statistically

significant for p < 0.05 at 95% confidence level).

Overall course satisfaction. The coefficient of

determination R-square for this regression is 0.5042,

while the p-value is 0.1138.

Similar results were obtained by Zlateva et al.,

2011 for the statistical analysis of computer

information system courses, contrary to the findings

by Volery and Lord 2000, Soong et al., 2001, and

Sun et al., 2008, where technology was presented as

one of the critical success factors in online

education. We argue in this paper that the

technology is an extremely important factor that

facilitates creation of novel approaches to present



y=0.7636x+0.879

R²=0.7121

P‐value=0.00007<0.05

3,5

4,5

33,544,55

y=1.0329x‐ 0.1492

R²=0.801

P‐value=0.000006<0.05

3,5

4,5

345

UBIQUITOUSTECHNOLOGY-ENHANCEDLEARNINGOFCOMPLEXFINANCIALCONCEPTS-Pedagogy

ImprovementinFace-to-faceandOnlineTeachingEnvironments

141

Figure 5: Overall course experience vs. Use of technology

for fall 2009 to fall 2011. (Not statistically significant for

p > 0.05 at 95% confidence level).

course material and significantly enhances instructor

effectiveness in presenting course material;

however, if we only have great technology, and do

not utilize it creatively, the technology per se will

not be the determining factor for overall course

satisfaction.

In addition to the regression analysis of Likert

scale rated questions, we also analysed the

descriptive feedback from students. Table 1 shows

samples of student written feedback from the pilot

courses, pointing to the different teaching style,

material organization, and course structure as

positive course developments.

Table 1: Student feedback.

DescriptiveStudentFeedbackforpilotcourseswith

integratedtechnology‐enhancedapproachtoteaching



a) “One of the strongest aspects of the course was

the simplicity in the layout of each week. It was

easy to follow the structure, the lecture notes

wereoutlinedandorganizedveryclearly”

b) “Very organized class and learned a lot of

material”

c) “ThisisthemostorganizedclassIhavehadinthe

program”

d) “I thought it wasan excellent course andI would

notchangeanythingaboutit”

e) Thishasbeenanexcellentcourse

f) “I thought this was the best course so far.

Professor did an outstanding job in teaching us

the different aspects of finance. This course has

helped me to get a good perspective on the

markets, economic environment, systemic risk,

andwhatthefuturemayhold”

g) “Thank you for all that you taught us. Your

teaching style is unique along with your detailed

explanation, which made it easy for us to learn

thematerial”

We argue that statements from students such as

“very organized course”, “instructor teaching style

is unique” or “the approach made it easy for us to

learn the material” that appear in the pilot courses

and are absent from other course feedback, testify

that the new integrated technology-enhanced

approach to teaching is effective and makes a

difference in student learning. In addition, in Figure

6 we plot the ratings for Course material

organization for different terms including pilot

courses (circled), and found that the pilot courses

feedback is persistently positive.

Figure 6: Course material organization ratings for fall

2009 to fall 2011 including the pilot courses (circled)

where the integrative technology-enhanced approach to

teaching was adopted.

3 CONCLUSIONS

The integrative technology-enhanced education

essentially increases the dimension of the space in

which the lecture material is being presented, going

from a flat sequential two-dimensional system to a

three-dimensional space where connections between

spatially and temporally distant components is

possible. This methodology is based on lecture

delivery where the entire material is presented as a

poster in the beginning of the lecture. There are

various techniques that can be used to implement

this approach such as multiple screens with links

between the learning objects or hyperlinks to

multimedia files or relevant documents. This

teaching methodology enhances students’

educational experience. While actively participating

in the lecture, students can point out objects in the

overall material and ask for further explanations or

clarifications of the lecture building blocks. We use

interactive object focus tools to emphasize the

relevant components that need further discussion

without moving backward or forward through the

material in order to search for a concept or a

definition.

