JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR BUSINESS, 85: 292298, 2010 Copyright C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0883-2323

DOI: 10.1080/08832320903449600

An Examination of the Effects of Flow on Learning in a Graduate-Level Introductory Operations Management Course
Barbara D. Klein, Don Rossin, Yi Maggie Guo, and Young K. Ro
University of MichiganDearborn, Dearborn, Michigan, USA

The authors investigated the effects of ow on learning outcomes in a graduate-level operations management course. Flow was assessed through an overall ow score, four dimensions of ow, and three characteristics of ow activities. Learning outcomes were measured objectively through multiple-choice quiz scores and subjectively using measures of students perceived learning of the subject matter, students perceived skill development, and student satisfaction. The ndings show that ow affected students perceived learning of the subject matter and student satisfaction but did not affect learning performance as measured through multiplechoice quizzes. Partial support is found for an effect of ow on students perceived skill development. Keywords: ow, inventory management, operations management, project management, student learning, total quality management

INTRODUCTION Faculty members in business schools are under increased pressure to demonstrate that positive learning outcomes are achieved in graduate-level courses. Some have argued that outcomes in business school courses are not as favorable as might be hoped (e.g., Bennis & OToole, 2005; Pfeffer & Fong, 2002), and external demands from potential employers and accreditation agencies encourage faculty to concentrate on the improvement of the design of courses and student experiences in courses. Instructors are generally interested in assessing learning outcomes through objective measures of learning as well as through student perceptions of learning and through measures of student satisfaction. In the present study, we addressed this concern by exploring the effects of ow, a psychological construct associated with improved task performance in a wide variety of task domains, on learning outcomes in a graduate-level operations management course. Specically, we examined the effects of ow on student performance, student perceptions of learn-

ing, and student satisfaction. The results of a eld study on ow and learning outcomes are reported. The subsequent sections of the paper explain (a) prior literature on student learning in business education and on the effects of ow on task performance, (b) the theoretical framework for the study, (c) the research question and research hypotheses, (d) the research methodology, (e) the ndings of the study, and (f) the implications of the results.

LITERATURE REVIEW Two streams of literature form the present study. The rst body of literature addresses learning outcomes in graduate business education and the second body of literature addresses the effect of ow on student learning. Learning Outcomes in Graduate Business Education In recent years, there has been an increased focus on understanding and measuring learning outcomes in graduate schools of business. It has been argued that graduate schools of business do a poor job of educating students in key managerial skills (e.g., Ghoshal, 2005; Olian, 2002; Pfeffer & Fong, 2002) and that the completion of a graduate degree

Correspondence should be addressed to Young K. Ro, University of MichiganDearborn, College of Business, Department of Management Studies, 19000 Hubbard Drive, Dearborn, MI 48126, USA. E-mail: yro@umd.umich.edu

THE EFFECTS OF FLOW ON LEARNING

293

in business does not necessarily guarantee an adequate level of student learning (Pfeffer & Fong, 2002). The recent emphasis on assessment by accreditation agencies (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business [AACSB] International, 2003) ensures that faculty of graduate schools of business are concerned with understanding, measuring, and improving student learning outcomes in order to attain or maintain accreditation. Although many college professors have always been concerned with student learning, the formal focus on understanding and assessing learning outcomes is relatively new. This motivates fresh approaches to understanding the conditions under which student learning occurs in the business school classroom. One approach to addressing this question uses the theory of ow to develop a theoretical approach to understanding the conditions under which student learning occurs. The theory of ow has been used to understand human performance in a wide variety of task domains including human learning. Briey, the theory of ow involves the argument that humans are more engaged in tasks when they nd them to be challenging and interesting (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Humans are said to enter into a state of ow in which time ies by and tasks are accomplished with an unusual level of attentiveness and energy (Csikszentmihalyi). Improved learning outcomes have been associated with the ow state in a variety of learning environments across a variety of academic disciplines. Flow and Learning Outcomes To understand how the state of ow may be associated with improved learning outcomes, imagine the following situation: You are a professor of operations management with 15 years of experience working in an academic environment. Although you enjoy your job, you have found that over the years you have developed so much expertise in the eld that your knowledge and skills are more than adequate to handle almost every challenge that occurs in your work. Seeking a new challenge, you sign up to audit a course on Mandarin Chinese at your university. At rst the Chinese class sessions seem very difcult. However, during a class session near the end of the semester, you nd yourself focusing intensely on the class activities. You are paying so much attention to the class that you do not notice that there is a great deal of noise just outside the classroom. When your Chinese professor announces that the class session is over, you glance at your watch and are surprised to see that an hour has passed since the class started. The hour has really own by because you have been in a state of ow. Prior research has found that ow is associated with learning outcomes in teenagers and young adults (Parr, Montgomery, & DeBell, 1998; Rathunde, 2003; Shernoff, Csikszentmihalyi, Schneider, & Shernoff, 2003; Whalen, 1998). Prior studies have examined the effects of ow in higher education (Ghani, 1995; Kiili, 2005), foreign language studies

