Learning with Stories: A Personal Case Study Approach in

Communication
Nirupama Akella, MA
Instructional Designer & Doctoral Assistant, Innovation in Learning Center,
University of South Alabama
This paper is a reflective paperan attempt by the researcher to explore, explain,
and understand the workings and benefits of the case study method from the
perspective of a learner. The researcher opens with a discussion of up the issue
discussing the case study method as a learning and teaching medium in applied
disciplines, by providing her own learning experience in her graduate
communication class. She further supports her perspective with suitable theory.
Introduction
Instructors in fields of applied communication and theory, such as public
relations, ethics, law, advertising, and social effects, are using the case study
method to teach important concepts, theories, and issues in class. Case study
method teaching and learning forms an important contemporary pedagogical tool in
the academic field of communication. There needs to be current research supporting
or negating this position.
This paper presents a learners viewpoint of how an academic topic was
taught in a graduate communication class using the case study method. This forms
the beginning section of the paper. The following three sections lay the theoretical
foundation of the paper. The researcher wraps up her paper with a discussion about
the workings and benefits of the case study method.
Learning with Cases
This paper is a personal observation of my experience of learning about a
qualitative communication research method through a case study rather than
systematic, empirical research into the practice of case study as a teaching and
learning tool. I am a communication graduate student at a large Midwestern
university. In my third semester, I had to enroll for a research methods class. This
class, 501: Qualitative Research Methods, is a
Case studies are steeped in
core course and has to be taken by every
the ethnographic tradition,
graduate student. The class, designed to be a
in which the researcher
conference class for a maximum of 15 students,
observes an event, or is an
is offered every fall as an evening class from 6
active participant in the
p.m. to half past eight. The class follows the
event. Case study research
traditional lecture format with additional class
does not restrict the
readings and assignments on various research
researcher to the role of an
methods,
paradigms,
concepts,
theories,
observer and interviewer.
traditions and practices. Outcome evaluations
Hence, case studies can be
done at the end of the semester have a
autobiographical in nature
research and a written examination component.
and filled with rich
Students have to submit an original piece of
description and dialogue.
research and take an examination to pass the
course.
In fall 2009, the Qualitative Research Methods class (scheduled on Monday
evenings) was a large class of 22 students, which was more than the designated
number. There were two course texts and a number of additional readings and
assignments. The class was due for two lectures on participant observation in the
month of October. And I was not looking forward to it. It would be the same old
lecture where my classmates and I would sit with our heads resting on our elbows,
listening to a monologue by the professor. There would be hushed chatter and a
60

Volume 6

2011

couple of yawns. The professor would give the class a ten-minute break, and my
classmates and I would rush into the corridor, thankful to escape the ordeal. Some
of us would stretch our legs, while others would drink water and eat chips from the
vending machine. Then the class would return to the conference room. The door
would close, and then it would be time to catch a few winks before the class would
end at precisely half-past eight. Perhaps the professor would call attention to the
sleeping class by giving a written assignment.
It would be exactly like that, I thought, entering the conference room
located in the corner of the communications department building, Room 1263.
Another boring class
I sat down in my designated chair and waited for the professor, idly
doodling on my notepad. The professor entered the room at precisely six p.m., and
the class began. I stifled a yawn and opened my text. There was a flipping of pages
as everyone seemed to be counting the page numbers of the text. The professor sat
down and said, We are supposed to discuss participant observation tonight, but I
am not going to give a lecture, and you are not going to take notes. Instead, you
are going to read a story
I sat upa story that WAS different.
The chatter had stopped. My neighbor put away his mobile
The professor handed out copies of a thick article and said,
Thats it for this evening. Let me take your attendance and you can go
read the story at home
I had wrongly assumed that it would be the same old lecture format, but
instead, the class had been saddled with a story. I put the article in my bag and left
class.
I went home, threw my bag on the floor and switched on the television. I
did not even glance at the story that night, or the next morning. It was not until the
weekend that I thought about it. I had finished all my assignments for the coming
week and was sitting idly. And, I thought, it is a story after all
I searched for the article, found it, and started reading Street Corner
Society by William F. Whyte (1993). After the first page, I didnt want to put it
down; I wanted to know more. And so I kept on reading the story; the story of a
Harvard doctoral student, William Foote Whyte, who decides to do his PhD research
on the housing situation in slums. The story took me on a journey of his
experiences, emotional encounters, interactions, and thoughts during his stay in the
slums of Cornerville.
The Heavy Stuff
In the Classroom
The storytelling genre is becoming popular again in lecture halls and
classrooms of communications departments and colleges (Cox, 2001). This is
because ordinary lectures consisting of a monologue by an authority figure do not
mentally stimulate the audience (Kreps, 1984). Stories, on the other hand, are firstperson accounts of what happened, how it happened, and to whom it happened.
They involve the audience as they call upon them to resolve a crisis or problem with
a theoretical rationale or explanation (Cox, 2001). In a nutshell, stories compel a
listener to think critically (Cox, 2001). Stories are illustrations of real-life episodes
and take on the form of cases. A case is a snapshot of human activity and crisis,
with real characters, dialogues, and a problem (Kreps, 1984).
Case studies are used to teach students how to effectively apply
communication theory to actual situations. The emphasis is on a message and
action-centered perspective. A student analyzing a case must first understand the
situation: what is going on, who is the main character. The student must recognize
and identify the problem and address the issue with relevant strategies pertaining to
the academic theory and literature (Schnelle, 1967; Mier, 1982). The reader should
experience the emotion and mental trauma of the protagonist and grapple with
InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching

61

dilemmas as if they were his or her own. And when the dilemma is solved, the
reader should feel relieved. That is the primary focus of the case study method: The
audience has to have a feel good experience at the end of the discussion.
Development of knowledge base and critical thinking is a necessary by-product
something that has to happen for the achievement of the solution (Mier, 1982).
A typical case study must incorporate rich background information that
provides the setting for further action and behavior. This background should provide
the student with appropriate clues as to why the protagonist is facing a problem
(Kreps, 1984). There should be dialogue between the characters in the story, which
should be as realistic as possible, providing background information about the
characters, their education, personalities. The listener should be able to visualize
these characters from the description in the case. The most enriching cases
describeshow and not tellthe process by which actions take place (Ulrich,
1953, p. 31).
A case study clarifies the role, function, and usage of theory in a
professional workplace: how someone can use theory to effectively resolve
workplace problems. Students are apt to remember and engage in continuous
learning if they learn by active participation (Mier, 1982). Knowledge learned
through passive participation is bound to reside in short-term memory. This limits a
students ability to analyze and comprehend situations and theories (Mier, 1982). It
is crucial to select case material that reflects course information and explains
important and appropriate theories. It is the responsibility of the instructor to
present the story in an engaging fashion with appropriate usage of visual aids,
audio, and role-play exercises (Kreps, 1984).
The main attraction of the case study method is the active
participation of the audience. This means that the listener should be physically and
mentally involved in the case (Kreps, 1984). Instructors often use the exercise of
role-play, where students are given roles of the characters in the case. The students
then engage in dialogue and action so they can experience the crisis unfolding. This
provides a further insight into the situation and helps students to develop critical
thinking skills, thus bridging the gap between theory and practice (Kreps, 1984). It
is also the responsibility of an instructor to create a class environment conducive for
case study teaching and learning (Glover & Hower, 1953). A student should not
hesitate to ask questions, clarify doubts, and think aloud.
This calls for a permissive atmosphere in which they (students) feel free to
put forth their ideas and questions without the instructor reacting in the form of
rejection, derision, blame, or authoritarian injunctions to think along other lines
preferred by the instructor at that moment. It is essential to develop a supportive
class atmosphere of communication, non-judgmental behavior, cooperation,
empathy, and spontaneity. These factors help the student experience firsthand the
workplace environment envisioned in the case (Gibb, 1961).
After reading and discussing the case in depth during class, a student must
be able to successfully answer the case questions. Case analysis represents the
outcome of the comprehension and explanation process (Kreps, 1984). A typical
case analysis must comprise three primary parts: (a) the opening problemidentification statement, (b) Problem analysis, and (c) recommendations or solution.
A case analysis report must be systematic, logically organized, realistic, wellresearched, and have a theory base (Bernthal, 1975).
Case studies have the power and ability to engage every type of student:
the kinesthetic student learns best through case studies by getting physically
involved in the case study activities. The tactual learners find the case study
method most appropriate, as it engages the emotional ego. In short, the tactual
learner identifies with the verbal exchanges and drama of the case study. The case
study method is also suitable for the auditory learners who are able to establish,
identify, and understand complex relationships, concepts, ideas, and theories during
discussion. Visual learners also benefit from this method, which gives them the
opportunity to see in person the problem and the unfolding of events. Class
62

