This paper aims to draw from backward design theory to deductively develop a conceptual model of movie and television (TV) use in management education. The authors apply this model to comprehensively summarize the literature and identify research gaps and opportunities.
The paper presents a systematic review of articles addressing the use, or application, of movies and TV in courses to fulfill instructors’ goals published in management education’s major journals (from their respective inceptions to June 28, 2025).
A total of 229 papers were included in the final sample. Movies (rather than TV shows) were found to be the most commonly used medium (59%). Diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI); organizational behavior; and leadership (representing 16%, 15% and 14% of articles, respectively) were the most common topics addressed in this study’s sample. Perhaps most surprisingly, the majority of articles (55%) provided no data to support effectiveness, with just 10% providing quantitative data from students.
This review synthesizes the various topics and options an instructor should thoughtfully consider while designing their movie- and TV-embedded courses. In addition, this review (grounded in an established educational framework) strongly encourages the collection of data to evaluate the efficacy of these instructor choices, while providing various options for the collection of this data.
This research deploys a well-established learning theory, backward design, to analyze the literature on movie and TV use in management education. The analysis provides new and valuable insights on the level and type of empirical evidence collected in the literature with respect to movies and TV (i.e. the second stage of backward design) and various design choices instructors might consider when using movies and TV (which relates to the third stage of backward design) while providing a comprehensive review of movie and TV articles across major management education journals.
The use of movies and television (TV) in management courses dates back to at least 1973, with management educators taking a practical, rather than theoretical, interest (Pedler, 1973). Since then, journals have continually published articles on this popular pedagogical approach (Kankal, Patra, & Panda, 2023), with the efficacy of movies/TV somewhat taken for granted. Conventionally, a “movie sandwich” technique is used wherein “instructors provide background on theoretical concepts before showing a movie clip, and following […]. the class engages in a […] debrief” (Sprinkle & Urick, 2016, p. 106). While existing research has seemingly coalesced on the utility of movies/TV, the literature’s practical focus on usage/sharing resources, with only a secondary interest in developing and presenting theory, has resulted in fragmentation within the literature and the overlooking of critical areas. To help resolve these issues, we turn to backward design theory (McTighe & Thomas, 2003) and present a comprehensive framework to review and connect these underdeveloped aspects of the literature.
Backward design theory suggests educators must “start with the end in mind” by first identifying the desired results/goals appropriate for the particular learners in question before proceeding to determining the evidence needed to evaluate goal progress. These two sequential steps should occur before and inform the design of specific learning experiences ultimately used by educators. To date, published articles on movies/TV use have tended to focus either on the first step (identify the desired results) or the third step (learning experience design) in relative isolation from each other, while multiple aspects of evidence gathering (step two) have been overlooked.
For example, a recent article reviewed the literature to inductively derive a conceptual model focused on the reasons why movies (TV was excluded) were used by instructors (Kankal et al., 2023). Another similarly reviewed the literature on videos (of all types, including recorded classroom lectures) to inductively develop a conceptual model of video-based learning (Fang & Chiu, 2024). From a backward design perspective, these previous reviews were focused only on the first stage, while a greater understanding of movie/TV use in management education requires examination of all three steps.
In contrast, our review comprehensively incorporates all three stages of backward design and integrates research questions addressing the second and third stages. To do so, we draw from backward design theory to deductively develop a conceptual model of movie/TV use, applying it to summarize the literature while identifying research gaps and opportunities. Beyond synthesizing the literature, our analysis provides new and valuable insights on the level and type of empirical evidence collected with respect to movie/TV use (i.e. the second stage of backward design) and various design choices instructors might consider when using movies/TV (which relates to the third stage of backward design). Furthermore, in contrast to prior work, we define our scope beyond movies to include TV and internet videos (i.e. videos created and posted on the internet and generally unavailable elsewhere), with a focus on those made for entertainment purposes (from the perspective of the producer), using the shortened phrase “movies/TV” to represent the scope of our review. Thus, we exclude resources created primarily for educational purposes that are ancillary to entertainment. This helps separate documentaries and TED Talks (which were not primarily produced for use in the classroom and thus are within the scope of our review) from other excluded resources (e.g. videos created by textbook publishers for use in courses). Altogether, this paper provides an up-to-date view of all three stages of backward design for movie/TV use, a clear vision of what is known about the effectiveness of teaching with movies/TV and a look at where the literature remains lacking.
Our study contributes to the scholarship and practice of management education in multiple ways. First, we apply a backward design view to the literature on movies/TV use, providing an insightful theoretical lens to better understand the effectiveness of using movies/TV in the management classroom. Second, we quantitatively synthesize articles in premier management education journals on movies/TV use, communicating collective educator guidance on management topics amenable to these resources and providing a template of options instructors should consider when designing movie/TV-embedded courses from a backward design perspective. Finally, our backward design conceptual model identifies significant gaps in the literature and future research opportunities, helping to orient future work that bolsters our understanding of effective movie/TV use in the management classroom from a theoretically driven lens.
