Mapping the Components of Finance Cases Using the Cognitive ...

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

Mapping the Components of Finance Cases Using the Cognitive Flexibility Model Duane B. Graddy1 Abstract The theory of cognitive flexibility provides a strong conceptual framework for integrating the multifarious events and situations that combine to form the core of cases used in upper-level finance courses. Transference is the basic tenet of case-based learning. Students must be able to transfer their knowledge and critical thinking skills from one case to another. The issue addressed in this paper is one of practicality. How does one use the cognitive flexibility approach as a pedagogical scaffolding to construct case-based courses in finance? The purpose of this paper is to suggest a means for constructing the learning objects interface for a set of core finance cases and to illustrate how these system components are used to facilitate the learners' cognitive and metacognitive development.

Introduction Whether stated or not, case-based courses in finance are predicated on a theory of how students learn. To use a case-based approach, the instructor must believe that analyzing actual experiences is a superior way to learn finance or she/he would employ a different pedagogy. For example, Roulac (1975) see cases as enhancing the ability of finance students to make situational decisions. Cases enable students to see patterns and general principles while involving them in realistic decision situations. According to Roulac, cases also play an important role in the social construction of knowledge. Interaction among students and the instructor in case discussions result in a group understanding of general principles and their applications to actual decision situations. Gitman, Lewis, and Yates (1987) take a constructivist view of the case approach. Through case-analysis, students construct knowledge that enhances their ability to use controllable managerial factors to take advantage of uncontrollable market events. Viscione and Aragon (1978) tout cases as a means of increasing the problem-solving and critical thinking skills of students. Sherman (1980) sees the application of the scientific method to business problems as best learned through the case method. A recent paper by Moore (1999) refers to uncited authors that advocate the use of cases in contrast to lectures because the case method reaches a student’s entire mental trilogy of cognition, emotion, and conation. While these authors point out the potential advantages of the case method in student learning, they do not show how case analysis is best structured to achieve these perceived benefits. Foremost is the question of what learning theory inspires the case method and what educational scaffolding is evident from its application. Granted, Gitman, Lewis, and Yates (1987) do suggest Bloom’s taxonomy as a means of selecting and using cases. Their approach is to match cases with the perceived cognitive levels of Bloom’s taxonomy and then to use these cases to achieve specific course objects.2 For example, cases for the principles of finance course are selected based on Bloom’s first two cognitive levels: knowledge and comprehension. Functional courses use cases perceived to be from the next two 1 Professor of Economics and Finance, Department of Economics and Finance, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, TN 37133, email:[email protected]. The author thanks Ms. Sally Govan for her assistance in preparing the figures and editing the manuscript. 2

However, no specific criteria are suggested for classifying the cases by cognitive domain.

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

levels, while capstone courses try to achieve the highest level of cognitive development. Viscione and Aragon (1978) capture the essence of the issue but fail to develop a workable schema. To them, cases are a means of bridging the gap between financial theory and the subtle aspects of the real world. By analyzing cases, students develop the skills necessary to confront the unstructured reality of actual financial decisions. In addition, by considering real world events, they see cases as influencing the students’ affective domain by encouraging interest in the subject matter. Each of these works makes an important contribution to our understanding of the case method in teaching finance. Nevertheless, application of the case method is more complex than is revealed in any of these articles. Failure to recognize this complexity may be one reason for the recent findings by Moore (1999). As a generalization, Moore’s study of introductory finance students found little difference in the cognitive and affective domain outcomes between the case and lecture methods. However, his study focused on short, highly structured cases in a curricular domain where the subject matter is wellstructured. Under these circumstances, educational theory (Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson, and Coulson 1995; Jonassen 1997; and Kolodner and Guzdial 2000) predicts what was found: no difference between highly structured cases and highly structured lectures. Case-based learning requires much more than the substitution of a case for a lecture on a particular topic.3 This paper focuses on knowledge transfer as the fundamental reason for using cases in the upperdivision finance courses. The financial education literature is used to evaluate how knowledge transfer is typically taught in finance courses. The paper then discusses and illustrates a new approach to knowledge transfer framed in the pedagogy of cognitive flexibility.