Volume 6

2011

activities, such as role-playing and games, allow them to see how theory can be
used to address an issue (Kosa, 2008). Tell me and I will forget, show me and I
may remember, but involve me, and I will understand and remember forever
(Kosa, 2008, p. 45).
Theoretical Framework
Academic storytelling in the form of case studies is a recognized qualitative
research tool (Dooley & Skinner, 1977). Case study work was first introduced in the
academic spheres of medicine, library science, business, legal education, and social
work. The goal of the case study method is to present the actual meaning of
action and behavior (Avis, 1995). Hence, storytelling or case study research is
described as a qualitative alternative paradigm where the objective is to find not the
truth but the meaning: a representation [of reality] from one particular point of
view, in contrast to the quantitative understanding of reality as truth a social and
physical reality which exists independently of our experiences of it (Avis, 1995, p.
1206). This means that a story in academic literature seeks to present a subjective
meaning of an event. This event or real-life episode can be interpreted in various
ways by many people. All interpretations are true and valid meanings of the real-life
episode. This is in contrast to quantitative research, which states that research
exists to find the truth, which is objective in nature and devoid of any social,
physical, or emotional interpretation.
The goal of case study researchers is to provide ways of understanding this
meaning and experience (Schwandt, 1994). Thus, one case study can have different
meanings colored by social, physical, and emotional reality. Case study inquiry is
based on the view that knowledge is not absolute or devoid of any subjectivity.
Knowledge is relative and is a creation of the interaction between researcher and
the researched (Guba & Lincoln, 1994; Avis, 1995; Reed, 1995; Strubert &
Carpenter, 1999). In other words, knowledge is not an independent entity but is
dependent on human interaction. This epistemological basis forms the foundation of
case study research. Richards explains that case research cannot be value free and
have a single conclusion or "truth." He says that case research is subjective and
objective at the same time. This means that a case study researcher or reader
cannot and does not approach a case without any "prior theory in mind" (Richards,
1993, p. 40).
MacIntyre (1984) states that man is a storytelling animal. According to
him, telling stories that detail an event or a process is critical to human experience
and learning (1984). He further clarifies that storytelling can be described as a
"narrative enquiry" (MacIntyre, 1984; Flyjvberg, 2006, p. 240). His view is further
propounded by a phenomenological approach, which states that stories are
snapshots of human experience. This approach is advocated by Christensen (1987)
when he says that similar stories build knowledge about a particular phenomenon.
Christensen further states that these stories are described as cases (1987). Thus,
he notes that case studies are central to human learning and knowledge utilization
(Christensen, 1987; Flyvbjerg, 2006, p. 222). The approach focuses on the aspect
of human interaction, and states that human learning does not evolve in a straight,
vertical, or horizontal line (Flyvbjerg, 2006). Rather, cases present human
interaction which can project and diverge in many different ways. Thus, exposure to
case studies builds human experience and learning (Flyvbjerg, 2006). The
phenomenological approach echoes the essence of the qualitative constructionist
theory (Avis, 1995).
The constructivist theory argues that all reality has meaning that is a
construction of human interaction (Avis, 1995). This means that a case study
researcher is involved in the process of reality construction. Thus, the case study
researcher can write the case constructing one reality. The audience reads the case
and constructs another reality. The reality of the researcher can be different from
that of the audience and that of the researched. But every reality construction
represents subjective meanings. In case study research, objective knowledge is a
InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching

63

myth (Avis, 1995, p. 1207). Case study research also falls within the paradigm of
qualitative narrative analysis (Mishler, 1986). The basic premise of this argument
holds that individuals develop and create constructions of reality and make sense of
meaning and their world by telling and listening to stories (Ricoeur, 1981; Smith,
1981; White, 1981; Connelly & Clandinin, 1986, 1990; Sacks, 1986, 1992;
Riessman, 1990, 1991, 1993; Bruner, 1991; Clandinin & Connelly, 1994; Wiltshire,
1995). Case studies are steeped in the ethnographic tradition, in which the
researcher observes an event, or is an active participant in the event. Case study
research does not restrict the researcher to the role of an observer and interviewer.
Hence, case studies can be autobiographical in nature and filled with rich description
and dialogue. The listener can take any perspective and create any construction.
The ultimate goal of the case study is to make the audience think and become
critical enquirers and reality constructivists (Atkinson, 1992; Mishler, 1979, 1986,
1990; Bailey, 1998).
Lincoln and Guba explain that a case moves from the particular to the
general. A case has many solutions as it depicts one story (Lincoln & Guba, 1984;
Perry, 1998). Thus, they conclude that a case is descriptive and biased. Hunt (1991)
and Parkhe (1993) argue that cases are the study of "observable" phenomena, and
therefore fall into the realm of objective research. Hunt further states that cases are
not prescriptive (Hunt, 1991). Cases do not provide an answer or the solution to the
problem, but encourage readers and researchers to probe and think further to
propose suitable appropriate answers. Thus the focus is on "how do" rather than on
"how should" (Hunt, 1991). Hence, case study utilizes the scientific paradigm of
realism with an emphasis on the induction research methodology.
Hunt (1991); Leplin (1986); and Tskouas (1989) state that case study
research embraces the scientific paradigm of positivism. Cases represent a mix of
induction and deduction methodologies (Perry, 1998). On one hand, cases have a
narrative descriptive quality which takes support from pure induction methods
(Perry, 1998; Mishler, 1986; Parkhe, 1993). Yin states that descriptive cases are
positivist based, while exploratory cases which further knowledge and human
learning adopt a realistic scientific paradigm (Yin, 1994; Flyvbjerg, 2006). Richards
further clarifies that cases are a mix of prior theory and newly compiled theory
emerging from the raw data (Richards, 1993, p. 40).
Playing a Role in Applied Disciplines
Contemporary teaching methods in the academic field of communication
are narrow (Robbins, 1975). The emphasis is on teaching students what to do
rather than how and why to do it (Robbins, 1975). In other words, educators are
confining students to the novice level of competency and comprehension. Novice
teaching methods include textual analysis and printed notes by the teacher and the
formal, traditional lecture. This method is based on the assumption that students
learn best when someone else tells them what to do (Robbins, 1975, p. 38). Thus,
students spend time reading, listening to an instructor, and taking notes. The
instructor decides when and what students should learn and periodically evaluates
their level of knowledge (Robbins, 1975).
Students do not engage in critical thinking or in logical and symbolic
organization of academic content. They simply follow what is presented to them,
read, and verbalize it without understanding its value, importance, and meaning
(Cascio, 1991). There is minimal student- teacher interaction, resulting in a failure
to organize relevant thoughts and concepts for use in future situations. In addition,
this passive method of teaching does not encourage students abilities of discovery,
problem solving, and collaboration with peers to formulate discussion, thoughts, and
ideas (Reich, 1991). The novice method fails to facilitate and teach students to
solve problems with the use of related theory (Digman, 1995). The traditional
novice method stifles competency building, leaving the graduate communication
student unfit for professional work in the real world (Digman, 1995).
64