Theoretical background
Backward design is a curriculum development framework that can be applied to a specific activity, class session, module, or entire course (Richards, 2013; Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). In contrast to “traditional” design, which might begin with a specific activity that was designed to cover a specific management topic, backward design is “backward” because it suggests that educators should begin with the desired results in mind. Using the three stages of backward design, identifying desired results, determining acceptable evidence and planning learning activities ensure that the classroom is focused on the end outcome rather than the experiential element.
Identifying desired results
Identifying desired results is the first stage of backward design. In primary and secondary education contexts, this has typically been conceptualized as content standards established by national, state and district-level governmental entities along with associated curriculum expectations (McTighe & Thomas, 2003). We extend this notion to the higher education management context and propose that desired results are the goals of the instructor (and/or program/university goals; e.g. learning outcomes). Within the literature on movies/TV in management education, theoretically-oriented essays have provided various reasons (e.g. goals) for using movies/TV.
One of the earliest examples is Gioia & Brass (1986), who drew on observational learning theory to advocate for the utility of movies/TV in management education. These authors identified the mismatch in upbringing between those raised before TV sets were widely available and those raised after, illustrating that those raised in the “before” times were surrounded by written and spoken words, while modern students were raised in the intensive audio–visual environment of movies/TV. They argued that this impacts best practices for engaging such students by expanding classroom audio–visual media use to enhance teaching and learning beyond just lectures and reading assignments. This theme of “meeting students where they are” is prevalent in subsequent articles (e.g. Hunt, 2001).
Similarly, Shaw & Locke (1993) provided a rationale for the importance of movies in the development of managerial judgment by realistically placing students in the “hot seat” of organizational decisions. Also, Hunt (2001) described the use of TV as both a critical energizer in class and material that could be used for examinations, homework and exercises. These are just a sampling of the multiple reasons management educators have advocated for using movies/TV. This first stage of backward design has probably received the most attention in extant literature, as evidenced by the aforementioned reviews that synthesized articles to develop comprehensive taxonomies and theories that outline why movies/TV might be used in the classroom (i.e. Fang & Chiu, 2024; Kankal et al., 2023). These articles could be classified more broadly as scholarship of teaching and learning (SOTL) on movies/TV use, which primarily discuss the pedagogy, methodology and assessment concerns of using movies/TV in management education.
While we point interested readers to these reviews for more detailed information, developing students’ knowledge and familiarity with substantive management topics is one of the most common goals of articles that advocate for the use of movies/TV (Sprinkle & Urick, 2016). Simply stated, playing movies/TV in courses to illustrate management topics and concepts represents the most common application of movies/TV. Instructors generally desire to enhance student knowledge and familiarity with a specific, limited set of management topics (e.g. Urick & Sprinkle’s (2019) article on teaching Leadership). Mendenhall (1989) saw the value of this for international management, with movies/TV providing secondhand experiences that students otherwise would not be able to experience directly. Given the existence of other reviews on this topic, our first research question focuses on this specific aspect of the first stage of backward design by synthesizing the various management topics that have been the target of instructors’ desired results (i.e. the substantive management topics on which instructors have sought to enhance student knowledge):
Which management topics have been targeted by instructors to advance students’ knowledge and familiarity?
Determining acceptable evidence
The second stage of backward design involves determining the evidence needed to validate whether the desired results have been achieved (McTighe & Thomas, 2003). We define evidence as the result of various learning assessment methods, including understanding checks (e.g. observations, informal dialogue or oral questioning), quizzes and exams, papers, presentations, projects and questionnaires. In stage two, the goals and desired results specified in the first stage of backward design should inform the nature and extent of evidence collected, as well as the appropriate learning assessment method to collect the evidence.
For example, if the goal of movie/TV use is to increase student interest, then the learning assessment method used should primarily be focused on the student experience at a particular moment in time (vs more distal outcomes, such as performance on a course project not directly related to the movie/TV resource). This could be done through an audience response system (i.e. polling software) or a single-item questionnaire given soon after the movie/TV resource is shown. This would be appropriate because the evidence would be collected via a learning assessment method that would match the timing of the instructors’ underlying goal. Conversely, from a backward design perspective, the lack of evidence to validate the impact of movies/TV on desired goals is problematic. Similarly, the collection of evidence through learning assessment methods with a poor match to the underlying goal is problematic as well.
Within published articles addressing movies/TV, this stage of backward design would involve collecting valid, reliable empirical data that could be used to meaningfully test instructor assertions regarding the effectiveness of movie/TV use. For example, Hurwitz (2017) asked students to watch a movie of their choosing and detail character followership behaviors. Others described a movie club and gamification technique (Sprinkle & Urick, 2016) where relevant scholars facilitate a discussion of both a novel and its film adaptation, and a game where students scored points by identifying management elements during the movie. Finally, McCarthy (2001) combined a tour, a book and a movie on Gettysburg with an assignment for students to design several class-relevant mini cases. Conceivably, management education scholars could analyze the data resulting from these efforts to surmise the extent to which their educational goals have been met – thus fulfilling the backward design recommendations of stage two. Thus, we inquire into the following questions:
How much empirical evidence has been published on the use of movies/TV in management education?
What type of evidence has been published about the effectiveness of movies/TV use in management education?
