evidence-based/informed teaching, flipped classrooms, guided problem-based learning, cognitive/social presence, intra-course interactions


Evidence of learning and student growth is a prized goal for programs and instructors, but is often difficult to measure with precision, especially for concepts like problem solving or critical thinking. This paper presents an experience teaching a core business course, operations management, at a Midwest (USA) regional campus that focuses on problem solving where the instructional choices are informed by theory, evidence in the literature, and author experiences. A guided problem-based learning (PBL) approach to teaching is employed using Excel exercises that are presented using interrelated narratives or dialogs. A conceptual narrative conveys why the problem being solved is important to organizations and the students’ careers. A technical narrative presents theories, tools and techniques used to solve the problems in an accessible dialog, emphasizing the how and why the problem is solved a certain way, and how those techniques/tools can be used to solve other problems. The dialogs encourage student metacognition of what they are learning, why it is important, and how it can be used more generally. The course is offered both fully online and in-person using a flipped approach, i.e. lectures are presented via videos and classroom time is spent solving problems in workshop fashion. Results show students appreciate the guided PBL approach, find the class worthwhile and realistic, find they have a better understanding of how to solve problems generally, and how the concepts fit into their careers. Improvements are indicated for achieving meaningful student interaction for learning and for gaining improved confidence in their own specific problem-solving abilities.