Theory of Case-Based Learning Conveying course material though cases requires a theory of case learning -- that is, a description of how students learn by using cases. The theory of case-based learning described in this section is predicated on the works of Spiro (1977), Spiro, Vispoel, Schmitz, Samarapungavan, and Boerger (1987), Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson, and Coulson (1995), Leamnson (2001, 2000), Hernandez-Serrano and Jonassen (in press), Kolodner and Guzdial (2000), O’Keefe and Nadel (1978), and Caine and Caine (1991). Put simply, learning occurs when something is understood, remembered, and transferable. As we know from the principles of finance course, students can memorize financial concepts and ideas without understanding them. Furthermore, students may understand a concept, such as the cost of capital but without repeated reinforcement forget it. For the case study method to be a successful educational pedagogy, it must enhance understanding and recall, heightening the prospective transfer of knowledge.4 Figure 1 provides an illustration of this relationship. At its most fundamental level, learning is a physical process. Learning is a strengthening of the neuronal connections (axons) within the human brain. According to Leamnson (2001, 2000), new synaptic connections created from experiences and sensory interactions are initially quite labile. However, without reinforcement synaptic pathways degenerate, reducing learning. The raw data may not be lost but lose its connection to other pathways, becoming less meaningful. Frequency of use stabilizes synaptic sequences fostering advanced learning. In this context, O’Keefe and Nadel make a useful distinction between the taxon and locale memories. Taxon memories relate to generic items or lists. 3

Several aspects of Moore’s results do not square well with the extant literature. For example, in some of his tests, cases are more effective at achieving lower-level cognitive skills and lectures more effective for higher-level cognitive development. Moreover, upper-level affective domain skills were stimulated more by lectures than by cases. While these results may in fact be correct for his sample, Moore’s study raises important pedagogical issues. For example, Kolonder and Guzdial (2000 ) note that “… in a traditional lecture-based or fact-based class, cases may not be useful or may even be ignored by the students” (p. 224). Spiro, et al.s (1995) reductive bias, which interferes with the development of higher level cognitive skills and which case analysis tries to overcome, is not as evident in lower-level principles courses as in more advanced subjects. Furthermore, studies by Dunkle, Schraw, and Bendixen (1995), Shinn, Jonassen, and Mckee (in press), and Jonassen and Kwon (2000) confirm that learners performance in solving well-defined problems is independent of their performance in completing ill-defined tasks (e.g., analysis of actual company scenarios). Essentially, tests such as those performed by Moore raise a fundamental issue about how case-learning occurs. 4

Studies using functional magnetic resonance imaging find that regions of the brain which are active when a person is struggling with a problem or abstract concept are different from regions active when memorizing a list of words. Thus, memory without understanding is a physical possibility (Leamnson 2001).

2

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

Items in the taxon memories are not dependent on specific thematic or physical context. Taxon learning is repetitious, isolated, and hierarchical. Learning the basic steps for the operation of a financial calculator is taxon learning. For most students the steps become automatic (hardwired) with Figure 1. Dimensions of Learning

with no real understanding of how the calculator works. Likewise, financial formulae can be entered by rote without necessarily understanding their contextual usage. The locale memory houses the interrelated network of context-based thematic maps. Thematic maps provide the pattern recognition necessary to transfer knowledge to novel situations. Thematic maps allow students to find their contextual bearings. When students are confronted with novel financial decision scenarios, they quickly form thematic maps to comprehend the extant circumstances. Whether sense is actually made of the scenarios depends on the sophistication of the students’ thematic networks. This degree of sophistication is what Leamnson (2000, p. 14) is describing when he says, “It is a matter of increasing neural connections with more re-entry loops and cross talk.” If the maps are fragmented or underdeveloped, then the students will be unable to insightfully interpret or react to new circumstances. Locale memory draws information from the taxon systems. The natural interaction between these systems creates meaningful responses to new situations. Mapping between the locale memory and the taxon systems requires a complex indexing structure. In assessing a new financial scenario, items from the taxon system, such as generic accounting statements, valuation formulae, financial ratios, and basic principles (e.g., financing transitory working capital with short-term funds), must be readily available for the formation of initial thematic maps. Inadequate connections will not provide the indexing capabilities necessary to transfer knowledge from one situation to another. Strict memorization of financial ratios or valuation formulae does not provide the strong thematic connections necessary to interpret novel circumstances. Strong connections (stabilized synaptic sequences) develop from repeated experiences in the contextual and situational domains of a subject. Instructional design in case courses should focus on strengthening the thematic pathways that define the learning process. The theory of cognitive flexibility (Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson, and Coulson 1995) provides a strong conceptual framework for integrating the multifarious events and situations that combine to form the core of finance cases into a usable interface that emphasizes the thematic structure of business decisions.

Cognitive Flexibility as a Theory of Instructional Design in Finance Courses Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson, and Coulson (1995) define cognitive flexibility as the “ability to spontaneously restructure one’s knowledge in many ways, in adaptive response to radically changing situational demands”(p. 165). Cognitive flexibility theory as a model of instructional design stresses contextual interrelatedness and interconnectedness. It is based on the observation by Spiro et al. that “knowledge that will have to be used in a large number of ways has to be organized, taught, and mentally represented in many ways.” The model developed as a response to what Spiro et al. and Jonassen (1997) refer to as the reduction bias. This phenomenon results from the oversimplification

3

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

and compartmentalization of knowledge in lower-level courses.5 By relying on memorization and rote at these levels, students do not develop the strong cognitive pathways or indexing necessary to succeed in complex contextual environments. Their responses to complex situations become grounded in the taxon systems. In a sense it is a conditioned response. For example, a student may memorize the Gordon equation in basic finance and be able to express it and use it to solve end-of-chapter problems but be unable to successfully apply it to a scenario involving actual company data.6 Developing the taxon memory is important to learning; however, continuation of the focus on memorization in upperdivision courses reinforces the simple epistemic beliefs (Jacobson and Spiro, 1993) of many students.7 Instructional design based on the theory of cognitive flexibility focuses on the development of meaningful learning -- that is, learning that indexes and reinforces information pathways so that they can be called upon in unexpected and varying circumstances.8 According to cognitive flexibility theory, students grasp the nature of complexity more readily by being presented with multiple representations of the same information in different contexts. By seeing multiple representations of the same phenomenon, students develop the mental scaffolding necessary for considering novel applications within the particular knowledge domain. Approaching instructional design from a thematic perspective “allows the transformation of taxon memory into locale memory, which is the natural way of learning” (Gillani 2002, p.7). The three primary design features of the cognitive flexibility model include the following: 1.

The heart of cognitive flexibility is the comprehensive case or case history: not one prototypical situation but many wide-ranging cases. Cases illustrate the multidimensional nature of actual experiences. However, no one case applies to all situations. Fragments of different cases, virtual experiences if you like, combine to form the basis of a reconstructive reasoning process.

2.

Themes are ideas expressed by subject experts as possible bases for understanding the complex scenarios being presented to a learner. No one theme will be the correct answer or capture all of the dimensions of a case.Comprehensive cases present a web of intertwined themes, a thematic map of actual experiences.

3.

The disassembled units of a case are referred to as mini-cases. Mini-cases are text selections from complete cases or case histories that encompass particular themes in the cases. Minicases represent the thematic subplots of the comprehensive case. Learners can reflect more readily on the overlapping themes in the various comprehensive cases by analyzing the minicases draw from the primary case material.

Figure 2 illustrates these features.