(Egbert, 2003), music education (Custodero, 2002), education for the gifted (Rea, 2000), and instructional design using hypermedia (Chan & Ahern, 1999; Konradt, Filip, & Hoffman, 2003). The application of ow theory to operations management education is a relatively new undertaking. Although various simulation games, such as permutations of the beer game (e.g., Chen & Samroengraja, 2000), have been used to enhance learning in operations management education in business schools, the number of studies directly investigating the impact of the ow experience on operations management education is limited. Choi, Kim, and Kim (2007) investigated the role of ow on learning outcomes in the training and usage of an Internet-enabled ERP system among 223 students enrolled in 24 different vocational schools. Although they concluded that ow generally had positive direct and indirect impacts on learning outcomes, the study was in an undergraduate vocational school at which the emphasis was on the development of drill and practice type end-user training rather than on cognitive learning. Although research on the effects of ow in business school education is relatively recent, a body of ndings on the subject is beginning to accumulate. Guo and Ro (2008) demonstrated that ow can occur in an undergraduate operations management course, and Guo and Ro (2005) found an effect of ow on student perceptions of learning and student satisfaction in an undergraduate operations management course. Guo, Klein, Ro, and Rossin (2007) found an effect of ow on student perceptions of learning and student satisfaction in a classroom-based information management course, whereas Rossin, Ro, Klein, and Guo (2008) found similar effects in an online information management course. When researchers look across the range of studies that have been conducted on ow and learning outcomes, it is not possible to draw denitive conclusions about the effects of ow on learning outcomes in higher education. However, two broad conclusions can be drawn. First, most studies on the topic have addressed student interaction with computers or the Internet (e.g., Chan & Ahern, 1999; Chan & Repman, 1999; Ghani, 1995; Konradt et al., 2003; Konradt & Sulz, 2001). Few studies have focused on traditional classroom settings, which are still the most common environments in which instruction in business schools is delivered. Second, the ndings of prior studies are somewhat mixed with some, but not all, hypothesized benets of ow demonstrated. For example, Konradt and Sulz found that individuals in ow had better concentration, satisfaction, and motivation, but did not have better learning performance compared to individuals who were not in ow. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Csikszentmihalyi (1975) argued that humans sometimes enter into a state of ow while performing a variety of different types of tasks. While in ow, humans concentrate intensely

294

B. D. KLEIN ET AL. TABLE 1 Denitions of Dimensions of Flow Dimension Focused concentration Perceived control Denition A centering of attention on a limited stimulus eld (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975, p. 40) There is the sense that the outcomes of the activity are, in principle, under the persons own control. (Csikszentmihalyi & Csikszentmihalyi, 1988, p. 33) Time no longer seems to pass the way it ordinarily does (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p. 66) The key element of an optimal experience is that it is an end in itself. (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p. 67)