Planning learning activities
In backward design, once the goals and acceptable evidence have been established, instructors plan the specific aspects of the learning activity, with various design considerations being weighed. For example, movies/TV can be fiction or nonfiction. Within the literature, Liu (2021) discussed the benefits of non-fiction documentary films, while Champoux (2001, p. 81) proposed that “Strong caricature in animated film can powerfully show concepts.”
Another design consideration might include deciding between presenting movies/TV as clips or in their entirety. Schmidt (2015, 2016) has published articles espousing both of these approaches. Further, management educators may determine that movies, TV, internet videos (e.g. YouTube), or a mix of these mediums (e.g. Liu, Breidenthal, & Schaffer, 2023) will ensure the desired results are emphasized for the appropriate student population (e.g. undergraduate vs graduate students).
In stage three, the choice of specific movie/TV resources, as well as their specific implementation, should be considered in light of the goals (established in stage one). All movies/TV shows are not created equal. Non-fiction might convey real-world dynamics in a more realistic, but complex, manner; while fiction might illustrate management concepts more precisely (without confounding factors), but in a contrived manner. Even the choice to use movies orTV resources is a question that should be thoughtfully considered by instructors. Although, to our knowledge, prior research has not forwarded theory or empirical studies comparing movies and TV as distinct mediums, there are multiple reasons the choice between using a movie or TV resource might result in differing outcomes. For example, although there are exceptions, movies tend to be shorter and self-contained, while TV can contain dozens (or hundreds) of hours of content. This flows into the choice of assigning an entire movie to view or showing TV clips during class – ultimately impacting the attainment of instructor goals.
As research has not offered theoretical arguments or empirical evidence differentiating these design characteristics, our final research question aims to serve as a first step, synthesizing and summarizing these various elements or design options presented in previously published research on movies/TV in management education. This is done to provide management educators and researchers with a menu of various options and choices that must be made with respect to movie/TV use in the classroom, providing practical insight that can be immediately used while also serving as a first step in understanding the points of variation among current instructor use:
What design options should management instructors consider when using movies/TV?
Methodology
We conducted a systematic analysis of published articles on this topic in premier general management (vs discipline-specific) journals that publish significantly on teaching. Organization Management Journal (OMJ), Journal of Management Education (JME), Management Learning (ML), Academy of Management Learning & Education (AMLE), Management Teaching Review (MTR) and The International Journal of Management Education (IJME) have continually published articles on movie/TV use and share common inclusion on the Australian Business Deans Council’s (ABDC) Journal Quality list and the Chartered Association of Business Schools’ Academic Journal Guide, broadly representing the field of management education. Our identification of articles involved an electronic keyword-based search of the journals (from their respective inceptions to June 28, 2025), followed by inspection of the articles. Our full methodology is detailed in Table 1. The final data set included 15 OMJ, 40 AMLE, 10 IJME, 116 JME, 15 ML and 33 MTR articles.
Summary of methodology
| Methodology | Description |
|---|---|
| Scope | Our review included articles that mentioned the use of video resources created primarily for entertainment (from the perspective of the producer) published in each journal from their inception to June 28, 2025a. To ensure journal quality, we limited our search to general management journals with a significant amount of teaching-related articles that also appeared on both the Australian Business Deans Council’s (ABDC) Journal Quality list and in the Chartered Association of Business Schools Academic Journal Guide, two major indicators of journal quality and relevance. This standard of quality led to a sample of Six total journals: Organization Management Journal, Academy of Management Learning & Education, The International Journal of Management Education, Journal of Management Education, Management Learning and Management Teaching Review Consistent with past research, “movies/TV” is inclusive of: 1) short-form or feature-length films (i.e. movies) and 2) serial or anthology shows with at least two episodes originally broadcast on over-the-air TV (i.e. traditional television programming that follows a fixed schedule and channel) or available exclusively on streaming platforms (e.g. Netflix). Acknowledging the evolving entertainment media landscape, our phrase “movies/TV” also includes internet videos (i.e. videos created and posted on the internet and generally unavailable elsewhere; e.g. TED Talks, YouTube). While distinctions have historically been made between movies, TV and online videos, we see these as sub-categories of the larger category of videos made primarily for entertainment purposes. Thus, we exclude resources created primarily for educational purposes that are ancillary to entertainment. This helps separate documentaries and TED Talks (which were not produced primarily for use in the classroom and thus are within the scope of our review) from other excluded resources (e.g. videos created by textbook publishers for use in courses) |