Volume 6

2011

Applied communication disciplines are usually taught by the craftsman or

workshop method. The focus is to train students to fit into the professional field.
Here again, the emphasis is on doing something rather than on understanding the
how and why of a situation or process (Robbins, 1975). Students write
assignments and theses, produce documentaries, write copy and advertising text,
business communication memorandums and letters to display and prove their
declarative and procedural knowledge (Robbins, 1975; Blanchard & Thacker, 2003).
However, these activities fail to teach the student to understand how and why he or
she is doing that activity. Workshop method develops craftsmanship or expertise in
doing activities (Robbins, 1975). But students need to learn more to be able to
function as communication practitioners. Current academic study of communication
is slowly making the transition towards the expert method of teaching. Instructors
have realized that they need to broaden the focus of their teaching and make it
relevant to real life. The expert method of teaching equips students to be able to:
(a) Examine a real-life situation and discover inherent communication
problems and opportunities;
(b) Research the communication environment they are a part of and critically
study diverse aspects of the audience, media, and technology, including
organizational constraints placed by them;
(c) Formulate communication goals, targets, and objectives;
(d) Evaluate alternative communication paradigms, theories, and strategies to
achieve their objectives;
(e) Engage in a high level of critical thought and logical cognitive organization
(Robbins, 1975, p. 38).
Thus, the expert method of teaching argues for the holistic competency
development of the communication student. This method takes the form of case
study teaching or storytelling in a communication classroom. However, there is a
definite lack of empirical research detailing the benefits and limitations of case study
teaching. Questions such as the number and names of communication subfields
currently using this method, including the rate of success, have to be empirically
investigated. Case study methods are being used in contemporary classrooms of
business, education, information technology, organizational communication, and
mechanical engineering (McDade, 1995). The aim of such applied disciplines, as
explained by McDade (1995) and Gerring (2004), is to be able to identify possible
workplace problems in a realistic paradigm and offer feasible solutions. Applied
academic disciplines require students to think creatively and critically, analyze, and
be cognitive, categorical decision makers (Robbins, 1974; Gerring, 2004). This
means that students of applied disciplines have to move beyond the craftsman
stage and acquire expertise in the field (Gerring, 2004). Academic fields such as
business marketing, financial management, nursing, accounting, research and
program evaluation, abnormal and industrial psychology, counseling psychology,
information technology, architectural design, instructional design, and mechanical
engineering are some of the contemporary academic users of case studies.
However, applied communication disciplines such as media theory and law,
advertising, public relations, and research methods do not use this method as an
official classroom methodology for imparting knowledge (Flyvbjerg, 2006). Given
the critical link and influence on human learning, researchers McDade (1995) and
Kosa (2008) opine that the explicit lack of case study as a viable classroom teaching
method in applied communication disciplines is astonishing. McDade (1995) points
out that cases are a way of sustaining a student's interest, as they encourage
students to think and analyze, make associations, and draw possible conclusions.
Cases help students to remain focused on the issue and develop a working
knowledge of the feasibility of textual fact in the "real" world (McDade, 1995, p.
10). This is crucial for applied communication disciplines because as the name
suggests, the aim of such disciplines is to equip students to apply classroom
knowledge in the workplace (Kosa, 2008).

InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching

65

The Real Deal

Integrating Theory and Practice
The story did what the lecture could not do
I learn best when the reading material involves drama and emotion. I need
to feel I am a part of the literature presented to me in order to identify, understand,
and critically analyze its various dimensions. Whytes story managed to engage me
at an emotional level. After the first page, I felt sorry for Whyte, the poor PhD
student. I am also a student, and know how difficult it is to live on a student salary.
The reading material had already gotten me hooked and involved with the main
character. I wanted to know how Whyte, with his financial problems, was going to
do a comprehensive research study.
I had my text nearby in case I needed to consult it about methodological
terms and concepts. After all, Whytes article was only a story. I was in for a
delightful surprise: I didnt need to refer to my text at all. Whytes article showed
me everything. The paper was a combination of realism and my interaction with it.
It depicted a journey of Whyte which was believable and humorous. By the time I
finished the article, I knew everything about the qualitative research method of
participant observationthe theory, pitfalls, validity, and reliability concerns. And I
had not read the textbook. I had just read the story of Whyte and understood and
enjoyed his emotional roller-coaster ride in Cornerville. I lived through the entire
process of data collection with Whyte, the protagonist of the story. I was there with
him when he befriended his gatekeeper, Doc, who later became his source for
information. I was at the edge of my seat when Whyte went on a drinking spree and
indulged in illegal activities to fit in with the slum members; I grappled with his
mental dilemma of either being objective and neutral, or become involved, to lose
perspective and become biased.
The following week in class (the last one on participant observation
method), I found myself actively discussing and participating in a discussion on the
method. Whytes article had successfully bridged the gap between theoretical
knowledge and the practical application of that knowledge in the field. We all saw
and understood how scientific knowledge was shaped by administrative concerns. In
this case, we identified Whytes doctoral grant funding committee as the primary
stakeholders. Whyte was forced to choose the slum of Cornerville for his research
because his finances, controlled by the doctoral funding committee, dictated it.
Thus, Whytes study taught us that all scientific research has to be conducted within
administrative constraints.
We were questioning each other and encouraging a regular flow of
interaction. Here I must mention that my instructor made it possible for us to
exchange ideas, debate, and argue about research issues of reliability and validity;
she created an open and informal classroom
setting where each one of us felt comfortable to
Here I must mention that
discuss and critically think. We developed
my instructor made it
respect for each other as individuals and
possible for us to exchange
students. This active participation, I am sure,
ideas, debate, and argue
will serve al l of us in good stead when we work
about research issues of
with diverse people in the workplace. In
reliability and validity; she
addition, dreary research issues of gate
created an open and
keeping, participant observation, and field
informal classroom setting
notes came alive. We engaged in a short skit
where each one of us felt
immersing ourselves in the various characters
comfortable to discuss and
in Whytes article. Someone became Doc, the
critically think. We
gatekeeper, a few others enacted roles of the
developed respect for each
doctoral-grant-funding
committee,
and
other as individuals and
someone took up the role of Whyte. The
students.
students playing the roles kept changing, as all
66