and experience a shift in their perception of control over an activity. They also feel a mergence of their conscious awareness and the task they are performing and perceive time differently than normal, typically perceiving time as passing more quickly than it normally does. Additionally, while in a state of ow, humans experience a loss of self and do not think about their normal concerns (Csikszentmihalyi). Characteristics of Flow Activities According to Csikszentmihalyi (1975), there is a set of characteristics of activities that enhance task performance. Activities that have these characteristics are called ow activities. The theory suggests that ow activities are characterized by goal clarity, feedback, and a perceived balance of challenge and skill (Csikszentmihalyi). Dimensions of Flow Csikszentmihalyi (1988) also discussed dimensions of ow that can be used to assess whether a person is in ow while engaged in the performance of a task. The dimensions of ow include focused concentration, merging of activity and awareness, perceived control, transformation of time, transcendence of self, and autotelic experience. Autotelic experience refers to the idea that tasks performed while in a ow state are intrinsically rewarding or autotelic. Two of the six dimensions (merging of activity and awareness and transcendence of self) are applicable to physical tasks such as playing table tennis. Because we were interested in an intellectual task for the present study, we focused on the other four dimensions of ow in this study. These four dimensions of ow are dened in Table 1. Learning Outcomes Flow has been found to be associated with improved learning outcomes in prior studies (Csikszentmihalyi, Rathunde, & Whalen, 1997). One method of assessing learning outcomes is to measure performance objectively, such as through exams and quizzes. Alternatively, other perspectives on learning, such as the cognitive perspective, that view learning taking place through changes in mental models or knowledge
FLOW Characteristics of Flow Activities Goal clarity Feedback Perceived balance of challenge and skill Dimensions of Flow Focused concentration Perceived contr ol Transformation of time Autotelic experience

Transformation of time Autotelic experience

representations (Shuell, 1986) would suggest that learning outcomes also be assessed indirectly through measures of student perceptions of learning outcomes (Alavi, Marakas, & Yoo, 2002). Perceived learning is conceptualized through students perceptions of their learning of the subject matter and students perceptions of their skill development. Finally, student satisfaction is an important learning outcome. Four learning outcomes were used in this study: learning performance (i.e., objective quiz scores), perceived learning of the subject matter, perceived skill development, and student satisfaction. Research Model The research model showing the effect of ow on learning outcomes is depicted in Figure 1. In the present study we addressed the question of whether ow affects learning outcomes in an introductory operations management course. This question was examined through the following set of research hypotheses. Hypothesis 1 (H 1 ): Flow affects learning performance. H 2 : Flow affects students perceived learning of the subject matter. H 3 : Flow affects students perceived skill development. H 4 : Flow affects student satisfaction.

affects

LEARNING OUTCOMES Learning performance Perceived learning of subject matter Perceived skill development Student satisfaction

FIGURE 1

Research model of ow and learning outcomes.

THE EFFECTS OF FLOW ON LEARNING

295

Because ow was measured three different ways in the study, each of the research hypotheses was also tested in three ways. First, an overall ow score was used to test each of the four hypotheses. Second, scores for the four dimensions of ow (focused concentration, perceived control, transformation of time, and autotelic experience) were used in a set of regression models as independent variables to test the four hypotheses. Finally, scores for the three characteristics of ow activities (goal clarity, feedback, and balance of challenge and skill) were used as independent variables to test the four hypotheses. The dependent variables used in the study to test the four hypotheses were measured through a mixture of objective measures of learning outcomes and self-reported measures of learning outcomes. The rst hypothesis was tested using objective measures of learning performance (i.e., scores on multiple-choice quizzes). The second, third, and fourth hypotheses were tested using self-reported measures of perceived learning of the subject matter, perceived skill development, and satisfaction. METHODOLOGY A eld study conducted in a campus-based, graduate-level introductory operations management course provided a test of the research hypotheses. The participants who participated in the study were MBA students in a public university in the Midwestern region of the United States. Data were collected during two semesters. In the rst semester of data collection, the participants completed a pretest quiz during one class session and completed a survey and a posttest quiz during a second class session. During the rst data collection session, a pretest quiz with 20 multiple-choice questions was administered to assess students background knowledge. During the second data collection session, a postlearning survey and quiz were administered immediately following a 3-hr class session on total quality management. In the second semester of data collection, the participants completed surveys during two class sessions and took quizzes during three class sessions. First, a pretest quiz with 20 multiple-choice questions was administered to assess students background knowledge of project management and inventory before these topics were covered or assigned in the course. Second, postlearning surveys and quizzes were administered immediately following 3-hr class sessions on project management and on inventory. Measures of the three characteristics of ow activities, the four ow dimensions, an overall measure of ow, student perceptions of perceived learning of the subject matter, student perceptions of perceived skill development, and student satisfaction were included in the surveys that students completed after the 3-hr class sessions. Each of the postlearning quizzes contained 10 multiple-choice questions that were used as measures of learning performance. Eighteen students completed the total quality management postlearning survey and

TABLE 2 Cronbachs Alpha for the Constructs Construct Goal clarity Feedback Perceived balance of challenge and skill Focused concentration Perceived control Transformation of time Autotelic experience Perceived learning of subject matter Perceived skill development Student satisfaction n 4 4 3 4 4 6 4 8 4 2 Cronbachs 0.792 0.832 0.762 0.924 0.714 0.778 0.877 0.835 0.716 0.677

quiz. Eighteen students completed the inventory postlearning survey and quiz. Twenty-two students completed the project management postlearning survey and quiz. Existing measures of the research constructs were used and adapted for the present study in the construction of the postlearning survey. Survey items used previously by Guo and Ro (2005) were adapted for this study. Survey items used to assess the ow experience during the class session were adapted from the Flow State Scale, which has been previously validated (Guo, 2004; Jackson & Marsh, 1996). In addition, an item asking participants to evaluate their overall ow state was included in the survey (Guo & Ro, 2005). Common methods bias was reduced by presenting items measuring different constructs in a mixed order within the survey. A 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) was used to measure the survey items. (The survey items are available from the corresponding author on request.) RESULTS The initial examination of the reliability of the research constructs showed that three constructs (student satisfaction, perceived balance of challenge and skill, and transformation of time) had low reliability. After one item was dropped from each of these three constructs, all but one of the research constructs (student satisfaction) had reliability above the generally accepted value of 0.7 (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). Table 2 presents the Cronbachs alpha for each of the research constructs after the adjustments were made to the student satisfaction, perceived balance of challenge and skill, and transformation of time constructs. A discussion of the effects of ow on learning performance, students perceived learning of the subject matter, students perceived skill development, and student satisfaction follows. Effect of Flow on Learning Performance Two measures of learning performance were used as dependent variables to test the effect of ow on learning

296

B. D. KLEIN ET AL. TABLE 3 Summary of Hypothesis Tests Hypotheses Hypothesis 1 (H1 ): Flow affects learning performance. H2 : Flow affects students perceived learning of the subject matter. H3 : Flow affects students perceived skill development. Results Not supported Supported

performance. First, a posttest quiz score is used. On average, students answered 6.97 (SD = 1.62) of the 10 questions on the posttest quiz correctly. The second measure of learning performance is the difference between the posttest quiz score and the score on the relevant part of the pretest quiz. On average, students answered 2.07 (SD = 2.10) more questions correctly on the posttest quiz than on the relevant part of the pretest quiz. Because three different aspects of ow were measured in the study, the effect of ow on learning performance is tested in three different regression models. The rst regression model used the overall ow score as an independent variable. The second regression model used the four dimensions of ow as independent variables. The third regression model used the three characteristics of ow activities as independent variables. The three regression models using the posttest quiz score as the dependent variable indicated that ow does not predict learning performance. The posttest quiz score was not predicted by the overall ow score (p = .577), the four dimensions of ow (p = .130), or the three characteristics of ow activities (p = .071). Likewise, the three regression models using the difference between the posttest quiz score and the relevant part of the pretest quiz score indicated that ow did not predict learning performance. The difference between the posttest and pretest quizzes was not predicted by the overall ow score (p = .802), the four dimensions of ow (p = .924), or the three characteristics of ow activities (p = .969). Hence, no support was found for H1 . Effect of Flow on Students Perceived Learning of the Subject Matter Because three different aspects of ow were measured in the study, the effect of ow on students perceived learning of the subject matter was tested in three different regression models. The rst regression model used the overall ow score as an independent variable. The second regression model used the four dimensions of ow as independent variables. The third regression model used the three characteristics of ow activities as independent variables. All three of the regression models using students perceived learning of the subject matter as the dependent variable indicated that ow predicts students perceived learning of the subject matter. Students perceived learning of the subject matter was predicted by the overall ow score (p = .000), the four dimensions of ow (p = .000), and the three characteristics of ow activities (p = .000). Hence, H2 was supported. Effect of Flow on Students Perceived Skill Development As with the other measures of learning outcomes, the effect of ow on students perceived skill development was tested in three different regression models. The rst regression model

Supported for four dimensions of ow and three characteristics of ow activities H4 : Flow affects student satisfaction. Supported

used the overall ow score as an independent variable. The second regression model used the four dimensions of ow as independent variables. The third regression model used the three characteristics of ow activities as independent variables. Two of the three regression models using students perceived skill development as the dependent variable indicated that ow predicts students perceived skill development. Students perceived skill development was not predicted by the overall ow score (p = .246). However, students perceived skill development was predicted by the four dimensions of ow (p = .039) and the three characteristics of ow activities (p = .000). Hence, partial support was found for H3 . Effect of Flow on Student Satisfaction Three regression models were also used to test the effect of ow on student satisfaction. The rst regression model used the overall ow score as an independent variable. The second regression model used the four dimensions of ow as independent variables. The third regression model used the three characteristics of ow activities as independent variables. All three of the regression models using student satisfaction as the dependent variable indicated that ow predicts student satisfaction. Student satisfaction was predicted by the overall ow score (p = .000), the four dimensions of ow (p = .000), and the three characteristics of ow activities (p = .001). Hence, support was found for H4 .

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Table 3 presents a summary of the results of the tests of the research hypotheses. No support was found for the hypothesis testing the effect of ow on learning performance as measured objectively through multiple-choice quizzes. However, strong support was found for an effect of ow on students perceived learning of the subject matter and on student satisfaction. Partial support was found for an effect of ow on students perceived skill development, with no support found for the overall ow

THE EFFECTS OF FLOW ON LEARNING TABLE 4 Comparative Summary of Findings Across Two Prior Studies and Present Study Operations management course (classroom based) Not supported Supported Partially supported Supported Information management course (classroom based) Not supported Supported Supported Supported

297

Hypothesis H1 : Flow affects learning performance. H2 : Flow affects students perceived learning of the subject matter. H3 : Flow affects students perceived skill development. H4 : Flow affects student satisfaction.

Information management course (online) Not supported Supported Partially supported Partially supported

Note. Findings from the Operations Management Course refer to the present study. Findings from the classroom-based Information Management Course refer to Guo et al.s (2007) study. Findings from the online Information Management Course refer to Rossin et al.s (2008) study.

score and support found for the four dimensions of ow and the three characteristics of ow activities. From the perspective of faculty teaching graduate-level business courses, the practical implication of the results of the study is that at least some learning outcomes may be improved through attention to ow. Although ow has not been shown to be associated with learning performance as measured through performance on multiple-choice quizzes, student perceptions of their learning and student satisfaction can play an important role in a business schools assessment plan and these measures of learning outcomes may be improved through increased attention to ow. The four dimensions of ow and the three characteristics of ow assessed in this study should provide faculty with concrete ideas for improving learning outcomes. The results of the study suggest that student perceptions of learning and student satisfaction may be improved if (a) instruction is designed so that the challenges imposed by a course and student skills are well balanced, (b) goals are stated clearly, and (c) adequate feedback on learning is provided. Additionally, if courses are designed so that students perceive that they are in control of the learning experience, experience focused concentration on course material and activities, and experience a transformation of time during course sessions and while studying outside of class, learning outcomes may be improved. Three studies examining the effects of ow on learning outcomes have now been conducted in this research stream. The two prior studies examined the effect of ow on learning outcomes in a classroom-based information management course (Guo et al., 2007) and in an online information management course (Rossin et al., 2008). In general, all three of the studies conducted as part of the research stream have found that ow affects students perceived learning of the subject matter, students perceived skill development, and student satisfaction, but does not affect student performance as measured through scores on multiple-choice quizzes. A summary of the results of the three studies conducted in the research stream is presented in Table 4. In the three cells in Table 4 that indicate that a relationship was partially supported, support was found for the four dimensions of ow

on the relevant learning outcome and for the three characteristics of ow activities on the relevant learning outcome. However, the overall ow score was not found to affect the relevant learning outcome in these three cells of Table 4. The main limitation of the present study reported was that learning performance was measured exclusively through scores on multiple-choice quizzes. However, it is possible that ow may affect learning performance in ways that are not detected through multiple-choice quizzes. Several directions for future research are suggested by the ndings of this study and the synthesis of the ndings of the studies in the research stream. First, further research using different measures of learning performance should be conducted. Although the nding that ow does not affect objectively-measured learning performance appears to be fairly robust, additional objective measures of learning performance, such as performance on written assignments and class projects, should be tested in order to more strongly conrm or disconrm this nding. Second, although work in this research stream has now addressed two academic disciplines in business schools, it may be benecial to extend the work to other disciplines, which are less oriented toward problem solving and design tasks.