| Keyword search | To achieve the most comprehensive keyword search possible, we utilized the following Boolean search query: “video” or “videos” OR film* OR videotape* OR “television” OR “TV” OR movie* OR cinema* OR stream* OR “YouTube” OR VHS* OR DVD* OR documentar* OR Netflix* OR Blu-ray* OR “disc” OR “discs” OR “disk” OR “disks” OR tape* OR “show” OR “shows”. This search logic was discussed and approved by all four authors. The asterisks signify wildcard searches where a partial word match (i.e. a match on the part of the word before the asterisk) in a journal article would result in that article’s inclusion in our initial article pool. The “OR” function used in our search query signifies that any article that contained any of the words in our query would result in that article’s inclusion in our initial article pool. This search query was used in the search bar on each journal’s website (i.e. not in a general database) |
| Inclusion/exclusion criteria and dataset | The keyword search resulted in a potential pool of 384 articles in OMJ, 956 in AMLE, 240 in IJME, 1420 in JME, 1394 in ML and 202 in MTR. This initial pool of articles was downloaded. We then reviewed each article for the use of video resources created primarily for entertainment (from the perspective of the producer) in management education, which was the foundation of our research interest. Specifically, articles were reviewed to ensure they focused on movies and/or TV created for entertainment purposes that were used in a classroom setting, whether face-to-face or online. This definition gave us the theoretical grounding that was helpful in determining the exclusion of other types of video resources, such as news clips, corporate training videos, textbook or other publisher resources (e.g. McGraw Hill, Harvard Business, etc.), animated explainer videos, recordings of students for the purposes of providing feedback on their behaviors and recordings of lectures or voice-over slide presentations (e.g. Khan Academy videos). This also excluded articles that used videos as an empirical data source for management research (vs pedagogy). We only excluded articles that so briefly mentioned videos in such cursory ways as to be indiscernible as a teaching tool. For example, one article that was ultimately excluded because its only mention of video resources was: “She outlines a number of excellent ways to add a social component to ethical decision making, including case studies, films, experiential exercises, role plays, and role modeling,” (emphasis added; Hedberg, 2017, p. 520). Articles not solely focused on teaching with movies and TV (but rather, dedicated a paragraph or two on the use of such resources to teach a broader management topic) were not necessarily excluded Following previous reviews (e.g. Fang & Chiu, 2024) and given that we intended to summarize the publication patterns of primary literature in this area, we excluded two extant literature reviews Articles that could not be readily assessed for inclusion were subject to perusal by all four authors for a final decision. This resulted in 229 articles in our final dataset: 15 OMJ, 40 AMLE, 10 IJME, 116 JME, 15 ML and 33 MTR |
| Article coding | Our coding of topics relied on authorial intent for final clarification. For example, two articles explored “power” using different movies. While one article focused on using a movie to demonstrate the bases of power (Baker, 1993), the other used a different movie to demonstrate how leaders use power (Holbrook & Stoner, 2022). Therefore, Baker (1993) was coded as Organizational Behavior, whereas Holbrook & Stoner (2022) was coded as Leadership. We also reviewed the articles for how movies and TV were used – whether it was an entire movie or show episode vs. shorter selected clips. Articles were also coded for level of student (i.e. graduate, undergraduate, both, non-specific) as well as movies and TV characteristics, including type of medium, as we defined them above: movie, TV, internet video, mixed-mediums or not specifiedb. Then, each article was reviewed for the presence or absence of data related to usage. The presence of data was organized into four categories: quantitative measurement only (from students or instructors), student feedback only, quantitative measurement and student feedback or instructor observation only. To be classified as a quantitative measurement, the paper had to demonstrate quantitative data by design and offer a measurement of student outcomes. Student feedback focused on student comments about the movie/TV show or its use in the classroom (e.g. “it was a great idea to show that movie”). Additionally, student feedback also included comments about the movie or TV show itself that indicated comprehension (e.g. “just like in the movie, the situation presented is a moral dilemma”). Articles with only instructor comments (e.g. “our students told us it was a perfect example of bias in the workplace”) were coded as instructor observation. Articles without measurement of any kind fell into the no data category |
aDigital and physical copies of IJME from inception to Vol. 8, Issue 1 have been lost by the publisher.bBecause of evolving technology, we used the origin of the video material as our guide (i.e., not current status on streaming video applications). For example, movie clips posted on YouTube would be considered movies, not internet videos
Findings
Instructors’ desired results: management topics
Regarding RQ1, our analysis found that three topics were about equally tied as the primary focus of instructors’ desired results: diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI); organizational behavior; and leadership (representing 16%, 15% and 14% of articles, respectively) [1]. Following these topics, strategy/general business represented the main topic in 10% of published articles, with ethics and sustainability trailing just slightly behind, representing 7% and 6%, respectively. Table 2 summarizes these results.