Volume 6

2011

of us took turns. The rest of the class was the audience. This role-playing made us
critically comprehend, sympathize, and also come up with preventive solutions.
Each one of us was able to see what Whyte was faced withhis research dilemmas,
his mental tussle between objectivity and subjectivityShould he join the residents
of Cornerville on their drinking binge, or should he refrain from becoming one of
them and remain a fly on the wall? Similarly, the audience as well as the actors
could understand Docs dilemmaShould he betray his longtime friends and include
a stranger among them on false pretenses, or should he tell the truth? Role-playing
also made us appreciate the storytelling-narrative-enquiry inherent in case studies.
We realized that there is no single truth, but that what we learn builds towards
our knowledge and understanding of academic phenomena and the human
endeavor to uncover truths many facets.
We had moved beyond the novice method of learning where we just read
what was given to us, repeated it, and listened to a lecture. We had successfully
learnt the craft of participant observation. But all of us had accomplished
something moresomething we would not have achieved with a traditional,
ordinary lecture. We had become participants in the lecture. We had shaped,
influenced our instruction. We had become experts at the qualitative research
method of participant observation. The cognitive activity of reading, analyzing,
evaluating, and synthesizing Whytes experiences, attitude, and perception had
taught us firsthand the function and course of action of the participation-observation
method. Reading the case had made us aware of the various drawbacks and
consequently we reflected on the holistic process of choosing an appropriate
methodology for research. Hence, the case study method had propelled us to
engage in critical thought and emerge as logical,
We had become experts at
cognitive individuals. It helped us gain a real-life
the qualitative research
perspective on how things get done in real life.
method of participant
The case study method had blended the theory
observation. The cognitive
of participant observation with its practice in the
activity of reading,
real world.
analyzing, evaluating, and
This kind of situated learning also made
synthesizing Whytes
us realize that research does not occur in a
experiences, attitude, and
vacuum but happens in a context. Research
perception had taught us
attitudes, behaviors, and actions cannot be
firsthand the function and
predetermined but are a function of the context.
course of action of the
Whyte did not plan and theorize that his
participation-observation
research method would lead him to participate
method.
in illegal activities. His experience made us
aware that all research is contextual. That evening, all of us had crossed from being
students to learners who had engaged in knowledge acquisition, knowledge
application, knowledge evaluation, and cognitive critical thought. The case study
method had successfully integrated Blooms taxonomy of educational objectives. It
made us all holistically and cognitively competent in the realm of research.
At the end of the class, we came out feeling excited and refreshed. We felt
happy for Whyte, as by now he had become an extension of our personal selves. We
were personally involved in Whytes successes and failures, and we experienced a
sense of relief and joy when his research yielded successful results.
Conclusion
Cases or stories encourage active, participatory learning. The student has
control over material he or she reads. Consequently, students are able to unite
theory and practice to develop a holistic and comprehensive view of the situation.
And cases are generalizableyou can apply learned and interpreted material of one
story in a situation to another story in a similar situation. But empirical investigation
detailing such effects of the case study method needs to be done in all fields of
academic instruction. My case shows that learning new material by way of case
studies is helpful, and beneficial. But the research purpose would have been better
InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching

67

served had my personal research investigation been supported by quantitativesurvey evidence. Hence, a mixed-methods research design could be deemed
suitable for further research into the identified problem.
References
Akella, D. (2010). Learning together:
Kolbs experiential theory and its
application. Journal of Management &
Organization, 16(1), 100-112.

