Case Study: Assembling a Case Study Tool Kit: 10 Tools for Teaching With Cases

References

• Anderson, C. W., & Smith, E. L. (1987). Teaching science. In V. Richardson-Koehler (Ed.), Educators’ handbook: A research perspective (pp. 84-111). White Plains, NY: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. O., & Flash, P (2014). The power of peer reviewing to enhance writing in horticulture: Greenhouse management. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 26, 310-334.
   Google Scholar
• Bacon, D. R., Stewart, K. A., & Silver, W. S. (1999). Lessons from the best and worst student team experiences: How a teacher can make the difference. Journal of Management Education, 23, 467-488.
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (2003). Grouping and achievement in cooperative learning. College Teaching, 51, 169-174.
   Google Scholar
• Barkley, E. F., Cross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (Eds.). (2005). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. (1998). Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 377-391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beatty, I. D., Gerace, W J., Leonard, W. J., & Dufresne, R. J. (2006). Designing effective questions for classroom response system teaching. American Journal of Physics, 74, 31-39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brosvic, G. M., Epstein, M. L., & Cook, M. J. (2004). Provision of feedback during preparation for academic testing: Learning is enhanced by immediate but not delayed feedback. The Psychological Record, 54, 207-231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brutus, S., & Donia, M. B. L. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of students in groups with a centralized peer evaluation system. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9, 652-662.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 6, 9-20.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chapman, K. J., Meuter, M., Toy, D., & Wright, L. (2006). Can’t we pick our own groups? The influence of group selection method on group dynamics and outcomes. Journal of Management Education, 30, 557-569.
   Google Scholar
• Chi, M. T. H. (2005). Common sense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. Journal of the Learning of Sciences, 14, 161-199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chlup, D. T., & Collins, T. E. (2010). Breaking the ice: Using icebreakers and re-energizers with adult learners. Adult Learning, 21(3/4), 34-39.
   Google Scholar
• Cho, H. H. (1985). An investigation of high school biology textbooks as sources of misconceptions and difficulties in genetics and some suggestions for teaching genetics. Science Education 69, 707-719.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coley, J. D., & Tanner, K. (2015). Relations between intuitive biological thinking and biological misconceptions in biology majors and nonmajors. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 14, 1-19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crouch, C. H., Watkins, J., Fagen, A. P., & Mazur, E. (2007). Peer instruction: Engaging students one-on-one, all at once. Research-Based Reform of University Physics, 1, 40-95.
   Google Scholar
• Dingel, M., & Wei, W. (2014). Influences on peer evaluation in a group project: An exploration of leadership, demographics and course performance. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39, 729-742.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duit, R. (2009). Bibliography— Students’ and teachers’ conceptions and science education. Kiel, Germany: IPN—Leibniz Institute for Science Education at the University of Kiel. Available at http://archiv.ipn.uni-kiel.de/stcse/
   Google Scholar
• Eaton, T. T. (2009). Engaging students and evaluating learning progress using collaborative exams in introductory courses. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57, 113-120.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, M. L., & Brosvic, G. M. (2002). Students prefer the Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique. Psychological Reports, 90, 1136-1138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein, M. L., Lazarus, A. D., Calvano, T. B., Matthews, K. A., Hendel, R. A., Epstein, B. B., & Brosvic, G. M. (2002). Immediate feedback assessment technique promotes learning and corrects inaccurate first responses. Psychological Record, 52, 187-201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faculty Focus. (2013). About faculty focus. Retrieved from http://www.facultyfocus.com/about/
   Google Scholar
• Felder, R. M., Felder, G. N., & Dietz, E. J. (1998). A longitudinal study of engineering student performance and retention v. comparisons with traditionally-taught students. Journal of Engineering Education, 87, 469-480.
   Google Scholar
• Fiechtner, S. B., & Davis, E. A. (1985). Why some groups fail: A survey of students’ experiences with learning groups. The Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, 9(4), 75-88.
   Google Scholar
• Fies, C., & Marshall, J. (2006). Classroom response systems: A review of the literature. Journal of Science Education and Technology 15, 101-109.
   Google Scholar
• Gueldenzoph, L. E., & May, G. L. (2002). Collaborative peer evaluation: Best practices for group member assessments. Business Communication Quarterly, 65, 9-20.
   Google Scholar
• Herreid, C. F. (2001). When justice peeks. Journal of College Science Teaching, 30, 430-433.
   Google Scholar
• Hilton, S., & Phillips, F. (2010). Instructor-assigned and student-selected groups: A view from the inside. Issues in Accounting Education, 25, 15-33.
   Google Scholar
• Hollis Gilley, B., & Clarkston, B (2014). Collaborative testing: Evidence of learning in a controlled in-class study of undergraduate students. Journal of College Science Teaching 43(3), 83-91.
   Google Scholar
• Huxham, M., & Land, R. (2000). Assigning students in group work projects: Can we do better than random? Innovations in Education and Training International, 37, 17-22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jang, H., Lasry, N., Miller, K., & Mazur, E. (2017). Collaborative exams: Cheating? Or learning? American Journal of Physics, 85, 223-227.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen, J. L., & Lawson, A. (2011). Effects of collaborative group composition and inquiry instruction on reasoning gains and achievements in undergraduate biology. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 10, 64-73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kay, R. H., & LeSage, A. (2009). Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 53, 819-827.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knight, J. K., Wise, S. B., & Southard, K. M. (2013). Understanding clicker discussions: Student reasoning and the impact of instructional cues. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 12, 645-654.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koppal, M., & Caldwell, A. (2002). Meeting the challenge of science literacy: Project 2061 efforts to improve science education. Cell Biology Education, 3, 28-30.