Top topics across journals, % of articles
| Topic area | % | Exemplars |
|---|---|---|
| SOTL concerns (methodology, pedagogy, assessment) | 24 | Maranville (2011, JME) discussed the use of movies to convey artistry in the classroom, demonstrating its usefulness in teaching strategic management Tosti-Kharas & Levinson (2024, JME) championed “film-centered” pedagogy in which films play the primary, rather than a subordinate, role in the course to illustrate management theories and skills |
| DEI | 16 | Corrigall & Cirka (2014, OMJ) identified specific movies and TV shows to supplement their activity about disabilities |
| OB (e.g. power, politics, motivation, teams) | 15 | Smith Sockbeson, Hartman, & Shaw (2023, MTR) used The Office to illustrate the differences between motivational theories |
| Leadership | 14 | Freed (2005, JME) used Groundhog Day to guide students in the opportunity, as leaders, to thoroughly assess decisions and the consequences of those decisions |
| Strategy/general business | 10 | Batts & Madansky (2008, AMLE) reviewed The Corporation (a documentary) from the perspective of a current instructor and CEO. They provided debrief guidance inside the classroom |
| Ethics | 7 | McKendall (2021, MTR) provided guidance on using YouTube video clips to demonstrate cognitive errors and self-deception in ethical decision-making |
| Sustainability | 6 | Clemens & Hamakawa (2010, AMLE) promoted the use of “silver screen pedagogy” to focus students on short-term and long-term goals in the area of sustainability |
| All other topics | 8 | Yesildag & Bostan (2023, IJME) examined the learning outcomes of using four movies as an active learning method for senior undergraduate health management students. Falling below 10% of the data, other papers addressed topics such as entrepreneurship, family business, health care, operations and supply chain management |
Evidence published, collectively across journals
Concerning RQ2, our analysis found that the majority (55%) of articles included no data to support the effectiveness of movies/TV use in achieving goals (see Figure 1).
The bar chart titled Evidence of Evaluative Data shows the distribution of evidence types across 229 journal articles. Categories include Student Quantitative Measurement Only with 9 articles, Both Student Quantitative Measurement and Student Feedback with 15 articles, Student Feedback Only with 54 articles, Instructor Observation Only with 24 articles, Instructor Quantitative Measurement with 1 article, and No Data Offered with 126 articles. The tallest bar represents No Data Offered, indicating the majority of articles did not provide evaluative data.Evidence of evaluative data
The bar chart titled Evidence of Evaluative Data shows the distribution of evidence types across 229 journal articles. Categories include Student Quantitative Measurement Only with 9 articles, Both Student Quantitative Measurement and Student Feedback with 15 articles, Student Feedback Only with 54 articles, Instructor Observation Only with 24 articles, Instructor Quantitative Measurement with 1 article, and No Data Offered with 126 articles. The tallest bar represents No Data Offered, indicating the majority of articles did not provide evaluative data.Evidence of evaluative data
With respect to RQ3, when evidence of effectiveness was offered, it was typically presented as students’ quotes or instructor observations. Specifically, just under a quarter of the articles (24%) drew upon ad hoc student comments and feedback as evidence of the effectiveness of using movies/TV in their courses. For instance, Comer & Holbrook (2005) provided a sampling of student comments in appendices (see their Appendix C, p. 883). In other articles, students’ thoughts were paraphrased or summarized, albeit through the filter of the instructor(s). For example, Mackey & Mackey (2025) said their use of Seinfeld “increases the enjoyment (and educational) value of this learning tool” (p. 79) and they “continue to get feedback of how impactful the exercise was” (p. 80). However, no direct student quotes were offered in the text or appendices to support these observations. Elsewhere, instructors provided their own perspectives about effectiveness, usually beginning their analysis with, “In our experience” (10% of all articles; e.g. Van Esch, Tarr, & Frye, 2023).
Overall, a low percentage of the articles (10%) contained quantitative data collected from students. As an example, Yesildag & Bostan (2023) compared students’ exam scores and academic grade point averages to analyze differences among students who had not watched the assigned movie, those who watched the movie only, those who watched it and engaged in group discussion and those who watched it and discussed it with the lecturer.
Evidence published, by individual journal
Addressing RQ3 in aggregate across all six journals, Figure 2 shows a lack of qualitative or quantitative data. However, it is also important to examine these data within each journal. In AMLE and MTR, approximately three-fourths (78% and 70%, respectively) of the movie/TV-related articles offered no data to demonstrate or support how well videos assisted in meeting desired results. Elsewhere, about half of the relevant articles in ML (53%) and JME (48%) offered no data. In the remaining two journals in our data set, roughly one-third of the relevant articles provided no data (OMJ at 33% and IJME at 30%).
The stacked bar chart compares percentages of articles containing quantitative measurement or feedback across six journals labelled A M L E, I J M E, J M E, M L, M T R, and O M J. Each bar is divided into categories including Quantitative Measurement, Student Quantitative Measurement, Quantitative Measurement and Student Feedback, Student Feedback Only, Instructor Observation Only, and No Data Mentioned. M T R has the highest proportion of No Data Mentioned at 70 percent, while O M J has the highest proportion of Instructor Observation Only at 40 percent. M L shows 53 percent No Data Mentioned and 40 percent Student Feedback Only. Sample sizes are listed below each journal, ranging from 10 to 116 articles.% of articles with quantitative measurement or feedback
The stacked bar chart compares percentages of articles containing quantitative measurement or feedback across six journals labelled A M L E, I J M E, J M E, M L, M T R, and O M J. Each bar is divided into categories including Quantitative Measurement, Student Quantitative Measurement, Quantitative Measurement and Student Feedback, Student Feedback Only, Instructor Observation Only, and No Data Mentioned. M T R has the highest proportion of No Data Mentioned at 70 percent, while O M J has the highest proportion of Instructor Observation Only at 40 percent. M L shows 53 percent No Data Mentioned and 40 percent Student Feedback Only. Sample sizes are listed below each journal, ranging from 10 to 116 articles.% of articles with quantitative measurement or feedback
Significantly, the most common type of data presented was ad hoc student feedback and instructor observations, which were offered as evidence in over one-third of the articles published in OMJ (47%), ML (40%), JME (39%), while the others fell at 30% or below (both IJME and MTR at 30% and AMLE at 18%). In terms of offering quantitative data, AMLE had one article (3%), OMJ had two (13%) and IJME and JME each had three (30% and 3%, respectively). Finally, only a few articles offered both quantitative and qualitative data as evidence. There was 1 article each in ML (7%) and OMJ (7%) and 12 articles in JME (10%). In sum, for many of the relevant articles published in these journals, authors provided no evidence supporting whether desired results were met.