Christensen, C. R. (with Hansen,

A.J.) (Ed.) (1987). Teaching and the
case
method,
Boston:
Harvard
Business School Press.

Atkinson, P. (1992). The ethnography

of a medical setting: Reading writing,
and rhetoric. Qualitative Health
Research, 2, 451-474.

Clandinin, D. J. & Connelly, F. M.

(1994).
Personal
experience
methods. In Denzin, N. L. & Lincoln,
Y. S. (Eds.). Handbook of Qualitative
Research, Sage Publications, London.

Avis, M. (1995). Valid arguments? A

consideration of the concept of
validity in establishing the credibility
of research findings. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 22(6), 12031209.
Bailey, P. H. (1998). Patients, family
caregivers, and nurses: Stories of
acute exacerbation events of chronic
pulmonary
disease
(Unpublished
doctoral thesis). The University of
Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Bailey, P. H. & Tilley, S. (2002).
Storytelling and the interpretation of
meaning in qualitative research.
Journal
of
Advanced
Nursing,
Blackwell Science Ltd. 38(6), 574583.
Brenthal, W. (1975). Case analysis in
organizational behavior and the
practice of management, unpublished
instructional mimeograph. University
of Colorado.
Bruner, J. (1991). The Narrative
construction
of
reality.
Critical
Inquiry, 18(1), 1-21.
Blanchard, N. P. & Thacker, J.W.
(2003). Effective training: Systems,
strategies, and practices, (2nd ed.)
Pearson Education: Prentice Hall.
Cascio, W. F. (1991). Applied
psychology in personnel management
(4th ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.

68

Connelly, F.M. & Clandinin, D. J.

(1986).
On
narrative
method,
personal philosophy, and narrative
unities in the story of teaching.
Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 23(4). 293-310.
Cox, K. (2001). Stories as case
knowledge: Case knowledge as
stories. Medical Education, 35(9),
862-866.
Digman, L. A. (1995). Strategic
management: Cases. Houston, TX:
Dame.
Dooley, A. R. & Skinner, W. (1977).
Chasing case methods. The Academy
of Management Review, 2, 277-289.
Flyvbjerg,
B.
(2006).
Five
misunderstandings about case-study
research, Qualitative Enquiry, 12(2),
219-245.
Gerring, J. (2004). What is a case
study and what is it good for?
American Political Science Review,
98(2), 341-354.
Gibb, J. R. (1961). Defensive
communication,
Journal
of
Communication, 11(3), 141-148.
Glover, J. D. & Hower, R. M. (1953).
Some comments on teaching by the
case method: The case method of
teaching
human
relations
and
administration. (Andrews, K. Ed.),
Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
Volume 6

2011

Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994).

Competing paradigms in qualitative
research. In Denzin, N. L. & Lincoln,
Y.S. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative
Research, Sage Publications, London.

Reed, P. G. (1995). A treatise on

nursing knowledge development for
the
21st
century:
Beyond
postmodernism. Advances in Nursing
Science, 17(3), 70-84.

Hunt, S. (1991). Modern marketing

theory. Cincinnati, South Western.

Reissman, C. K. (1990). Strategic

uses of the narrative in the
presentation of self and illness: A
research note. Social Science and
Medicine, 30(11), 1195-1200.