5

Although cast in different terms, Brigham, Fischer, Johnson, and Jordan (1972) express this idea when they caution against using short cases in the same manner as textbook problems.

6 Finance is not alone in this respect; Coulson, Feltovich, and Spiro (1997) discovered reduction bias in studies of medical students. Diagnosis of hypertension was characterized by a centralized mindset (Resnick, 1996) that produced common remedial action across different patients even though it was later found that the sources of the hypertension were different and other complications existed. Applying an approach derived from the theory of cognitive flexibility led to different diagnoses among the patients. Two of the patients received the same treatment, one received fewer medicines because the primary problem was addressed directly, and the other patient was treated for a different disorder. 7

Compartmentalization of knowledge (reduction bias) in lower-level courses may account for the inability of many students to apply the foundation concepts from required economics, accounting, and statistics to later finance courses. 8

Indexing and reinforcement give meaning to the information stored in the taxon systems.

4

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

Figure 2. Structure of the Cognitive Flexibility Paradigm

Cases and Case Histories Designing functional and capstone courses in finance using the cognitive flexibility paradigm begins with the comprehensive case or case history. Cases represent the rough terrain that is mapped by the thematic dimensions. Cases illustrate the multifarious nature of real-life financial decisions. However, as emphasized by Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson, and Coulson (1995), no one case applies to all situations. In designing case courses the emphasis should not be on the prototypical case but on the thematic dimensions that combine to form the basis of the reconstructive reasoning process (stabilization synaptic sequences) necessary for the analysis of novel circumstances. Two instructional design principles forthcoming from the cognitive flexibility paradigm have the potential to enhance the transfer of knowledge through the use of cases. First, each case must be decomposed into its component themes. Second, the design interface must emphasize the interconnectedness of the case themes. Designing the course interface requires the consideration of both intra-case and inter-case connectedness. Intra-case dimensions focus on the interplay of themes within a given scenario, such as the interconnection of government policies and financial strategies. For instance, the redirection of aggregate fiscal policy, resulting in an increase in marginal tax rates, can have an impact on the debt financing strategies of a company. Inter-case linkages tie together the theme of government policies among various case scenarios. Firms begin in different initial states, so the impact of a new tax provision can have varying financial implications. Focusing on specific themes in dissimilar circumstances strengthens their potential usage in novel situations. Case Selection Case selection is important in the application of the cognitive flexibility approach to course