REFERENCES
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business International. (2003). Eligibility procedures and accreditation standards for business accreditation. Tampa, FL: Author. Alavi, M., Marakas, G. M., & Yoo, Y. (2002). A comparative study of distributed learning environments on learning outcomes. Information Systems Research, 13, 404415. Bennis, W. G., & OToole, J. (2005). How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review, 83, 96104. Chan, T. S., & Ahern, T. C. (1999). Targeting motivationAdapting ow theory to instructional design. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 21, 151163. Chan, T. S., & Repman, J. (1999). Flow in web based instructional activity: An exploratory research project. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications,International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 5, 225237. Chen, F., & Samroengraja, R. (2000). The stationary beer game. Production and Operations Management, 9(1), 1926.

298

B. D. KLEIN ET AL. Jackson, S. A., & Marsh, H. W. (1996). Development and validation of a scale to measure optimal experience: The ow state scale. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 18(1), 1735. Kiili, K. (2005). Content creation challenges and ow experience in educational games: The IT-emperor case. The Internet and Higher Education, 8, 183198. Konradt, U., Filip, R., & Hoffmann, S. (2003). Flow experience and positive affect during hypermedia learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34, 309327. Konradt, U., & Sulz, K. (2001). The experience of ow in interacting with a hypermedia learning environment. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10(1), 6984. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill. Olian, J. D. (2002). Management education at risk. Tampa, FL: AACSB International. Parr, G. D., Montgomery, M., & DeBell, C. (1998). Flow theory as a model for enhancing student resilience. Professional School Counseling, 1(5), 2631. Pfeffer, J., & Fong, C. T. (2002). The end of business schools? Less success than meets the eye. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1(1), 7895. Rathunde, K. (2003). A comparison of Montessori and traditional middle schools: Motivation, quality of experience, and social context. NAMTA Journal, 28(3), 1352. Rea, D. W. (2000). Optimal motivation for talent development. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 187216. Rossin, D., Ro, Y. K., Klein, B. D., & Guo, Y. M. (2008). The effects of ow on learning outcomes in an online information management course. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(1), 8798. Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of ow theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, 158 176. Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive conceptions of learning. Review of Educational Research, 56, 475500. Whalen, S. P. (1998). Flow and the engagement of talent: Implications for secondary schooling. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 82(595), 2237.

Choi, D. H., Kim, J., & Kim, S. H. (2007). ERP training with a web-based electronic learning system: The ow theory perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65, 223243. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety: Experiencing ow in work and play. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). The ow experience and its signicance for human psychology. In M. Csikszentmihalyi & I. S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.), Optimal experience: Psychological studies of ow in consciousness (pp. 1535). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, I.S. (eds.). (1988). Optimal Experience: Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., & Whalen, S. (1997). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. New York: Cambridge University Press. Custodero, L. A. (2002). Seeking challenge, nding skill: Flow experience and music education. Arts Education Policy Review, 103(3), 39. Egbert, J. (2003). A study of ow theory in the foreign language classroom. Modern Language Journal, 87, 499518. Ghani, J. A. (1995). Flow in human-computer interactions: Test of a model. In J. M. Carey (Ed.), Human factors in information systems: Emerging theoretical bases (pp. 291309). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 7591. Guo, Y. (2004). Flow in Internet shopping: A validity study and an examination of a model specifying antecedents and consequences of ow. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Information and Operations Management, Mays Business School, Texas A&M University. Guo, Y., Klein, B., Ro, Y., & Rossin. D. (2007). The impact of ow on learning outcomes in a graduate-level information management course. Journal of Global Business Issues, 1(2), 3139. Guo, Y, & Ro, Y. (2005, November). Capturing ow in the business classroom: A study in progress. Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of Decision Sciences Institute, 1488114886. Guo, Y., & Ro. Y. (2008). Capturing ow in the business classroom. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 6, 437462.

Copyright of Journal of Education for Business is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.