Evaluation of participation in the case method: elements to consider for its incorporation in digital environmentsAbstract
The transformation of learning assessment processes has become critical for educational institutions that apply the case method, according to international accrediting agencies. With the progressive inclusion of virtual or hybrid environments for this methodology, especially after the Covid-19 pandemic, and the expectations of Education in the fourth industrial revolution, it is relevant to explore the evaluation complexities associated with the case method. A multiple case study was conducted to identify the main problematic aspects of evaluation with this methodology. 58 sessions were documented with 2,596 students from 4 top management programs and 36 professors of different nationalities. The results highlight that student participation in plenary sessions is a decisive factor for evaluation, but it is affected by how the professor gives the floor, generally in a rather heterogeneous way, generating inequitable opportunities. The transformation of evaluation in the case method is critical given the inclusion of virtual environments. A study identified that the unequal participation of students, due to how the floor is given, affects equitable opportunities in evaluation.
Case Method; Learning Evaluation; Pedagogical Research; Student Participation
Resumo
A transformação dos processos de avaliação da aprendizagem tornou-se crítica para as instituições educacionais que aplicam o método do caso, de acordo com agências de credenciamento internacionais. Com a inclusão progressiva de ambientes virtuais ou híbridos para esta metodologia, especialmente após a pandemia de Covid-19, e as expectativas da Educação na quarta revolução industrial, é relevante explorar as complexidades da avaliação associadas ao método do caso. Foi realizado um estudo de casos múltiplos para identificar os principais aspectos problemáticos da avaliação com essa metodologia. Foram documentadas 58 sessões com 2596 alunos de 4 programas de alta direção e 36 professores de diferentes nacionalidades. Os resultados destacam que a participação dos alunos nas sessões plenárias é um fator decisivo para a avaliação, mas é afetada pela forma como o professor concede a palavra, geralmente de maneira pouco homogênea, gerando oportunidades pouco equitativas. A transformação da avaliação no método do caso é crítica diante da inclusão de ambientes virtuais. Um estudo identificou que a participação desigual dos alunos, devido à forma como a palavra é concedida, afeta as oportunidades equitativas na avaliação.
Avaliação da Aprendizagem; Pesquisa Pedagógica; Método do Caso; Paticipação Estudantil
Resumen
La transformación de los procesos de evaluación del aprendizaje se ha vuelto crítica para las instituciones educativas que aplican el método de caso, según agencias acreditadoras internacionales. Con la inclusión progresiva de entornos virtuales o híbridos para esta metodología, especialmente tras la pandemia de Covid-19 y las expectativas de la Educación en la cuarta revolución industrial, es relevante explorar las complejidades de la evaluación asociadas al método de caso. Se realizó un estudio de casos múltiples para identificar los principales aspectos problemáticos de la evaluación con dicha metodología. Se documentaron 58 sesiones con 2.596 estudiantes de 4 programas de alta dirección y 36 profesores de distintas nacionalidades. Los resultados resaltan que la participación de los estudiantes en las sesiones plenarias es un factor decisivo para la evaluación, pero se ve afectada por cómo el profesor otorga la palabra, generalmente de forma poco homogénea, generando oportunidades poco equitativas. La transformación de la evaluación en el método de caso es crítica ante la inclusión de entornos virtuales. Un estudio identificó que la participación desigual de los estudiantes, por cómo se otorga la palabra, afecta las oportunidades equitativas en la evaluación.
Evaluación del Aprendizaje; Investigación Pedagógica; Método del Caso; Participación Estudiantil
1 Introduction
The Education system is currently facing numerous criticisms regarding the urgency to align with the needs and expectations of the 21st century (Fernandes Junior; Almeida; Almeida, 2022; Ma; Chen, 2012; Manthe; Smallwood, 2007). While many educational systems over the past two centuries have tended towards standardized approaches that some critics characterize as ‘industrial’, it’s important to recognize that this generalization doesn’t capture the full complexity and diversity of educational practices during this period (Bird et al., 2020). Although there have been trends towards uniform teaching methods that may not always account for individual student differences, it would be an oversimplification to suggest that all educational systems have entirely overlooked student diversity and expectations. Many educators and institutions have, in fact, made efforts to address individual needs and promote active learning, even within more traditional frameworks. Moreover, the degree of standardization and the role of students in the learning process have varied significantly across different cultures, regions, and educational philosophies. While there’s merit in critiquing overly rigid or passive learning models, it’s also crucial to acknowledge the ongoing evolution of educational practices and the numerous examples of innovative, student-centered approaches that have emerged alongside and within more traditional systems.
As Kéri (2021), assert, new eras demand new teaching methods, attitudes, and a shift towards active learning orientations, requiring not just an update but an entirely new educational conception.
Considering this, Ghazali and Nordin (2019), Vandeyar (2020) or Xu y Yue (2019) mention that 21st-century Education should be characterized not only by harnessing the potential of digital environments but also by encouraging genuinely active student participation through them.
From a didactic perspective, strengthening student participation has been proposed through various means, including problem-solving-oriented teaching methods. These methods not only enhance student engagement but also allow them to contextualize their learning within real or simulated situations (Brown et al., 2011; Matlala, 2021; Roh; Kim; Kim, 2014; Sari et al., 2019; Seybert et al., 2012; Valdez; Ferreira; Barbosa, 2018).
Research on Problem-Based Learning (PBL) shows that this didactic approach has been under investigation for over three decades and has become a growing trend in Education throughout the 21st century, as illustrated in Figure 1.
This problem-based teaching has been expressed through different methodological approaches, among which are, for example, project-based learning or challenge-based learning (Costa et al., 2018; Lindner, 2020; Membrillo-Hernández et al., 2019; Pornpongtechavanich; Eumbunnapong; Piriyasurawong, 2021). In addition to these two approaches, one of the problem-based methods with a long history and potential application in teaching various knowledge is the case method (Campbell; Powers; Zheng, 2016; Mcmahon; Christopher, 2011).
The case method offers numerous didactic advantages, yet it lacks relevant assessment mechanisms. On the one hand, it demonstrates a high level of curricular coherence (Anderson, 2002; Schmidt; Prawat, 2006) by simulating various decision-making spaces and the application of different managerial skills: (1) personal review of the case study, (2) case analysis in work teams, and (3) participation in the class plenary (Shieh; Lyu; Cheng, 2012).
It’s noteworthy that educational institutions traditionally employing the case method as their didactic foundation historically deployed this method almost exclusively in face-to-face settings. This has changed since the Covid-19 pandemic forced the use of digital platforms for plenary sessions between students and teachers (Aina; Ogegbo, 2021). In the post-pandemic period, many institutions that returned to in-person classes started expanding their digital presence, shaping virtual or hybrid learning experiences (Cavalcanti; Guerra, 2022; Chan Ie Lyn; Suppiah; Chan, 2022).
Whether in-person or through digital environments, the significant didactic strengths of the case method are overshadowed by weaknesses in learning assessment (Mu; Hatch, 2019). Critics mainly focus on the source of evidence for evaluating learning. While some teachers incorporate questionnaires or other assessment mechanisms during the first two phases of the method (personal review of the case study and case analysis in work teams), the majority, especially purists of the case method, solely assess students based on their participation in the final phase: the class plenary (Desiraju; Gopinath, 2001).
This situation raises questions about the validity of an evaluation strategy entirely grounded in the teacher’s perception, especially considering the typical large class sizes (+/–30 students) and the average duration of a plenary session (+/–90 minutes) (Dorta-Afonso, 2019). Under these conditions, it is crucial to question whether all students have equal opportunities to participate, which is essential for fair evaluation in such circumstances.
To gather evidence regarding potential issues during the evaluation of learning through student participation in the class plenary during the case method, a study characterizing class participation was conducted. This study included sessions of the case method in two prestigious schools of managerial Education (one in Colombia and the other in Mexico). The goal was to identify the main problems related to class participation, serving as essential input for learning assessment processes.
2 Method
The purpose of the study was to find answers to the question: What aspects (positive and negative) of participation in plenary classes become determining factors in the evaluation during plenary sessions of the case method? The research unfolded as a multiple case study over 32 weeks, documenting 58 plenary class sessions. These sessions were approached under the same observation and analysis parameters to enable comparison (Stake, 2013). Each plenary class session corresponded to a case analysis. A total of 2596 students from four executive Education programs and 36 teachers of different nationalities and institutional affiliations participated collectively. It is noteworthy that executive Education refers to specialized training programs designed for business leaders, executives, and managers. These courses aim to enhance leadership skills, strategic thinking, and industry-specific knowledge. Typically offered by business schools or corporate training centers, they are often short-term, intensive, and tailored to meet the unique needs of working professionals seeking to advance their careers or improve organizational performance.
2.1 Phases
The design of the multiple case study followed recommendations from Yin (2009) and Cousin (2005), resulting in three major phases: (1) case study preparation, (2) data collection, and (3) data analysis and report preparation. These phases are detailed in Figure 2.
2.1.1 Research Preparation
In this phase, the aspects to observe and document during the class sessions were established, the observation protocol was defined, and the documentation instruments for such observation were designed. The following aspects were determined as factors for analyzing participation in plenary classes:
-
Activities conducted during the sessions
-
Quantity of participations
-
Duration of participations
-
Distribution of participations based on the student’s location within the classroom
To document the aforementioned aspects, a field diary was used for general annotations of activities and the time they took place. Additionally, a documentation matrix was designed to record information for each session: professor’s name, number of students, classroom zones (n = 6) where students were located (left, center, right, and from the previous ones, front and back), quantity of participations per zone, and location of participations for each zone. Furthermore, class sessions were recorded on video, a resource that allowed for a detailed analysis of aspects not recorded by the other two instruments.
As a supplementary and triangulation instrument, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20% of the professors whose class sessions were documented. The purpose was to verify certain inferences made from the data analysis and observation, or to obtain information that could not be acquired through those processes directly from the source. The intentional sample for the interviews followed criteria of thematic diversity, teaching experience, and availability.
Observation was carried out by two different researchers who underwent training in completing the instruments and executing the class session observation protocol to ensure sufficient consistency in their results. An example of the instruments used is shown in Figure 3.
2.1.2 Data Collection
The non-participant observation and documentation protocol indicated that the researcher-observers should be situated in a place where they would not pose a distracting or disruptive element (Handley et al., 2020) to the activities proposed by the professor during the plenary class and that would allow a broad visual access to the entire classroom. For this purpose, observations were conducted from recording booths located at the back of the rooms or, when possible, within a Gesell chamber.
Subsequently, the observer had to record whether the students’ location in the six zones of the classroom was uniform or not. If students were not evenly distributed in the six zones in which the classroom was divided, an annotation was made in the documentation matrix for consideration during data analysis.
Once the video recording started, throughout the session, the observer had to note the time (minutes and seconds) when activity changes occurred and document student participations, indicating the location zone of each student, recording whether the student requested the floor, whether it was granted or not, or if the student simply did not participate in the activities.
Regarding semi-structured interviews, a foundational questionnaire with 10 questions was designed to explore various aspects related to the learning evaluation process during the case method. This instrument underwent a validation process by two experts who were given a format in which they assessed the coherence of each question in terms of wording, clarity, and relevance, marking either yes or no. The results of this validation process were subjected to a Cohen’s Kappa coefficient to estimate their agreement, resulting in K = 0.737, which, according to Vieira et al. (2010) represents a high level of agreement for an inter-rater process like the one conducted.
2.1.3 Data Analysis
The information recorded in the field diary was qualitatively analyzed based on the type of activity conducted and the potential inputs for learning evaluation. This analysis was cross-verified with the videos obtained during observation.
The treatment of interviews followed the guidelines proposed by Lopezosa (2020), where two main operations were executed: (1) transcription and (2) constant idea management. In the first operation, all recordings were converted to text using a speech-to-text tool. Subsequently, each transcription was contrasted in real-time to adjust errors occasionally generated by these tools and thus verify the consistency of the text against the recording. On the other hand, the second operation included several sub-processes, including the extraction and coding of text segments based on an initial association with the evaluation processes during the development of the case method, grouping or categorization into emerging categories, and the identification of key ideas through frequency analysis and word clouds or tags.
This second operation was applied similarly to the analysis of information recorded from the non-participant observation processes documented in the field diary. This analysis included verification of the recorded content with the videos obtained during observation.
A descriptive statistical analysis was conducted on the information recorded in the documentation matrix, comparing student participation data per session, per professor, and per location zone within the classroom. Finally, data from these three sources were triangulated to confirm some findings and to expand the available framework of interpretation for the researchers.
3 Results
The following presents the results obtained regarding the analysis of student participation in the plenary sessions of the case method.
3.1 General Aspects
Table 1 presents the consolidated data from the documented class sessions.
If learning evaluation in the case method is mainly channeled through student participation in plenary sessions, it is interesting to analyze the data in this table. With the exception of the center-back zone (34.5%), the rest of the zones show a very even average of participations, which might suggest that the vast majority of students receive similar opportunities to participate, and therefore, the professor would have similar inputs for conducting a comprehensive and fair evaluative exercise. Nothing could be further from the truth. In the next sections of this article, it will be seen more accurately that when approaching the study of class participation session by session, the figures reflect that, in almost all classes, there are areas of the classroom that participate repeatedly and others almost never.
Beyond the averages of participants, participations, and session times indicated in the Table 1, Figure 4 shows that, with a few exceptions, both the number of participants and the time of class sessions (not the number of participations) are quite even in all the sessions analyzed, which is important as they are the subject of comparison.
On the other hand, interviews with teachers consistently highlight the predominant role of the teacher’s perception of student participation during plenary class sessions for the purpose of assessing the expected learning outcomes for each session.
In this regard, some teachers mentioned:
The plenary session is the quintessential space to realize if students learned what they were supposed to learn. If the case method is a simulation of managerial performance in a board meeting or assembly, it is the way to participate, what is said, and how it is argued that demonstrates their learning [Teacher RR].
It is almost an art to articulate teaching and evaluation appropriately in the case method. The forms may vary, but very little. Almost everything depends on what happens in the plenary session. Small variations may depend a bit on each teacher’s style, how purist they are... some conduct small tests or reading checks of the case, but almost all of us focus on the plenary session... that’s where the important things happen [Teacher SI].
3.2 Regarding Participations
Since participation in the plenary sessions is the prevalent channel for the teacher to form a complete picture of the learning demonstrated by students and proceed to evaluate from there, it becomes the most critical element in the entire deployment of the case method.
Regarding participation in plenary sessions, it was found that, despite the average number of participations being 1.3, which could give a sense of homogeneity in participation, a detailed analysis reveals that in 41.4% of the analyzed sessions, the average is less than one, indicating that in almost half of the sessions, students did not participate. This is assumed to be critical for evaluation purposes, as for these students, the teacher would not have information to assess the specific expected learning outcomes of that session, and consequently, one would have to rely on the perception generated by the student in other sessions, with the resulting ambiguity and inconsistency that this would bring to the evaluation process.
These data are consistent with what was recorded regarding plenary sessions in the field diary, for example:
Many participants are distracted, looking at their phones, which did not happen before while asking questions; many raised their hands and were not given the floor [Session 2 MX].
Some students leave the room repeatedly to answer calls. A few students participate repeatedly, and a large part of the group does not participate [Session 8 MX].
In addition to the above, the data show that teachers grant the floor unevenly based on the location of students within the classroom. This has enormous repercussions on the opportunities students have to participate in class and thus express their learning to their teacher and consequently be properly evaluated.
In this regard, the averages indicated in Table 1 show that, in one sector of the classroom, the center and back, students participate more than twice as often as in the other five sectors of the classroom. However, in a more detailed analysis considering participations per Teacher, it is shown that there is indeed a tendency for teachers to give the floor in a certain area of the classroom (although it is not always the center and back as indicated by the average), “neglecting” students in the other areas of the classroom.
To illustrate the above, Figures 5 and 7 are shown, indicating the areas in which two different teachers gave the floor a greater number of times.
In Figure 5, the teacher gives the word in a marked manner in different areas, coinciding with the pattern found in this analysis, in which the word is given a greater number of times in the rear areas of the room and especially in the center area. 64% of the participating teachers showed this type of behavior when giving the floor to their students to participate in class. Figure 6 shows the flow of class participation between the different areas of the classroom for a session that corresponds to the aforementioned. The area highlighted in color indicates the concentration of the flow of student interventions in the back area of the classroom.
On the other hand, in Figure 7, Professor RR speaks in a very marked way more in some areas than in others, but not always in the same areas. 28% of the participating teachers showed this type of behavior that does not coincide with the general pattern when giving the floor for their students to participate in class.
Finally, only 8% of the teachers gave the floor in a more homogeneous way in the different areas of the room without marking a preference in this regard.
For the purposes of addressing the above, Table 2 shows the details of student participation in the analyzed sessions, for each teacher involved in the study.
3.3 Relationship between number of participants and participations
Given that the length of class sessions in the case method seems to have no major variations and is around 90 minutes, a casual look at this relationship would suggest the convenience of having small groups of students. The above is based on a simple logical relationship: if time does not vary, the more students there are, the less chance each of them will have to participate and with this, express their learning to their teacher.
Figure 8 shows the comparison between the number of students and the number of participations in each of the class sessions analyzed. With some exceptions, sessions that had more students achieved a comparatively lower number of participations and those with very few students reflected a greater number of participations.
Now, the graph seems not to be entirely conclusive due to the exceptions. In this regard, what was observed after analyzing the comments in the field diary, is that in the cases in which there were few students, the number of participations was not very high, this was due to the way in which these plenary sessions were planned and executed. In this regard, these sessions took more time in expository processes on the part of the teacher, so the time available for participation was much less.
Detailing the above, in these cases the professor allocated a good part of the available time of the plenary session to explain the topic through presentations or videos or to carry out collective participation such as surveys or opinion polls, which, although they add value to the experience of learning, do not generate easily usable inputs for the evaluation of learning, at least in terms of student participation in class.
4 Discussion
The results of the study have shown at least two major problems related to learning assessment in the case method, from which it is interesting to focus the discussion and draw some conclusions applicable to both face-to-face and digital learning environments: (1) inequity in student participation in plenary classes and (2) the inconvenience of students requesting the floor voluntarily.
Regarding the inequity in participation in plenary classes, this study reveals significant concerns. If a larger part of the group does not participate while another monopolizes attention with numerous interventions, unfavorable conditions are created for some students. This can be attributed to the teaching style that favors “free competition” for the floor, rewarding the most participative. Additionally, the design of the plenary session also influences; if it includes extensive explanations, the time for everyone to demonstrate their learning is reduced, affecting the equitable assessment of students and raising the need to review and adjust pedagogical strategies.
Indeed, previous studies have shown that teacher strategies influence student participation, engagement, and commitment during both face-to-face (Smith et al., 2005), online (Xu; Chen; Chen, 2020), and blended classes, i.e., those that combine remote and face-to-face teaching (Heilporn; Lakhal; Bélisle, 2021).
Therefore, the results of this study confirm the importance of spatial location. They align with the findings of research that analyzed different types of classroom space and their associated meanings. The position and movement of a teacher in the classroom are fundamental to the pedagogical process, acquiring specific meanings due to the nature of the pedagogical discourse that occurs in the place and its position and distance in relation to each student and also with didactic resources. Thus, a form of spatial pedagogy materializes, both through positioning patterns and the directionality of movement, and through intersemiotic correspondences in the use of space with other semiotic resources (e.g., language used, gestures, and didactic materials) (Lim; O’halloran; Podlasov, 2012). Therefore, studying the spatial location of students in relation to their participation becomes highly relevant, considering the importance of student participation associated with successful academic outcomes (Sáez-Delgado et al., 2023).
The analysis of students’ spatial location, a factor of inequity in face-to-face participation, extends to the digital environment. In online class platforms, the lack of a sense of physical location creates inequality by highlighting only those who actively participate, while others remain hidden. This dynamic, evident in lists or grids of students, limits the teacher’s visibility, making unequal participation reinforce the difficulty of properly assessing those with little or no participation. This pattern underscores the need to address equity in participation and assessment in digital environments.
It should be noted that there is a need to differentiate between low participation and little learning. It would be questionable to equate low participation with a negative assessment of learning, especially when the learning objectives presented in the syllabi of these classes focus on the development of managerial competencies or specific managerial knowledge rather than simply excelling in plenary sessions.
It is possible to infer that a student may have achieved the development of competencies or correctly appropriated knowledge but did not have the opportunity to express them during the plenary session and thus received a failing grade. This situation, besides being unfair, is clearly inconvenient due to its inconsistency for ensuring learning in the processes where the case method is applied as a teaching strategy.
Finally, the second problem is closely related to the former: it is inconvenient for the tacit rule that only those who ask for it are given the floor to persist.
In this regard, when students know that the differential factor for a favorable evaluation will be their voluntary participation in class, two typical behaviors are generated. The first is a behavior of monopolizing the floor, and the other is a behavior of mimicry within the group, behaviors widely observed in the students who participated in this research and consistent with the studies of Echiverri, Xu and Shang. (2020), Hard y RaoShah (2021), and Jones (2008).
As participation is essentially voluntary, students who have prepared the case properly and have diligently completed the prior activities frequently raise their hands from the beginning of the class to have the opportunity to make a good impression on the professor through their interventions. On the other hand, as students know that only those who raise their hands will be given the floor, those students who have not prepared the case properly or have not completed the prior activities will not want to risk making imprecise or irrelevant interventions, thus avoiding a negative impression on the professor and entering a neutral perception zone caused by their absence in terms of participation.
If students clearly understood that participation in plenary sessions was mandatory rather than voluntary, it would have significant benefits. Specifically, if they knew that anyone could be called upon at any time, not just those who raise their hands, two positive outcomes would likely emerge. First, students would be more inclined to thoroughly prepare the case beforehand. Second, they would pay closer attention to class discussions and interactions throughout the session. This approach would enhance both preparation and engagement in the learning process.
Regarding the tangible possibility of being called upon to speak before the group in plenary at any time, those students who generally mimic would be more prepared (even if they do not participate much), significantly advancing in the consolidation of their learning.
However, based on these considerations, someone could propose that assessment should be carried out at other times besides the plenary session. In this regard, an examination of the internal coherence of such a process would suggest that it would not be an adequate solution since the case method is, in a certain sense, an exercise in simulation for the deployment and learning of managerial skills, which manifest themselves mostly in the spaces of interaction of the manager. In that sense, a proposal for assessment through instruments applied outside the plenary session would not attest to these performances.
Nevertheless, it has been found that the use of ICT, either as support for face-to-face or as a structural basis for interactions in digital environments, allows the automatic documentation of interactions. This means that digital records, in the form of texts or video recordings, can be retrieved as evidence of learning to support assessment processes precisely.
Apart from the above, it is worth mentioning that the dissemination of the results of this study among the participating professors has generated a very interesting process of teacher self-regulation. Consciously, some professors have begun to give the floor more evenly, to the point where it has been considered as a mechanism for monitoring and improving teaching practices in programs that use the case method as their main didactic option.
In conclusion, the results and the reflection generated from them allow us to suggest some paths for future research on the subject. In this regard, it is considered appropriate to undertake inquiry processes on mechanisms to ensure equity in student participation, on the articulation or incorporation of technology-based aids that go beyond the configuration of virtual or traditional blended environments where interaction possibilities are even more complex, such as in Hyflex environments (Chen, 2022; Keiper et al., 2021). On the other hand, it is also interesting to expand this study into the assessment of possible gender differences that may be found regarding participation in classes with this methodology during class plenary (Aguillon et al., 2020). Another area of great relevance that could also be explored to increase understanding of this phenomenon is related to the socio-emotional perspective of students attributed to certain characteristics. Therefore, it would be interesting to analyze these and their spatial location in the classroom and also participation (Ernest; Reinholz; Shah, 2019). Another area of great relevance that could also be explored to increase understanding of this phenomenon is related to the socio-emotional perspective of students attributed to certain characteristics. Therefore, it would be interesting to analyze these and their spatial location in the classroom and also participation (Dobia et al., 2019). In this context, increasing inclusion in the participation of others (those students who, according to different characteristics, are located in areas where less participation is evident) could also be improved with teaching practices that enhance students’ emotional awareness, promote a positive sense of self, and consequently stimulate their active participation under models of different teaching methodologies. To advance in this, a teacher undoubtedly needs to increase their effectiveness in their own socio-emotional competencies to achieve skills such as empathy with the student, active listening, and deploy strategies that consolidate a high communication and reciprocal participation relationship between teacher and student to progress towards quality Education (Lozano-Peña et al., 2021).
Acknowledgements
We thank both the Universidad de La Sabana (Grupo Tecnologías para la Academia - Proventus (project CTA-36-2018)) and Inalde for the support received in the preparation of this article.
References
-
AGUILLON, S. M., et al. Gender differences in student participation in an active-learning classroom. CBE Life Sciences Education, Bethesda, v. 19, n. 2, ar12, jun. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-03-0048
» https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-03-0048 -
AINA, A. Y.; OGEGBO, A. A. Teaching and assessment through online platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic: benefits and challenges. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, Grandville, v. 8, n. 4, p. 408-415, dez. 2021. https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.509.2021.84.408.415
» https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.509.2021.84.408.415 -
ANDERSON, L. W. Curricular alignment: a re-examination. Theory Into Practice, Columbus, v. 41, n. 4, p. 255-260, nov. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_9
» https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_9 -
BIRD, G. C. et al. Impact of educational format on learner commitment to change and satisfaction. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, St. Louis, v. 40, n. 3, p. 207-210, set. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000301
» https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000301 -
BROWN, S. W., et al. Impacting middle school students' science knowledge with problem-based learning simulations. In: IADIS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COGNITION AND EXPLORATORY LEARNING IN DIGITAL AGE. Proceedings[...]. Rio de Janeiro: CELDA, 2011. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287739906_Impacting_middle_school_students%27_science_knowledge_with_problem-based_learning_simulations Access in: 2023 Sep. 16.
» https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287739906_Impacting_middle_school_students%27_science_knowledge_with_problem-based_learning_simulations -
CAMPBELL, M. G.; POWERS, T. M.; ZHENG, S.-L. Teaching with the case study method to promote active learning in a small molecule crystallography course for chemistry students. Journal of Chemical Education, [s. l.], v. 93, n. 2, p. 270-274, Feb. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00629
» https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00629 -
CAVALCANTI, L. M. R.; GUERRA, M. G. G. V. Os desafios da universidade pública pós-pandemia da Covid-19: o caso brasileiro. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, Rio de Janeiro, v. 30, n. 114, p. 73-93, jan./mar. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-40362021002903113
» https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-40362021002903113 - CHAN IE LYN, J.; SUPPIAH, S.; CHAN, L. The post-pandemic challenge: reimagining private higher education in Malaysia. P erspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, Philadelphia, v. 26, n. 2, p. 59-62, Apr. 2022.
-
CHEN, L.-L. Designing online discussion for HyFlex Learning. International Journal of Educational Methodology, Reno, v. 8, n. 1, p. 191-198, Feb. 2022. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.8.1.191
» https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.8.1.191 -
COSTA, A. D., et al. Multidisciplinary groups learning to develop mobile applications from the challenge based learning methodology. In: XXXII BRAZILIAN SYMPOSIUM ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING - SBES '18. Proceedings [...] Sao Carlos: ACM Press, 2018. Available from: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=3266237.3266256 Access: 2021 Jan 26.
» http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=3266237.3266256 -
COUSIN, G. Case study research. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, Philadelphia, v. 29, n. 3, p. 421-427, Nov. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098260500290967
» https://doi.org/10.1080/03098260500290967 -
DESIRAJU, R.; GOPINATH, C. Encouraging participation in case discussions: a comparison of the Mica and the Harvard Case Methods. Journal of Management Education, Newbury Park, v. 25, n. 4, p. 394-408, Ago. 2001. https://doi.org/10.1177/105256290102500404
» https://doi.org/10.1177/105256290102500404 -
DOBIA, B., et al. Social and emotional learning: from individual skills to class cohesion. Educational & Child Psychology, [s. l.], v. 36, n. 2, p. 78-90, Jun. 2019. https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsecp.2019.36.2.78
» https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsecp.2019.36.2.78 -
DORTA-AFONSO, D. Teaching organizational behavior in the bachelor of tourism through the case study method. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, Oxford, v. 25, p. 100204, Nov. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2019.100204
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2019.100204 -
ECHIVERRI, L. L.; XU, K.; SHANG, H. Class discussion and class participation: determination of their relationship. In: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HIGHER EDUCATION ADVANCES, 6., Valencia: Universitat Politècnica de València, 2020. Available from: http://ocs.editorial.upv.es/index.php/HEAD/HEAd20/paper/view/11121 Access: 2021 Feb 17.
» http://ocs.editorial.upv.es/index.php/HEAD/HEAd20/paper/view/11121 -
ERNEST, J. B.; REINHOLZ, D. L.; SHAH, N. Hidden competence: women's mathematical participation in public and private classroom spaces. Educational Studies in Mathematics, [s. l.], v. 102, n. 2, p. 153-172, out. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-019-09910-w
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-019-09910-w -
FERNANDES JUNIOR, A. M.; ALMEIDA, F. J. D.; ALMEIDA, S. C. D. A pesquisa brasileira em Educação sobre o uso das tecnologias no Ensino Médio no início do século XXI e seu distanciamento da construção da BNCC. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, Rio de Janeiro, v. 30, n. 116, p. 620-643, jul./set. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-403620220003002943
» https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-403620220003002943 - GHAZALI, N.; NORDIN, M. S. Measuring meaningful learning experience: Confirmatory factor analysis. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, [s. l.], v. 9, n. 12, p. 283-296, 2019.
-
HANDLEY, M., et al. Using non-participant observation to uncover mechanisms: Insights from a realist evaluation. Evaluation, [s. l.], v. 26, n. 3, p. 380-393, July 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389019869036
» https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389019869036 -
HARD, B. M.; RAOSHAH, T. Developing collaborative thinkers: rethinking how we define, teach, and assess class participation. Teaching of Psychology, [s. l.], v. 49, n. 2, p. p. 176-184, Jan. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320986953
» https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320986953 -
HEILPORN, G.; LAKHAL, S.; BÉLISLE, M. An examination of teachers' strategies to foster student engagement in blended learning in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, Cham, v. 18, n. 1, 25, Dec. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00260-3
» https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00260-3 - JONES, R. C. The "Why" of class participation: a question worth asking. College Teaching, [s. l.], v. 56, n. 1, p. 59-63, Jan. 2008.
- KEIPER, M. C., et al. Student perceptions on the benefits of Flipgrid in a HyFlex learning environment. Journal of Education for Business, [s. l.], v. 96, n. 6, p. 343-351, Ago. 2021.
- KÉRI, A. Online teaching methods and student satisfaction during a pandemic. International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences, [s.l.], v. 15, n. 4, p. 373-379, 2021.
-
LIM, F. V.; O'HALLORAN, K. L.; PODLASOV, A. Spatial pedagogy: mapping meanings in the use of classroom space. Cambridge Journal of Education, Cambridge, v. 42, n. 2, p. 235-251, June 2012. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2012.676629
» https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2012.676629 - LINDNER, J. Entrepreneurship education by youth start: entrepreneurial challenge-based learning. In: AUER, M. E.; TSIATSOS, T. (eds.). The challenges of the digital transformation in education. advances in intelligent systems and computing. Cham: Springer International, 2020. p. 866-875.
- LOPEZOSA, C. Entrevistas semiestructuradas con NVivo: pasos para un análisis cualitativo eficaz. In: LOPEZOSA, C.; DÍAZ-NOCI, J.; CODINA, L. (eds.). Anuario de métodos de investigación en comunicación social. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra, 2020. p. 88-97.
-
LOZANO-PEÑA, G., et al. Teachers' social-emotional competence: history, concept, models, instruments, and recommendations for educational quality. Sustainability, [s, l.], v. 13, n. 21, p. 12142, Nov. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112142
» https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112142 - MA, S.; CHEN, L. Analysis about improvement of students training quality in higher institution. In: Zhang, L. Zhang, C. (eds.). Engineering education and management. Berlin: Springer, 2012. (Lecture notes in electrical engineering, v. 112).
- MCMAHON, M. A.; CHRISTOPHER, K. A. Case study method and problem-based learning: utilizing the pedagogical model of progressive complexity in nursing education. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, Berkeley, v. 8, n. 1, article 22, Aug. 2011.