Planning learning activities: movie/television design options
RQ4 addresses the various options instructors might consider when planning their movie/TV-embedded class sessions. Our review of the literature revealed four design choices amongst published articles: fiction vs. nonfiction, clips vs. units, medium and educational level. We present these four design options and summarize our findings below.
Fiction vs. Nonfiction.
Fictional movies/TV were the most popular choice (40% of all articles), although nonfiction (including media based on real-world events) was present in over a quarter of the articles (29%). A total of 17% of articles included the use of both fictional and nonfiction resources, while 14% did not specify.
Clips vs units.
One-third (33%) of articles focused on complete units (i.e. entire movies and/or TV show episodes), 23% focused on clips (short, curated excerpts), 14% used both units and clips and 30% did not specify. AMLE, IJME and JME focused heavily on complete units (45% of AMLE, 40% of IJME, 34% of JME articles). In contrast, MTR and OMJ focused heavily on clips (58%, 33%, respectively), with less than a quarter of articles focusing on units (24%, 20%, respectively). Interestingly, most (9 or 60%) of the 15 ML articles did not specify the use of either clips or units.
Medium.
Our analysis across journals revealed the dominant medium of choice to be movies (59% of articles), whether as a unit or clips. Mixed media (i.e. use of a combination of movies, TV and/or internet videos within a single article; e.g. Liu et al. (2023) provided a list of movies and TV) garnered the next highest percentage of papers (17%). Surprisingly, just 12% of articles used TV only. The smallest percentage of articles (8%) involved only internet-based videos, such as TED Talks (e.g. Bell, Panayiotou, & Sayers, 2019) and YouTube videos (e.g. Parris & McInnis-Bowers, 2017).
Educational level.
Overall, student level (undergraduate vs graduate) did not appear to be well-articulated. Of the 229 articles, 89 (39%) did not specify the targeted student level for appropriate usage and 69 (30%) suggested suitability for any educational level. In the articles that did specify, 51 (22%) targeted undergraduates, 18 (8%) targeted graduates and two (1%) targeted executive education.
Discussion
Theoretical implications
We integrated a foundational education theory, backward design, to synthesize the movie/TV literature into a theoretically-driven three-step model. This allows for the identification of theoretical connections between different articles in the literature that have largely developed independently from each other with piecemeal rationale rather than systematic, education-based theories. For example, the literature has largely focused on suggesting resources without explicitly considering the variability of these resources with respect to design characteristics (e.g. fiction vs nonfiction). Backward design theory argues that these design options are substantive decisions and must be considered with respect to the goals and acceptable evidence established by the instructor. The extant literature has neglected to consider that the choice to use fiction or nonfiction resources, for example, is inherently a design decision that has potential implications for its effectiveness. Instead, the identification of various design options for movies/TV has largely been detached from the empirical measurement of the effectiveness of these design decisions. Continuing with our example, at this point, there is no clear, empirically supported basis to determine whether fiction or nonfiction movies are more effective because the link between acceptable evidence and these design decisions has not been clearly elucidated. Our framework highlights the importance of such theoretically driven mechanisms and empirically validated linkages, which we hope will spark a theoretical shift in the movie/TV use conversation within management education.
The backward design lens also helped identify gaps ripe for future research. In particular, one major theoretical implication of our review is the observation that publications on movie/TV use in management education have largely been non-empirical, which might be problematic considering the emphasis that backward design places on the collection of acceptable evidence (in Step 2). This points to a need for future theory-based programmatic empirical research, which we discuss below in further detail.
Practical implications
Our review has multiple implications for management education practice. First, we provide instructors a framework for the use of movies/TV in their classrooms by suggesting that learning goals and expected outcomes should determine movie/TV design choices. More specifically, our review synthesizes previous work to provide a template of design options (from a backward design perspective) that an instructor should thoughtfully consider while designing their movie/TV-embedded courses. In addition, our review strongly encourages the collection of data to evaluate the efficacy of these choices. To support this, we have offered instructors various options for the collection of data used to validate whether their goals have been met. Furthermore, our review highlights the important linkages among the three sequential steps outlined in backward design theory that instructors must carefully consider. By following these steps, and adhering to the linkages, instructors will be better equipped to interrogate their own movie/TV use, increasing effectiveness and reaching students as intended. Finally, our review quantitatively summarizes and supports the ubiquity of this pedagogical approach, providing management educators with the assurance that using movies/TV in the classroom is a serious learning endeavor.