   Google Scholar
• Kurt, H. (2013). Biology student teachers’ cognitive structure about “living thing.” Educational Research and Review, 8, 871-880.
   Google Scholar
• Lantz, M. E. (2010). The use of ‘Clickers’ in the classroom: Teaching innovation or merely an amusing novelty? Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 556-561.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lantz, M. E., & Stawiski, A. (2014). Effectiveness of clickers: Effect of feedback and the timing of questions on learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 280-286.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lasry, N. (2008). Clickers or flashcards: Is there really a difference? The Physics Teacher, 46, 242-244.
   Google Scholar
• Lasry, N., Mazur, E., & Watkins, J. (2008). Peer instruction: From Harvard to the two-year college. American Journal of Physics, 76, 1066-1069.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Limon, M. (2001). On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for conceptual change: A critical appraisal. Learning and Instruction, 11, 357-380.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludemann, P M., & McMakin, D. (2014). Perceived helpfulness of peer editing activities: First-year students’ views and writing performance outcomes. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 13, 129-136.
   Google Scholar
• Mazur, E., & Watkins, J. (2010). Just-in-time teaching and peer instruction. In S. P. Simkins & M. H. Maier (Eds.), Just-in-time teaching across the disciplines, and across the academy (pp. 39-62). Sterling VA: Stylus.
   Google Scholar
• Michaelsen, L. K., Bauman Knight, A., & Fink, L. D. (Eds). (2004). Team based learning: A transformative use of small groups in college teaching. Sterling VA: Stylus.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, C. (2016, June 6). Frame your feedback: Making peer review work in class. Faculty Focus. Retrieved from http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-and-learning/frame-feedback-making-peer-review-work-class/
   Google Scholar
• Moravec, M., Williams, A., Aguilar-Roca, N., & O’Dowd, D. K. (2010). Learn before lecture: A strategy that improves learning outcomes in a large introductory biology classroom. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 9, 473-481.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Association of Colleges and Employers. (2015). Job outlook 2016: Attributes employers want to see on new college graduate’s resumes. Retrieved from http://www.naceweb.org/s11182015/employers-look-for-in-new-hires.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen, K. L., Hansen-Nygard, G. H., & Stav, J. B. (2012). Investigating peer instruction: How the initial voting session affects students’ experience of group discussion. ISRN Education, 2012. Available at https://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2012/290157/
   Google Scholar
• Oakley, B., Felder, R. M., Brent, R., & Elhajj, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of Student Centered Learning, 2, 8-33.
   Google Scholar
• Orr, R., & Foster, S. (2013). Increasing student success using online quizzing in introductory (majors) biology. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 12, 509-514.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific concept: toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227.
   Google Scholar
• Rieger, G. W., & Heiner, C. E. (2014). Examinations that support collaborative learning: The students’ perspective. Journal of College Science Learning, 43(4), 41-47.
   Google Scholar
• Saleh, M., Lazonder, A., & De Jong, T. (2005). Effects of within-class ability grouping on social interaction, achievement, and motivation. Instructional Science, 33, 105-119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J. K., Guild, N., & Su, T. T. (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323(5910), 122-124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sovibo, K. (1995). A review of some sources of students’ misconceptions in biology. Singapore Journal of Education, 15, 1-11.
   Google Scholar
• Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in sciences, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69, 21-51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Storey, R. D. (1989). Textbook errors and misconceptions in biology: Photosynthesis. American Biology Teacher, 51, 271-274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stowell, J. R. (2015). Use of clickers vs. mobile devices for classroom polling. Computers & Education, 82, 329-334.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stowell, J. R., & Nelson, J. M. (2007). Benefits of electronic audience response systems on student participation, learning, and emotion. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 253-258.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tekkaya, C. (2002). Misconceptions as barrier to understanding biology. Journal of Education, 23, 259-266.
   Google Scholar
• Terenzini, P T., Cabrera, A. F., Colbeck, C. L., Parente, J. M., & Bjorkland, S. A. (2001). Collaborative learning vs. lecture/discussion: Students’ reported learning gains. Journal of Engineering Education, 90, 123-130.
   Google Scholar
• Vural, O. F. (2013). The impact of a question-embedded video-based learning tool on E-learning. Educational Science: Theory & Practice, 13, 1315-1323.
   Google Scholar
• Wahawisan, J., Salazar, M., Walters, R., Alkhateeb, F. M., & Attarabeen, O. (2016). Reliability assessment of a peer evaluation instrument in a team-based learning course. Pharmacy Practice, 14, 676-681.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Webb, N. M. (1982). Group composition, group interaction, and achievement in cooperative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 475-484.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West, E. (1999). The big book of icebreakers: Quick, fun activities for energizing meetings and workshops. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Wieman, C. E., Rieger, G. W., & Heiner, C. E. (2014). Physics exams that promote collaborative learning. The Physics Teacher, 52, 51-53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zipp, J. F. (2007). Learning by exams: The impact of two-stage cooperative tests. Teaching Sociology, 35, 62-76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar