Page 17 - Ice Breaker Article

17

1. Eco, U. (1982), “The Name of the Rose” Vintage Classics 1982
2. Bauman, J. (2005), Management Theory and the Church, Accessed: March 2006
http://www.theooze.com/articles/article.cfm?id=87 8
3. Wertheim, E.G (2006), A Model for Case Analysis and Problem Solving, College of
Business Administration, Northeastern University.
4. Tellis, W. (1997):Application of a Case Study Methodology The Qualitative Report,
Volume 3, Number 3, September, 1997
5. Brown, R. B. (1995): The Case Method As A Research Vehicle, Paper presented at the
BAA Special Interest Group In Accounting Education, annual conference, 18-19
December 1995, Loughborough University of Technology
6. Flyvbjerg, B. (2006): "Five Misunderstandings About Case Study Research." Qualitative
Inquiry, vol. 12, no. 2, April 2006, pp. 219-245.
7. Heller, R. (2003) “Thinking Managers”,
http://www.thinkingmanagers.com/management/business-strategy-success.php
Accessed 2003-01-12 21:41
8. Gallagher, J.G. (2007) January: Refereed Paper: presented at the International Applied
Business Research Conference (IABR) Hawaii, USA: Trigger Questions And Their Place
In Business Case Study Analysis
9. Gallagher, J.G. (2006): December: The Journal of Business Case Studies, The Business
Case Study: A Suitable Candidate for Blended Learning, ISSN 1555-3353
10. Merseth, K. K. (1991):.The Case for Cases in Teacher Education. RIE. 42p. (ERIC).
11. Bonk, C. (2004): The Perfect E-Storm: emerging technology, enormous learner demand,
enhanced pedagogy, and erased budgets The Observatory on borderless Higher
Education, 2004. Accessed, Jan. 2006: http://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk/part1.pdf
12. Lane-Maher, M, & Ashar, H. (2001): Students.com: Guidelines for online education
programs. Educause Quarterly, 24, 26-31.
13. Moskal, P., & Dziuban, C. (2001): Present and future directions for assessing
cybereducation: The changing research paradigm. In L.Vandervert, L. Schavinina, & R.
Cornell (Eds.). Cybereducation: The future of long-distance learning (pp.157-184).
Larchmont, NY: Mary Ann Liebert.
14. Smith, L. J. (2001): Content and delivery: A comparison and contrast of electronic and
traditional MBA marketing planning courses. Journal of Management Education, 23(1),
35-45.
15. Twigg, C.A. (2001): Innovations in online learning: Moving beyond no significant
difference. Retrieved April 19, 2005, from http://www.center.rpi.edu/PewSym/mono4.html
16. Twigg, C.A. (2004): USING ASYNCHRONOUS LEARNING IN REDESIGN: REACHING
AND RETAINING THE AT-RISK STUDENT: JAN Volume 8, Issue 1 — February 2004
17. Taber, K. S. (2003): Examining structure and context - questioning the nature and
purpose of summative assessment. Seminar presentation to Cambridge International
Examinations, University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate, July 2003
18. Picciano, A. G. 2002: Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and
performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6(1), 21-
40.
19. Zawacki-Richter, O. (2005): Online Faculty Support and Education Innovation – A Case
Study, European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning
http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2005/Brindley#Brindley]
20. Ramsden, P., (1995): Recognising andrewarding good teaching in Margetson, D., Martin,
E. higher education in Australian higher and Clarke,S. education.Canberra: Committee
for the advancement of University Teaching. Available at:
www.autc.gov.au/pubs/caut/rrgt/default.htm