Future research directions
Re-examining modern instructor goals.
The first stage of our backward design conceptualization discussed various instructor goals. Based on our review, many educators use movies/TV to illustrate course concepts in an attention-grabbing, engaging manner (Gioia & Brass, 1986). There is a need to reconsider this assumption for modern students, who have other options when a movie/TV show is shown (e.g. checking their smartphone). This may be particularly true for online courses, where students might skip through the movie/TV clip to get to the “real” material. Thus, given increased competition for students’ attention, future research might take a critical view of prior research that focused on the first stage of backward design and reevaluate the potential for movies/TV to accomplish instructor goals, such as engaging students.
Similarly, a more expansive (re)view of alternative forms of engagement, beyond simply capturing and maintaining students’ attention to course material, might be necessary due to changes in modern classes. Specifically, given feelings of isolation in online courses, students’ engagement with each other (through interaction or feelings of inclusion in the course) could be conceptualized as a form of engagement targeted by instructors in the first stage of backward design. In this sense, movies/TV can offer a shared experience, serving as common ground for peer discussions (Kresse & Watland, 2016). Furthermore, while recent reviews have developed more comprehensive theories that outline why movies/TV might be used in the classroom (e.g. Fang & Chiu, 2024; Kankal et al., 2023), future conceptual work might more explicitly link movie/TV resources to extant learning theories beyond backward design (e.g. Bloom’s Taxonomy, experiential learning theory, social learning theory, scaffolding, constructivism, etc.). Such efforts may help instructors build upon our review to map the connections between movie/TV use in management education and expected learning outcomes while also further integrating research on movies/TV into the wider education literature.
Collecting more acceptable evidence.
The second stage of backward design centers on the criticality of determining and collecting evidence to measure progress toward instructors’ goals. However, most of the papers we analyzed provided minimal to no empirical examination of movie/TV’s effectiveness toward instructor goals, with anecdotal evidence being most common. This highlights the extant literature’s heavy reliance on anecdotal evidence, which could undermine the strength of conclusions related to the effectiveness of movies/TV use. We further speculate that this dearth of empirical validation persists because such efforts require more resource-intensive research methodologies, which are often limited in teaching universities.
Journal policies also play a role. For instance, our analysis revealed that resource reviews (often explicitly non-empirical) on movies/TV are slightly overrepresented in AMLE, compared to articles on movies/TV published in other sections (i.e. 38% of the AMLE articles in our review were resource reviews, whereas resource reviews represent only 25% of all articles published in AMLE). Regarding ML, a recent editorial notes, “in addition to publishing book reviews, we broaden up the review space towards media reviews to include discussions of […] TV series, films, YouTube videos […] ” (Fan & Bettin, 2023, p. 442).
In terms of the number of publications, movie/TV articles quickly populated JME through the 1990s and into the 2010s, but a slowdown began in the early 2020s (see Figure 3 for a count of published articles by decade for each journal). A recent JME editorial noted: “The majority of JME’s manuscripts these days are empirical submissions, largely quantitative and increasingly numbers of qualitative ones” (Edwards & Leigh, 2022, p. 8). Based on our analysis, the majority of past movie/TV-related articles published are not empirical. Thus, journal editorial policies seem to elicit articles that are practice-focused, rather than research-focused. To be clear, we are not suggesting that all articles on movies/TV be submitted with quantitative or qualitative data. Rather, we hope our review continues to raise awareness of the ubiquity of movies/TV in management education practice, and that journals will expand opportunities for submissions that both reflect the practice-driven need for resource reviews/sharing while also opening opportunities to contribute to the literature through qualitative and/or quantitative examinations of the basic value of using movies/TV. This might be done through special issues or sections devoted to this important pedagogical approach.
The stacked bar chart titled Movie and T V articles, by Journal, By Decade displays the number of articles published from 1970 to 2020 across journals including M T R, O M J, A M L E, I J M E, J M E, and M L. Each decade contains stacked segments representing article counts by journal. The 2010 decade contains the largest total with contributions including 28 articles from J M E, 22 from A M L E, 8 from O M J, 9 from M T R, and 4 from M L. The 2020 decade shows a strong contribution from M T R with 24 articles. Earlier decades contain fewer articles, including 8 total articles in the 1970 decade and 14 in the 1980 decade.Movie and TV articles, by journal, by decade – number of articles
The stacked bar chart titled Movie and T V articles, by Journal, By Decade displays the number of articles published from 1970 to 2020 across journals including M T R, O M J, A M L E, I J M E, J M E, and M L. Each decade contains stacked segments representing article counts by journal. The 2010 decade contains the largest total with contributions including 28 articles from J M E, 22 from A M L E, 8 from O M J, 9 from M T R, and 4 from M L. The 2020 decade shows a strong contribution from M T R with 24 articles. Earlier decades contain fewer articles, including 8 total articles in the 1970 decade and 14 in the 1980 decade.Movie and TV articles, by journal, by decade – number of articles
This further raises questions regarding appropriate methodologies for such research endeavors. Again, backward design theory maintains that any such evidence and data collection must be linked to the underlying goals promulgated by instructors in the first stage of backward design. Although instructor goals may vary, management educators might draw inspiration from student evaluations of teaching, which measure student self-reported perceptions. In particular, students’ perceived importance of viewing movies/TV within classrooms might capture the potential for student attention. Other, more controlled experiments can be conducted, similar to those used to assess case methodology (e.g. Loewenstein, Thompson, & Gentner, 2003), where participants are assigned to a condition exposed to a movie/TV resource while the control condition only reads a description or transcript of the resource. Differences in the application of knowledge (or other learning outcomes) could then be compared between the groups. Finally, more rigorous, systematic qualitative investigations using surveys or interviews could develop robust theory and support for the previously espoused theories on the use of movies/TV in management education.
