This article discusses the effectiveness of the case method when teaching online by comparing synchronous and asynchronous communication technologies with respect to how well they each embody Chickering and Gamson’s Seven Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. The authors also present their empirical study of the effectiveness of different online case discussion methods with respect to student learning and satisfaction. The empirical findings suggest that student satisfaction and perceived learning are affected by the type of technology used to implement the case method online. The technology used for case discussions in an online course seems to matter, especially with respect to how well it enhances students’ engagement and interaction with the instructor and their fellow students.
AllenI. E.SeamanJ. (2010). Class differences online education in the United States, 2010. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group.
2.
BangertA. W. (2005). Identifying factors underlying the quality of online teaching effectiveness: An exploratory study. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 17(2), 79-99.
3.
BangertA. W.EasterbyL. (2008). Designing and delivering effective online nursing courses with the Evolve electronic classroom. Nurse Educator, 26(2), 99-105.
4.
BarnesL. B.ChristensenC. R.HansenA. J. (1994). Teaching and the case method. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
5.
BillingsD. M. (2000). A framework for assessing outcomes and practices in web-based courses in nursing. Journal of Nursing Education, 39(2), 60-67.
6.
Chen WangL. C.MorganW. R. (2008). Student perceptions of using instant messaging software to facilitate synchronous online class interaction in a graduate teacher education course. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25(1), 15-21.
7.
ChickeringA. W.EhrmannS. C. (1996, October). Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever. AAHE Bulletin, 49(2), 3-7.
8.
ChickeringA. W.GamsonZ. F. (1987, March). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.
GrahamC.CagiltayK.LimB.-R.CranerJ.DuffyT. M. (2000). Teaching in a web based distance learning environment: An evaluation summary based on four courses (CRLT Technical Report No. 13-00). Retrieved from http://crlt.indiana.edu/publications/workpapers/crlt00-13.pdf
11.
HalicO.LeeD.PaulusT.SpenceM. (2010). To blog or not to blog: Student perceptions of blog effectiveness for learning in a college-level course. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 206-213.
12.
HrastinskiS. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous E-learning: A study of asynchronous and synchronous e-learning methods discovered that each supports different purposes. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 31(4), 51-55.
13.
KimN.SmithM.KyungeunM. (2008). Assessment in online distance education: A comparison of three online programs at a university. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 11(1). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring111/kim111.html
14.
KimballB. A. (1995). The emergency of case method teaching, 1870’s-1990’s: A search for legitimate pedagogy. Bloomington: Poynter Center, Indiana University.
15.
KockN. (2005). Media richness or media naturalness? The evolution of our biological communication apparatus and its influence on our behavior toward E-communication tools. Professional Communication, IEEE Transactions, 48, 117-130.
16.
LinS. Y.OverbaughR. C. (2007). The effect of student choice of online discussion format on tiered achievement and student satisfaction. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39, 399-415.
17.
LongL. K. (2008). Online training: The value of capturing trainee reactions. Journal of Workplace Learning, 20(1), 21-37.
18.
MartinsL. L.KellermannsF. (2004). A model of business school students’ acceptance of a web-based course management system. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(1), 7-26.
19.
MeansB.ToyamaY.MurphyR.BakiaM.JonesK. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
20.
MeyenE. L.AustR. J.BuiY. N.IsaacsonR. (2002). Assessing and monitoring student progress in an e-learning personnel preparation environment. Teacher Education and Special Education, 25, 187-198.
21.
Middle States Commission on Higher Education. (2011). Distance education programs interregional guidelines for the evaluation of distance education (Online learning; 1st ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Author.
22.
PowersJ.BurrowsJ.PowersS. (2001). Using the case method in distributed environments: Opportunities and challenges. Paper presented at the proceedings of the17th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning, Madison, WI.
23.
RollagK. (2010). Teaching business cases online through discussion boards: Strategies and best practices. Journal of Management Education, 34, 499-526.
24.
SohP.-H.SubramanianA. M. (2008). Is usage a missing link in explaining the perceived learning outcome of technology-mediated learning?IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55(1), 50-66.
25.
SuenL. (2005). Teaching epidemiology using WebCT: Application of the Seven Principles of Good Practice. Journal of Nursing Education, 44, 143-146.
26.
WebbH. W.GillG.PoeG. (2005). Teaching with the case method online: Pure versus hybrid approaches. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 3, 223-225.
27.
WhiteA.RobertsV. W.BrannanJ. (2003). Returning nurses to the workforce: Developing an online refresher course. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 34, 59-63.
