Abstract:

Issues have been raised regarding the graduates expectations gap in economics (Jackling & De Lange, 2008). In addition to technical skills, employers expect a wider range of generic skills i.e. team skills, verbal communication skills, leadership skills, etc. (Jackling & De Lange, 2008; Rademacher & Walia, 2013). A traditional semester model may not suit this new generation of students who need to speed up learning and acquire employable competences and skills (Serdyukov, 2017). Intensive learning and teaching can offer a solution. Intensive programs can significantly shorten the duration of the learning from a semester to weeks or even days. This method organizes the teaching year in several ‘blocks’ in which a limited number of courses are taught (Valcke, 2016). Intensive programs can also increase learning outcomes (Serdyukov, 2008). The main purpose of this method is to ensure a deeper processing of study material as to have a better study retention (e.g. Boddy,1985; Scyon & Gleason, 1993; Seamon, 2004).The research concerning the effect of intensive learning on student learning outcomes in higher education is rather limited, definitely in an economic setting, therefore the central research question is: “Does intensive learning improve the learning outcomes of the students?”. Since most of the prior research concentrated on the effects of the intensive learning formats on short term performance, Scott & Conrad (1992) raised the idea to develop a multiple-achievement measure. Based on the cognitive load theory (Sithole & Abeysekera, 2017) and the self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2011), the current study will contribute to prior literature by focusing not only on the short term performance (GPA) but also on long term retention, students motivation, students evaluation, attendance in class, perceived time spent studying and researching and working days for students. This study was conducted in the master year of business economics at a West-European University. In 2015-2016 the university organized the normal semester system (i.e. the control group, n= 82) and 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 the university changed to intensive learning (i.e. treatment group, n =85 and n= 84). After approval, data on performance and curriculum was obtained by the administration. In addition, after graduation the students were questioned by an online-survey. The students in the normal semester system were compared to students in the intensive learning system while controlling for gender and ability. Analyses confirm that students studying in the block teaching system perform better on short term performance. We found a significant effect of intensive learning on GPA and several courses. Students in the intensive learning formative earned better grades. We also found that students in the intensive learning format report less time spent compared to the students in the traditional semester format. We might conclude that intensive format is more efficient for the students. We didn’t find any significant result on long term performance or on motivation. In addition we found a significant effect on students evaluation of the academic year. Students in the intensive learning format reported a better didactic approach and more cooperative learning. To conclude we found that there was no effect of the learning method on the number of student working days. In the paper we reflect on the results and advice on the implementation of intensive learning is provided.

Keywords:

Intensive learning, student performance, satisfaction, motivation.