Teaching with cases, especially at universities where cases are not a regular part of the curriculum, poses challenges for both faculty and students. The results in this research present an effective and manageable method to introduce the case analysis process and to facilitate written case analysis for both students and faculty. Experiment 1 compares the effectiveness of a semistructured one-page written case analysis over a traditional case analysis and finds the shorter assignment results in shorter grading time and better student grades. A two-case method introducing the case analysis process is tested in Experiment 2 and finds that a short lecture introducing the case analysis method and an initial small group practice case further improves student grades. Theoretical reasoning and directions for future research are discussed.
AbernethyA. M.ButlerD. D. (1993). Scaled case grading forms: A method to improve the assessment of student case performance. Marketing Education Review, 3(3), 40-46.
2.
AbramiP. C.BernardR. M.BorokhovskiE.WaddingtonD. I.WadeC. A.PerssonT. (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85, 275-314.
3.
AusterE. R.WylieK. K. (2006). Creating active learning in the classroom: A systematic approach. Journal of Management Education, 30, 333-353.
BaconD. R. (2006, April). Assessing improvement in case analysis skills. Paper presented at the Marketing Educators Association Conference, San Francisco, CA.
6.
BaconD. R.Quinlan-WilderT. M. (2011). Toward a computer-scored assessment of marketing expertise. Paper presented at the Marketing Educators Association Conference, San Diego, CA.
ChristensenD. R.HansenA. J. (1987). Teaching and the case method. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.
9.
DarabiA.ArrastiaM. C.NelsonD. W.CornilleT.LiangX. (2011). Cognitive presence in asynchronous online learning: A comparison of four discussion strategies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27, 216-227.
10.
DesirajuR.GopinathC. (2001). Encouraging participation in case discussions: A comparison of the MICA and the Harvard case methods. Journal of Management, 25, 394-340.
11.
FormanH. (2006). Participative case studies: Integrating case writing and a traditional case study approach in a marketing context. Journal of Marketing Education, 28, 106-113.
12.
FreyC. J.KeyesR. F. (1985). Marketing case instruction at the undergraduate level. Journal of Marketing Education, 1, 51-59.
13.
GarnerB. A. (2013). HBR guide to better business writing (HBR Guide Series). Boston. MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
14.
GradyH. M. (2006). Instructional scaffolding for online courses. In 2006 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (pp. 148-152). Saratoga Springs, NY: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
15.
HamerL. O. (2000). The additive effects of semistructured classroom activities on student learning: An application of classroom-based experiential learning techniques. Journal of Marketing Education, 22, 25-34.
16.
KlebbaJ. M.HamiltonJ. G. (2007). Structured case analysis: Developing critical thinking skills in a marketing case course. Journal of Marketing Education, 29, 132-139.
17.
KrathwohlD. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 4, 212-218.
18.
MasonC. H.PerreaultW. D. (1991). Collinearity, power, and interpretation of multiple regression analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 28, 268-280.
19.
MesnyA. (2013). Taking stock of the century-long utilization of the case method in Management Education. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences De l’Administration, 30(1), 56-66.
20.
MintzbergH. (2004). Managers, not MBAs: A hard look at the soft practice of managing and management development. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
21.
MumfordA. (2005). The case method—Does learning theory matter?Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, 19(4), 17-19.
22.
PowellJ. L. (1994). Case method in higher education: A case study (Doctoral dissertation). Kansas State University, Manhattan.
23.
RamsdenP. (2002). The leadership challenge in the contemporary context of higher education. In Learning to lead in higher education (pp. 24-49). London, England: Routledge.
24.
RollagK. (2010). Teaching business cases online through discussion boards: Strategies and best practices. Journal of Management Education, 34, 499-526.
25.
SchindlerL. A.BurkholderG. J. (2014). Instructional design and facilitation approaches that promote critical thinking in asynchronous online discussions: A review of the literature. Higher Learning Research Communications, 4(4), 11-29.
26.
SlavinR. E. (1992). When and why does cooperative learning increase achievement? Theoretical and empirical perspectives. In Hertz-LazarowitzR.MillerN. (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 145-173). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
27.
SpragueE. W.DahlD. W. (2010). An evaluation of the personal response system clicker technology in introductory marketing courses. Journal of Marketing Education, 32, 93-103.
28.
TaylorS.HunterG.MeltonH.GoodwinS. (2011). Student engagement and marketing classes. Journal of Marketing Education, 33, 73-92.
29.
TurnerA. N. (1981). The case discussion method revisited. Exchange: The Organizational Behavior Teaching Journal, 6, 6-8.