5

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

architecture.9 Spiro and Jehng (1990) see benefits in trying to find a system for selecting and grouping cases. For example, they criticize the selection of cases to neatly illustrate some textbook points. Cases in this category include what Viscione and Aragon (1978) call “armchair” cases. Brigham, Fischer, Johnson, and Jordan (1972) express this idea when they caution against using short cases to achieve the same objective as textbook problems. The point is that using this approach reinforces the reduction bias and impedes knowledge transfer. Textbookization of the cases is a basic criticism of Moore’s (1999) study of finance students. Spiro and Jehng suggest another argument for attempting to select the right cases in the proper grouping, namely to substantially shorten the time and number of cases necessary for students to develop the ability to transfer their learning on a particular subject to novel situations. Case selection in the cognitive flexibility approach implies the following criteria. First, cases should reflect the ill-structuredness and uncertainty of actual experiences. Second, cases should be rich in thematic elements. Third, cases need (should) not include explanations of fundamental concepts; in advanced knowledge acquisition these concepts should be established in the taxon memory. In discussing the application of cases in upper-level courses, Spiro, Vispoel, Schmitz, Samarapungavan, and Boerger (1987) note that “… a learner should be required to get ideas right (even if that is hard to do) and be able to appropriately apply those ideas (even if there is not a simple formula that they can memorize for doing so). If extra difficulty and confusion are the price of this shift in criteria, that is unfortunate but not an excuse for oversimplifying instruction” (p. 192). Essentially, ignoring the third criteria reinforces reduction bias. Viscione and Aragon’s (1978) second category of cases, structured cases, violates this third criterion. All three case-selection criteria are met by their third case category: “typical Harvard type.” Grouping Cases Optimal case grouping should strengthen the connections in the locale memory in a way that maximizes the student’s ability to transfer knowledge to new situations. Cognitive flexibility emphasizes the multidimensional aspects of actual experiences, so dimensionality should provide a basis for case grouping. To Spiro, Vispoel, Schmitz, Samarapungavan, and Boerger (1987), the key grouping criterion is the partial overlap of the thematic dimensions across the cases. While not explicitly stated, what they suggest is a hypothetical scale running from cases with complete overlap of thematic dimensions to completely dissimilar cases. In this context consider a case as a set with two elements: (∈) , {factual information, abstract perspectives}. Overlap can occur for either or both elements. At the theoretical extremes for a case pairing of A and B, A = B and A ∩ Β = ∅. Between these extremes the ∈’s of A and B partially overlap. Grouping at either extreme unnecessarily limits the transfer possibilities. Grouping cases that are exactly alike in thematic dimensions adds no new connections and produces spurious generalizations to novel situations. Hypothetically, if all case elements were identical, spurious generalization could be transferred to all new situations. In effect, there is one connection. On the other hand, grouping cases that are totally dissimilar chances the omission of important regularities. Between these conceptual extremes is the area of partial overlap. Spiro et al. (1987) see partial overlap as the key to grouping because “strength of connection derives from the partial overlapping of many different strands of connectedness across cases rather than from any single strand running through large numbers of cases” 9 Gitman, Lewis, and Yates (1987) and Trahan (1993) discuss case selection in the context of finance courses. Using Bloom’s taxonomy, Gitman, Lewis, and Yates suggest a classification scheme based on the level and complexity of course objectives. They categorize courses as principles, functional, and capstone. Principles courses are at the low end of the cognitive domain (knowledge and comprehension). Functional courses encompass application, analysis, and synthesis. Capstone courses emphasize upper-domain skills, especially evaluation. Cases are reviewed and classified by cognitive domain as simple, moderately complex, and complex. However, the authors did not reveal the criteria for making these distinctions. The cases are then matched with the respective course categories. Trahan (1993) comes close to a thematic selection process in his classification scheme. Highly structured cases really represent single-issue problems. Spiro and Jehng (1990) would probably not classify these exercises as cases. Moderately-structured cases encompass one or more financial issues but are still highly structured. Unstructured cases are the multidimensional scenarios that provide the basis for thematic development. According to Trahan, highly structured cases are suitable for the principles course, moderately structured for the intermediate course, and unstructured for the capstone.

6

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

(p. 193). Conceptually, pairs of cases should be compared on the basis of a partial overlap index, the ratio of overlapping case themes to total themes for a particular set of cases. (Schemes that are more complex could use contrast analysis to develop similarity indices based on the entire set of individual themes. For example, a Tversky (1977) similarity function [F( A ∩ B, A-B, B-A)] would compare the themes common to cases A and B, the themes included in A but not in B, and the themes common to B but not to A. Intuitive weights applied to each of these components can be used to form a similarity ratio with values ranging from 0 and 1.) At its extremes the ratio equals one for spurious generalization, A = B and zero for totally dissimilar cases, A ∩ Β = ∅. Appropriate case grouping implies ratios between these extremes. For example, a ratio of 0.75 implies that a particular case has three-fourths of the themes (managerial ethics, hedging strategy, recessionary period) relative to a case (either actual or hypothetical) including all of thematic elements. As noted above more complex similarity schemes are possible as well. The case library is the group of cases selected for a specific knowledge domain (finance course or finance topic being considered). Figure 3 illustrates the case grouping scale. Figure 3. Case Grouping Scale

