Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun. 2017, 65(6), 1979-1985 | DOI: 10.11118/actaun201765061979

Simulation of Insolvency Proceedings Year II - Evidence of the Long Term Effect on Cognitive Learning

Martina Krásnická1, Viktor Vojtko2, Zdeněk Strnad1, Rudolf Hrubý1
1 Department of Law, Faculty of Economics, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Branišovská 1645/31a, 370 05 České Budějovice, Czech Republic
2 Department of Trade and Tourism, Faculty of Economics, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Branišovská 1645/31a, 370 05 České Budějovice, Czech Republic

The aim of this paper is to draw some conclusions from a long-term project inspired by the so-called Mock trials experienced in the USA and applied into the Czech system of law education of students at the Faculty of Economics of the University of South Bohemia.
The project involves a simulation of insolvency proceedings in case of a company bankruptcy. The students play roles of the various participants in the insolvency proceedings and learn very relevant but rather complicated process of insolvency. The results of the second academic year involve re-testing of students included in the SIP 1.0 (Simulation of Insolvency Proceedings 2015/2016) in order to assess if the learning experience has the long-term impact and comparison with the new group of students that undergone the SIP 2.0 (Simulation of Insolvency Proceedings 2016/2017).

Keywords: simulation, mock trial, insolvency proceedings, company bankruptcy, long-term cognitive learning, education
Grants and funding:

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sport of the Czech Republic - university specific research.

Published: December 7, 2017  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Krásnická, M., Vojtko, V., Strnad, Z., & Hrubý, R. (2017). Simulation of Insolvency Proceedings Year II - Evidence of the Long Term Effect on Cognitive Learning. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 65(6), 1979-1985. doi: 10.11118/actaun201765061979
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. ANDERSON, P. H. and LAWTON, L. 2008. Business Simulations and Cognitive Learning: Developments, Desires, and Future Directions. Simulation & Gaming, 40(2): 193 - 216. DOI: 10.1177/1046878108321624 Go to original source...
    2. AVRAMENKO, A. 2012. Enhancing students' employability through business simulation. Education and Training, 54(5): 355 - 367. DOI: 10.1108/00400911211244669 Go to original source...
    3. BENNETT, R. B., LEIBMAN, J. H. and FETTER, R. E. 1997. Using a Jury Simulation as a Classroom Exercise. Journal of Legal Studies Education, 15(2): 191 - 210. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-1722.1997.tb00071.x Go to original source...
    4. BLOOM, B. S., ENGLEHART, M. D., FURST, E. D. et al. 1959. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: The cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
    5. BURNS, A. C., GENTRY, J. W. and WOLFE, J. 1990. A cornucopia of considerations in evaluating the effectiveness of experiential pedagogies. In: GENTRY, J. W. (Ed.). Guide to business gaming and experiential learning. East Brunswick, NJ: Nichols/GP Publishing, pp. 253 - 278.
    6. DUQUE, L. C. and WEEKS, J. R. 2010. Towards a model and methodology for assessing student learning outcomes and satisfaction. Quality Assurance in Education, 18(2): 84 - 105. DOI: 10.1108/09684881011035321 Go to original source...
    7. GENTRY, J. W. and BURNS, A. C. 1981. Operationalizing a test of a model of the use of simulation games and experiential learning. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 8: 48 - 52.
    8. GERSHUNY, P., MCALLISTER, C. and RAINEY, C. 2012. Mock Trials Versus Management or Litigation-Driven Models of Business Law Instruction. Journal of Education for Business, 87(4): 193 - 197. DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2011.587474 Go to original source...
    9. GOSENPUD, J. J. 1990. Evaluation of experiential learning. In: GENTRY, J. W. (Ed.). Guide to business gaming and experiential learning. East Brunswick, NJ: Nichols/GP Publishing, pp. 301 - 329.
    10. GREENLAW, P. S. and WYMAN, F. P. 1973. The Teaching Effectiveness of Games in Collegiate Business Courses. Simulation & Gaming, 4(3): 259 - 294. DOI: 10.1177/003755007343001 Go to original source...
    11. HSU, E. 1989. Role-Event Gaming Simulation in Management Education: A Conceptual Framework and Review. Simulation and Games, 20(4): 409 - 38. DOI: 10.1177/104687818902000402 Go to original source...
    12. HUEBSCHER, J. and LENDNER, C. 2010. Effects of Entrepreneurship Simulation Game Seminars on Entrepreneurs' and Students' Learning. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 23(4): 543 - 554. DOI: 10.1080/08276331.2010.10593500 Go to original source...
    13. KARRAKER, M. W. 1993. Mock trials and critical thinking. College Teaching, 41(4): 134 - 137. DOI: 10.1080/87567555.1993.9926796 Go to original source...
    14. KRAIGER, K., FORD, J. and SALAS, E. 1993. Application of cognitive, skill-based, and affective theories of learning outcomes to new methods of training evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2): 311 - 328 DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.311 Go to original source...
    15. KRÁSNICKÁ, M., VOJTKO, V., STRNAD, Z. and HRUBÝ, R. 2016. Learning outcomes of simulation of insolvency proceedings inspired by the US Mock trials. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Et Silviculturae Mendelelianae Brunensis 64(6): 1951 - 1959. DOI: 10.11118/actaun201664061951 Go to original source...
    16. KRATHWOHL, D. R., BLOOM, B. S. and MASIA, B. B. 1964. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook II: The affective domain. New York: David McKay.
    17. LAWTON, A. M. and OSWALD, L. J. 1993. The use of simulated hearings in business law courses. Journal of Legal Studies in Education, 11: 103 - 126. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-1722.1993.tb00101.x Go to original source...
    18. MANN, S. K. 1995. A Simulated Hearing Modified for Teaching Business Law to Graduate Business Students. Journal of Legal Studies in Education, 13(2): 311 - 316. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-1722.1995.tb00054.x Go to original source...
    19. MCDEVITT, W. J. 1998. Three Ready-to-Use Mock Jury Trials for the Classroom. Journal of Legal Studies Education, 16(1): 149 - 171. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-1722.1998.tb00254.x Go to original source...
    20. MILLER, C. J. 1987. Mock Jury Trial: A Model for Business Law I Courses. Journal of Legal Studies Education, 6(1): 91 - 94. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-1722.1987.tb00181.x Go to original source...
    21. TIWARI, S. R., NAFEES, L. and KRISHNAN, O. (2014). Simulation as a pedagogical tool: Measurement of impact on perceived effective learning. The International Journal of Management Education, 12(3): 260 - 270. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijme.2014.06.006 Go to original source...
    22. WILSON, K. A., BEDWELL, W. L., LAZZARA E. H., SALAS E., BURKE C. S., ESTOCK J. L., ORWIS K. L. and CONKEY C. 2008. Relationships Between Game Attributes and Learning Outcomes: Review and Research Proposals. Simulation & Gaming, 40(2): 217 - 266. DOI: 10.1177/1046878108321866 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY NC ND 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content