Kreps, G. L. (1984). Using the case

study
method
in
organizational
communication classes: Developing
students insight, knowledge and
creativity. Paper presented at the
meeting
of
International
Communication
Association
Conference, San Francisco, CA.
Kosa, J. R. (2008). Tell a story. NJEA
Review, 81, 3-10.
Leplin, J. (Ed.) (1986) Scientific
realism. University of California
Press, Berkeley: CA.
MacIntyre, A. (1984). After virtue: A
study in moral theory (2nd ed.).
Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre
Dame Press.
McDade, A. S. (1995). Case study
pedagogy
to
advance
critical
thinking. Teachers College: Columbia
University, 22(1), 9-10.
Mier, D. (1982). From concepts to
practices: Student case study work in
organizational
communication,
Communication Education, 31, 151154.
Mishler, E. G. (1986). Research
interviewing context and narrative.
Harvard University Press, London.
Parkhe, A. (1993). Messy Research,
methodological predispositions and
theory development in international
joint
ventures.
Academy
of
Management Review, 18(2), 227268.
Perry, C. (1998). Processes of a case
study methodology for postgraduate
research in marketing. European
Journal of Marketing, 32(9/10), 785802.
InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching

Reissman, C. K. (1991). Beyond

reductionism: Narrative genres in
divorce accounts. Journal of Narrative
and Life History, 1, 41-68.
Reissman, C. K. (1993). Narrative
analysis. Sage Publications, London.
Reich, R. B. (1991). The work of
nations: Preparing ourselves for a
21st century capitalism. NY: Alfred A.
Knopf.
Richards, L. (1993) Writing a
qualitative thesis or grant application,
In Beattie, K. (Ed.) So wheres your
research profile? A Research Book for
Academics.
Union
of
Australian
College Academics, South Melbourne,
Australia.
Ricoeur, P. (1981). Narrative Time.
In W. J. T.
Mitchell (Ed.), On
Narrative, University of Chicago
Press, Chicago, IL.
Robbins, J. C. (1975). Training the
professional communicator: The case
study method. Journal of Business
Communication, 12(3), 37- 45.
Sacks,
H.
(1986).
consideration of a story
ordinary
conversation,
15(1/2), 127-138.

Some
told in
Poetics,

Sacks, H. (1992). Part IV Spring

1970. G. Jefferson (Ed.), In Lectures
on
Conversation,
2,
Blackwell,
Oxford.
Schwandt,
T.
A.
(1994),
Constructivist,
interpretivist
approaches to human inquiry. In N.
L. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln0 (Eds),
69

Handbook of Qualitative Research.

Sage Publications, London.
Schmidt, M. & Lipstreu, O. (1975),
The case method, (Unpublished
instructional mimeograph). University
of Colorado.
Schnelle, K. (1967), Case analysis
and
business
problem
solving,
McGraw-Hill: New York.
Smith, B. H. (1981), After thoughts
on narrative. In W. J. T. Mitchell
(Ed.), On Narrative University of
Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Streubert H. J. & Carpenter, D. R.
(1992),
Qualitative
research
in
nursing advancing the humanistic
imperative, J.B. Lippincott Company,
Philadelphia.
Tsoukas, H. (1989) The validity of
idiographic research explanations.
Academy of Management Review,
24(4), 551-561.
Ulrich, D. N. (1953), The case
method: The case
method of
teaching
human
relations
and
administration (Andrews, K. Ed.),
Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

West, C., Farmer, J. & Wolff, P.

(1991),
Instructional
design:
implications from cognitive science.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
White, H. (1981), The value
narrativity in the presentation
reality, in W. J. T. Mitchell (Ed.),
Narrative,
University
Press
Chicago, Chicago, IL.

of
of
On
of

Whyte, W. F. (1993), Street Corner

Society, (4th ed.) University of
Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Wiltshire, J. (1995), Telling a story,
writing a narrative: Terminology in
health care, Nursing Inquiry, 2(2),
75-82.
Yin, R. K. (1994) Case study
research: Design and methods.
Applied Social Research Method
Series, 5 (2nd ed.), Sage, Newbury
Park: CA.
Zhao, J. J. (1996), Using case studies
for
international
business
communication training, Business
Communication Quarterly, 59(4), 1124.

Nirupama Akella is a PhD student in Instructional Design and Development at the

College of Education, University of South Alabama. She is also employed as an
Instructional Designer and doctoral assistant at the Innovation in Learning Center,
University of South Alabama. Nirupama has master degrees in management,
journalism, and communication.

70

Volume 6

2011