-
MANTHE, M.; SMALLWOOD, J. The appropriateness of built environment tertiary education: Perspectives of academics and postgraduate students. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, [s. l.], v. 5, n. 2, p. 102-119, 1 Jan. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1108/17260530710833167
» https://doi.org/10.1108/17260530710833167 -
MATLALA, S. Educators' perceptions and views of problem-based learning through simulation. Curationis, [s. l.], v. 44, n. 1, e1-7, Mar. 2021. https://doi.org/10.4102/curationis.v44i1.2094
» https://doi.org/10.4102/curationis.v44i1.2094 -
MEMBRILLO-HERNÁNDEZ, J., et al. Challenge based learning: the importance of world-leading companies as training partners. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing, [s. l./, v. 13, n. 3, p. 1103-1113, Sep. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-019-00569-4
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-019-00569-4 -
MU, F.; HATCH, J. E. Grading and interim feedback processes for a case method course. Journal of Education for Business, [s. l.], v. 94, n. 8, p. 512-519, Nov. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2019.1583160
» https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2019.1583160 -
PORNPONGTECHAVANICH, P.; EUMBUNNAPONG, K.; PIRIYASURAWONG, P. Flipped classroom with challenge-based learning model on an online streaming ecosystem to develop coping skills in cyberbullying. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, Singapore, v. 11, n. 11, p. 523-531, Nov. 2021. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2021.11.11.1560
» https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2021.11.11.1560 -
ROH, Y. S.; KIM, S. S.; KIM, S. H. Effects of an integrated problem-based learning and simulation course for nursing students: effects of an integrated nursing course. Nursing & Health Sciences, [s. l.], v. 16, n. 1, p. 91-96, Mar. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12069
» https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12069 -
SÁEZ-DELGADO, F., et al. Revisión sistemática del compromiso escolar en educación secundaria. Interdisciplinaria Revista de Psicología y Ciencias Afines, [s. l.], v. 40, n. 2, p. 41-57, Jan. 2023. https://doi.org/10.16888/interd.2023.40.2.3
» https://doi.org/10.16888/interd.2023.40.2.3 -
SARI, R., et al. The implementation of problem-based learning model with online simulation to enhance the student's analytical thinking skill in learning physics. Journal of Physics Conference Series, Bristol, v. 1233, 012030, Jun. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012030
» https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012030 -
SCHMIDT, W. H.; PRAWAT, R. S. Curriculum coherence and national control of education: issue or non-issue? Journal of Curriculum Studies, [s. l.], v. 38, n. 6, p. 641-658, Dec. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270600682804
» https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270600682804 -
SEYBERT, A. L., et al. Simulation-based learning versus problem-based learning in an acute care pharmacotherapy course. Simulation in Healthcare, [s. l.], v. 7, n. 3, p. 162-165, Jun. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e31825159e3
» https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e31825159e3 -
SHIEH, R. S.; LYU, J. J.; CHENG, Y.-Y. Implementation of the Harvard case method through a plan-do-check-act framework in a university course. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, [s. l.], v. 49, n. 2, p. 149-160, May 2012. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2012.677657
» https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2012.677657 -
SMITH, K. A., et al. Pedagogies of engagement: classroom-based practices. Journal of Engineering Education, [s. l.], v. 94, n. 1, p. 87-101, Jan. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00831.x
» https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00831.x - STAKE, R. E. Multiple case study analysis. New York: Guilford, 2013.
- VALDEZ, M. T.; FERREIRA, C. M.; BARBOSA, F. P. M. Implementation of methodological strategies, attitudes and instruments as a PBL resource. In: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY BASED HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING (ITHET), 17., 2018. Proceedings[…]. Olhao: IEE2020 Dec 11.
-
VANDEYAR, T. A window to teachers' ICT practices: Discerning between teaching and the complex science of pedagogy. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, Rio de Janeiro, v. 28, n. 109, p. 982-1011, Oct.Dec. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-40362020002802388
» https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-40362020002802388 -
VIEIRA, S. M.; KAYMAK, U.; SOUSA, J. M. C. Cohen’s kappa coefficient as a performance measure for feature selection. In: 2010 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON FUZZY SYSTEMS (FUZZ-IEEE). Barcelona: IEEE, July 2010. Available from: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5584447/ Access: 2024 Jan 2. XU, B.; CHEN, N.-S.; CHEN, G. Effects of teacher role on student engagement in WeChat-Based online discussion learning. Computers & Education, [s. l.], v. 157, p. 103956, nov. 2020.
» http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5584447/ -
XU, P.; YUE, X. Talent leadership strategies enhance teacher's professional competencies in 21st century education for sustainable development. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Bristol, v. 373, p. 012003, Nov. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/373/1/012003
» https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/373/1/012003 - YIN, R. K. Case study research: design and methods. 4th. ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2009.
-
Data:
The set of data that supports the results of this review can be found directly in the sources stated in the article.
-
Financing:
No funding was received for the manuscript preparation and publishing nor its previous research processes.
Data availability
The set of data that supports the results of this review can be found directly in the sources stated in the article.
Publication Dates
-
Publication in this collection
25 Oct 2024 -
Date of issue
Oct-Dec 2024
History
-
Received
12 Feb 2024 -
Accepted
30 Aug 2024
Source: Scopus (2024)
Source: Own elaboration (2024)
Source: Own elaboration (2024)
Source: Own elaboration (2024)
Source: Own elaboration (2024)
Source: Own elaboration (2024)
Source: Own elaboration (2024)
Source: Own elaboration (2024)