Dr. Ronald Mickler, Jr.
Assistant Dean for Accreditation and Strategic Initiatives
Boler College of Business
John Carroll University

Feedback is a cornerstone of academic development, particularly in marketing education, where skill development often requires iteration and applied practice. While instructors spend considerable time providing effective feedback, artificial intelligence (AI) tools can significantly reduce this burden by generating timely, tailored responses. For example, AI-based chatbots can supplement instruction, providing students with timely feedback and reducing instructors’ workload. This study examines how marketing students perceive feedback quality based on its source, specifically whether it is delivered by an AI system or a human instructor. Through a scenario-based experiment, we investigate student perceptions of feedback quality and effectiveness based on the source (AI vs. Instructor) or valence (positive vs. negative). Our findings provide guidance for professors who want to incorporate AI tools into their teaching practices. Understanding student perceptions of feedback source is crucial for marketing educators who want to leverage AI systems to enhance the educational experience without compromising the human component that students value.

Dr. Ronald Mickler, Jr., is a distinguished academic leader with over two decades of experience in higher education, specializing in enrollment management, student services, and program development. He currently serves as the Assistant Dean for Accreditation and Strategic Initiatives at the Boler College of Business, John Carroll University, where he also teaches leadership and organizational development courses.

Dr. Mickler earned his Doctor of Education in Leadership Studies from Ashland University in 2021. His dissertation, titled “Informal Leaders, Interpersonal Influence, and Word-of-Mouth Communication: Understanding Master of Business Administration Applicants’ Enrollment Decision-Making Process,” provides valuable insights into the factors influencing MBA applicants’ enrollment decisions.

Throughout his career, Dr. Mickler has demonstrated a profound ability to design and implement innovative academic programs and strategic initiatives. He also successfully led the AACSB Continuous Improvement Peer Review Process in 2024, resulting in the extension of dual accreditation through 2029.

Ronald Mickler, Jr., John Carroll University

Gender Identity, Inter-Team Competition, and Leader Self-Efficacy Developmental Trajectories in a Multi-Institutional Leader Development Program

David Michael Rosch, Lisa Kuron, Robert Reimer, Ronald Mickler, Daniel Jenkins

Journal of Leadership Education, April 2024

This study examines the evolution of leader self-efficacy among collegiate participants engaged in the multi-institutional Collegiate Leadership Competition, a unique pedagogical framework that incorporates inter-team challenges. Over three years, data was collected to explore whether gender identity influences the developmental trajectories of leader self-efficacy. The findings reveal that women participants consistently began their competition experience with higher levels of self-efficacy compared to their male counterparts. Throughout the competition and several months following its conclusion, both groups exhibited sustained moderate growth in self-efficacy, yet the initial disparity between genders remained unchanged. This persistence of the gender gap underscores the complex dynamics of leader development in competitive academic environments and offers crucial insights for leadership educators aiming to refine program effectiveness and inclusivity.

The research contributes significantly to the nascent body of literature on leadership education efficacy, particularly within settings that simulate real-world competitive dynamics. By maintaining a focus on inter-team competition, the study not only aligns with contemporary educational best practices—including experiential learning and student-centered pedagogies—but also provides a detailed assessment of how such approaches can be optimized to support diverse leader identity development. The results suggest that while competitive formats like those used in the Collegiate Leadership Competition foster leader self-efficacy across genders, they do not necessarily mitigate pre-existing efficacy disparities. These insights are invaluable for leadership educators who are tasked with designing programs that not only enhance leadership skills but also address gender-based perceptions in leader efficacy.