Expanding design options.
Regarding the third stage of backward design (the planning of learning activities), our review identifies the potential for increased use of TV (i.e. just 12% of the articles used TV only). Still other, more nuanced questions remain. For example, we found that leadership is one of the most widely covered topics but less is known about which resource(s) an instructor should use if more than one is available to teach a given leadership concept. We argue that comparisons between different video resources (especially with data that support assertions) represent an important next step. For example, if all else were equal, should this decision be partly informed by the recency of the movie/TV show? Should preference be given to a specific genre (e.g. drama vs comedy)? What about the length of the movie/TV show or whether it is shown in class vs used as an assignment? Perhaps instructors might consider the level of sophistication of the movie/TV resource, such as in published articles that articulate suggested student levels for the movie/TV resource (information analogous to a “maturity rating” for movies/TV in management education). These and other questions are currently ripe for investigation in management education, and a deeper discussion and comparison (with data) could offer guidance to management educators in choosing one of the many options available to them. Thus, future research should expand investigations into a broader array of movie/TV characteristics, while linking these characteristics to instructor goals with evidence.
Exploring contingencies.
While our review focuses on the three stages of backward design, future research might examine contingencies or when movies/TV are less effective. Given many “classic” movies/TV, when would it be inappropriate to use these resources? When would the distractions stemming from the video (e.g. foul language or outdated, offensive content) actually spoil the educational value of the video? Future articles might take a critical view of past movie/TV resources that have been commonly used and provide recommendations or scholarly research ideas that could help guide when “classics” should or should not be retired.
A spotlight on contingencies could also consider contextual factors such as culture, class climate, etc. As an empirical example, Fee & Budde-Sung (2014) found that students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of video clips were impacted by culture, such that different cultures varied in their perceptions of what the general benefits of video clips should be (e.g. to clarify concepts or offer another perspective). Another contingency to explore is alignment between media and teaching style. Using movies/TV with characteristics (e.g. irreverent vs earnest) that align with an instructor’s teaching style (e.g. fun vs serious) should feel more authentic and could thus be more effective.
Limitations
Our review is not without limitations. First, our review did not consider measures of article impact, such as citations or download counts. Further, while we intentionally focused on a set of journals primarily dedicated to management education, future reviews might consider a more expansive scope by examining additional publication outlets, such as management journals that are not primarily focused on education, education-focused journals in other business disciplines, or even conference presentations. A particular discipline may also want to look more narrowly at use in its area. In attempting to put this article into context, we briefly examined business-discipline-specific (i.e. marketing) and general education journals.
In marketing, Journal of Marketing Education was found to have articles presenting similar benefits and challenges of using video as those found in our review of the management education journals. For example, a recent article by Chang (2020) posits that using visual media (i.e. movies) can help overcome the limitations of text-only instruction and suggests that movies can more thoroughly provide meaning to theories and concepts. Chang (2020) wrote specifically in this article about using movies to teach diversity, a challenge that has been discussed recently in management education literature (e.g. Liu et al., 2023), indicating that current SOTL research in the marketing education area is similar to that of management education. Still, a more thorough examination of all business disciplines, although outside the scope of the present review, could be a fruitful avenue of investigation.
Elsewhere, in Journal of Education, the oldest educational publication in the USA, the most recent article on the use of visual media as we have defined it appeared in 2015. Pearcy (2015) analyzed the use of a short movie to teach critical inquiry, albeit primarily focused on secondary education, arguing that movies “can help educators highlight relevant contemporary issues and support an active […] role for student critique” (p. 39). The conclusion of that article asserts that visual media from popular culture, when used effectively, can help students reach deep levels of understanding. Overall, it appears that research on the effectiveness of visual media in general education research, such as management education, could benefit from more theoretically-driven approaches combined with rigorous data collection and analysis.
Conclusion
We hope that our review sparks reflection in management educators about how they use movies/TV and conduct research on the topic. While this review has reached its end credits, we do not think management educators are close to reaching the end of movie/TV use in their classrooms. Perhaps the most exciting part of the story is yet to come.
Note
Although the topic of SOTL garnered the highest percentage of articles in our sample (24%), these articles represent management educators’ discussion of pedagogy, methodology, and assessment as it relates to movie/TV use in management education. RQ1, which focuses on substantive management topics that instructors target to advance students’ knowledge and familiarity, addresses the prevalence of all other topics besides SOTL in the literature.