Full Text : PDF

  • 7 things you should know about…™ | Flipped Classrooms (2012). Retrieved from15    A Journal of the Academy of Business and Retail Management (ABRM)
  • International Journal of Higher Education Management (IJHEM), Vol. 5 Number 1    August 2018
  • Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 52, pp. 1–26.
  • Bandura,  A.  (2002).  Social  cognitive  theory  in  cultural  context.  Applied  Psychology,  vol.  51  (2),  269–290.  DOI:10.1111/14640597.00092
  • Bahn, D. (2001). Social Learning Theory: its application in the context of nurse education. Nurse Education Today, vol.21, pp. 110–117.
  • Barr, R. & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, vol. 27(6), pp. 13-25.
  • Biesta, G. (2007). Why “What Works” won’t work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational
  • research. Educational Theory, vol. 57 (1), pp. 1–22. DOI: 10.1111/j.1741-5446.2006. 00241.x
  • Bloch, J. & Spataro, S. E. (2014). Cultivating critical-thinking dispositions throughout the business curriculum. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, vol. 77 (3), pp. 249–265.
  • Brame, C. J. (2013). ‘Flipping the classroom'. Retrieved from
  • Career preparation: How wide is the divide? [Infographic] (2017, June 9). The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from
  • Davies, P. (1999). What Is evidence-based education? British Journal of Educational Studies, vol. 47 (2), pp. 108-121. Delaney, Y., Pattinson, B. & Beecham, S. (2017). Transitioning from traditional to problem-based learning in
  • management education: the case of a frontline manager skills development programme. Retrieved from Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Macmillan Publishers. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. New York, NY: The Macmillan Company.
  • Dunn, D. S., Saville, B. K., Baker, S. C. & Marek, P. (2013). Evidence-based teaching: Tools and techniques that promote learning in the psychology classroom. Australian Journal of Psychology, vol. 65, pp. 5–13. doi: 10.1111/ajpy.12004
  • Flavell J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of psychological inquiry. American Psychology, vol. 34, pp. 906–911.
  • Flipped learning (2017). Retrieved from
  • Friesen, N. & Kuskis, A. (2012). Modes of Interaction. In M. Moore, Handbook of distance education (pp. 351-371).
  • Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Gackowski, Z. J. (2003). Case/Real-life problem-based learning with information system projects. Journal of Information Technology Education, vol. 2, pp. 357-365.
  • Händel, M., Artelt, C. & Weinert, S. (2013). Assessing metacognitive knowledge: Development and evaluation of a test instrument. Journal for Educational Research Online, vol. 5 (2), pp. 162–188.
  • Hart Research Associates (2013). It takes more than a major: Employer priorities for college learning and student success. Employer Survey & Economic Trend Research - Association of American Colleges and Universities, pp. 5-14.
  • Hoeft, M. E. (2012). Why university students don't read: What professors can do to increase compliance. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, vol. 6 (2), pp. 1-19.
  • DOI:
  • Ibabe, I. & Jauregizar, J. (2010). Online self-assessment with feedback and metacognitive knowledge. Higher Education, vol. 59 (2), pp. 243–258.
  • Israel, S. E., Bauserman, K. L. & Block, C. C. (2005). Metacognitive assessment strategies. Thinking Classroom, vol. 6 (2), pp. 21-28.
  • Israel, S. E., Block, C. C., Bauserman, K. L. & Kinnucan-Welsch, K. (Eds.) (2008). Metacognition in literacy learning:
  • Theory, assessment, instruction, and professional development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Iwai, Y. (2016). The effect of explicit instruction on strategic reading in a literacy methods course. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, vol. 28 (1), pp. 110-118.
  • 16    A Journal of the Academy of Business and Retail Management (ABRM)
  • International Journal of Higher Education Management (IJHEM), Vol. 5 Number 1    August 2018
  • Jacobs, A., Robinson, D. F., & DePaolo, C. A. (2016). Teaching Case: Using Excel to Make Strategic Managerial Decisions. Journal of Information Systems Education, vol. 27 (2), pp. 93-98.
  • Kathpalia, S. (2011, April 10). Blended e-learning-The way to go? English Language Teaching World Online. Retrieved from
  • Kirschner, P. A. (2001). Using integrated electronic environments for collaborative teaching/learning. Research Dialogue in Learning and Instruction, vol. 2 (1), pp. 1–10.
  • Kreijnsa, K., Kirschner, P. A. & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: a review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 19, pp. 335–353.
  • Norman, G. R. & Schmidt, H. G. (2016). Revisiting ‘Effectiveness of problem-based learning curricula: theory, practice and paper darts’ Medical Education, vol. 50 (8), pp. 793–797.
  • Pardo, A., Sanagustin, M., Parada, H. & Leony, D. (2012). Flip with care. SoLAR Southern Flare Conference, Aerial Function Centre, University of Technology Sydney November 29 – 30, 2012. Retrieved from
  • Picciano, A. & Dziuban, C. (Eds.) (2007). Blended Learning: Research Perspectives. Needham, MA: Sloan-C.
  • Roach, T. (2014). Student perceptions toward flipped learning: New methods to increase interaction and active learning in economics. International Review of Economics Education, vol. 17, pp. 74–84
  • Rousseau, D. (2006). Is there such a thing as “evidence-based management”? [2005 Presidential Address]. Academy of Management Review, vol. 31 (2), pp. 256–269.
  • Servant, V. F. C. & Schmidt, H. G. (2016). Revisiting ‘Foundations of problem-based learning: some explanatory notes’. Medical Education, vol. 50 (7), pp. 698–701.
  • Tanner,  K.  (2012).  Promoting  student  metacognition.  CBE  Life  Science  Education,  vol.  11  (2),  pp.  113–120.  doi:
  • 10.1187/cbe.12-03-0033.
  • Tu, C-H (2000). On-line learning migration: from social learning theory to social presence theory in a CMC environment. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, vol. 23, 27–37. doi:10.1006/jnca.1999.0099
  • von Konsky, B. R., Miller, C., & Jones, A. (2016). The Skills Framework for the Information Age: Engaging Stakeholders in Curriculum Design. Journal of Information Systems Education, vol. 27 (1), pp. 37-50.
  • Vrasidas, C. (2000). Constructivism versus objectivism: Implications for interaction, course design, and evaluation in distance education. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, vol. 6 (4), pp. 339-362.
  • Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press