Besides having many benefits, the

comprehensive technology-enhanced education has

shortfalls as well. One of the major drawbacks of

computer-aided education is excessive reliance on

y=0.8612x‐ 0.0649

R²=0.5042

P‐value=0.1138>0.05

3,5

4,5

345

3,5

4,5

Set‐09

Nov‐09

Jan‐10

Mar‐10

Mai‐10

Jul‐10

Set‐10

Nov‐10

Jan‐11

Mar‐11

Mai‐11

Jul‐11

Set‐11

CSEDU2012-4thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation

142

technology. Any technical problem can contribute to

major frustration and derailment in the class. To

overcome this weakness, and improve the

technology reliability, it is important to secure

redundant resources that can be activated in case of

technical difficulties to enable seamless continuation

of the class.

We performed a pilot study introducing the

integrative technology-enhanced approach and

found that Course material organization and Ability

of the instructor to deliver the lecture effectively are

statistically significant factors for overall course

satisfaction, while interestingly enough Use of

technology per se was not a statistically significant

factor for overall course satisfaction.

The initial feedback from students has been very

positive in regards to the benefits that the integrative

technology-enhanced approach to teaching brings

into the online and face-to-face educational

programs. Overall, the use of advanced technologies

to create integrative big picture delivery of the

course has helped students understand better the

complex risk management and financial decision

making for the global financial industry.

REFERENCES

Bourner, T. and Flowers, S., 1999. A new improved web

version of the paper “Teaching and Learning Methods

in Higher Education: A glimpse of the Future” from

Reflections on Higher Education (A Journal of the

Higher Education Foundation) Vol. 9, 1997, pp. 77

Butler, J. A., 1992. Use of teaching methods within the

lecture format, Medical Teacher Journal, Vol. 14, No.

Fender, I. and Gyntelberg, J. December, 2008. Overview:

Global Financial Crisis spurs unprecedented policy

actions, BIS Quarterly Review

Hoppe, H. U., Luther, W., Muhlenbrock, M., Otten, W.,

and Tewissen, F., 1999. Advanced Research in

Computers and Communications in Education, G.

Cumming et al. (Eds.). IOS Press 1999. pp. 923-930.

Rodrigues, C. A., 2004. The importance level of ten

teaching/learning techniques as rated by university

business students and instructors, Journal of

Management Development, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 169

Saunders, K. T., 2001. Teaching Methods and Assessment

Techniques for the Undergraduate Introductory

Finance Course: A National Survey, Journal of

Applied Finance, Vol. 11, Issue 1, pp. 110

Soong, M. H. B., Chan, H. C., Chua, B. C., Loh, K. F.,

2001. Critical success factors for online course

resources, Computers & Education, Vol. 36, Issue 2,

pp. 101-120

Sun, P-C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y-Y., Yeh, D.,

2008. What drives a successful e-Learning? An

empirical investigation of the critical factors

influencing learner satisfaction, Computers &

Education, Vol. 50, pp. 1183-1202

Turban, G. and Muhlhauser, M., 2007. A framework for

the development of educational presentation systems

and its application, Proceedings of the international

workshop on Educational multimedia and multimedia

education, New York, NY

Volery, T., Lord, D., 2000, Critical success factors in

online education, International Journal of Education

Management, Vol. 14, Issue 5, pp. 216-223

Zachman, J. A., 1987. A framework for Information

Systems Architecture, IBM Systems Journal, Vol. 26,

No. 3

Zlateva, T., Willett, S., Kalathur, S., Schudy, R., Burstein,

L., Chitkushev, L., Saito, M., Haines, E. M., 2011.

Dimensions of course design and delivery and their

effect on student satisfaction/perception in online

learning, The 7

Annual International Conference on

Computer Science and Education, July 06-10, 2011,

Sofia, Bulgaria

UBIQUITOUSTECHNOLOGY-ENHANCEDLEARNINGOFCOMPLEXFINANCIALCONCEPTS-Pedagogy

ImprovementinFace-to-faceandOnlineTeachingEnvironments

143