Themes Themes are ideas expressed by subject experts as possible ways of understanding complex real-life financial decisions.10 In complex, ill-structured situations, no one theme will be the correct answer or capture all of the important dimensions of a case. For example, executive ethics is not the only important theme in the destruction of value in the cases of Enron and WorldCom. Other routes in the thematic map explaining this destruction would transverse financial strategies, regulatory policy, corporate culture, and economic environment. Spiro and Jehng (1990) provide two criteria for the development of themes. Themes should be broad in scope, covering the complexities of the case situations. Second, contextual complexity requires multiple themes. Adding themes to the case map increases instructional value as long as the themes are not coincidental and can support a content rich mini-case. In relation to the mini-cases, themes are the indexing categories, the meta-data for classifying the case components.

Mini-cases 10

Gillani notes, “Experts are those individuals who have organized their taxon memory or external memory into their locale memory according to the big picture of some core concepts. A novice, on the other hand, simply memorizes new information and attempts to encode it into long-term memory without much regard for its organization. The difference between the way an expert and a novice learn to organize information becomes apparent when it comes to retrieval and problem solving. The former can easily retrieve relevant information to solve the problem at hand whereas the novice attempts in vain to use a variety of approaches to solve the problem. In other words, experts have achieved meaningful knowledge structures and novices have not” (p. 6). Knowledge structures connote the system of pathways in the networked locale memory.

7

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

Mini-cases refer to the contextual components of the cases and case histories. The starting point for all instruction in the cognitive flexibility approach is the mini-case. Having read the comprehensive cases, the students can focus more readily the overlapping themes by analyzing the mini-cases drawn from the primary case material. Mini-cases are short statements but rich enough in content to allow recognition of a major theme(s) and its (their) relationship to the case.11 As a generalization, the two conceptual components of mini-cases are the contextual elements and the abstract perspectives.12 Technically speaking, mini-cases are the components of the course architecture that can be summoned to create an instructional event. In modern parlance, mini-cases can be thought of as reusable instructional objects. Students should be provided with a reflective moment within each mini-case as a design element. Inclusion of a reflective question, data manipulation, or search for resources in each mini-case offers the student an opportunity to deepen her/his understanding of the theme and its relationship to the composite case.

Thematic Architecture for Finance Topics The key to applying the cognitive flexibility approach to advanced finance courses is viewing the case library in a nonlinear and multidimensional way. Arranging the cases in a hierarchical structure is antithetical to the cognitive flexibility model. Spiro, Vispoel, Schmitz, Samarapungavan, and Boerger (1987) note, “Successive cases are unlike successive parts of a text in that each case is an integral entity, rather than a continuation of the preceding case. The metaphor of the line of development is then superceded by such others as multistranded weaves, by the degree of overlap of many thematic elements” (p.193). Many course architectures could be developed to meet this requirement. However, the issue is one of practically, scalability, and reusability. This paper uses an off-the-shelf knowledge management software called the Personal Brain (hereafter referred as the Brain) to illustrate the cognitive flexibility approach to topic organization. The Brain plex is used purely for illustrative purposes; other products useful for this approach include Mind Manager by Mindjet and TreePad by Freebyte.13

Example Procedure The first step in creating the course architecture is to define the knowledge domain. In this example the knowledge domain is the valuation of healthcare service providers. For illustrative purposes the case library is limited to three comprehensive cases. The comprehensive cases include Henry Ford Health Systems (HFHS), Columbia Cedars Medical Center, and Partners Healthcare System, Inc. Table 1 lists the total number of thematic dimensions developed from the case library. The partial overlap indices for HFHS, Columbia Cedars Medical Center, and Partners Healthcare System, Inc. (A) are 1.00, 0.63, and 0.38, respectively.14 For simplicity, these indices are calculated as the equally weighted ratio of the themes included in a specific case to the total number of themes in the case library. More complex indices can be developed using Tversky’s (1977) contrast model. For example, 11

Mini-cases are not limited to one theme. The number of themes included in a mini-case depends on the richness of the comprehensive case and the course designers’ objectives. Including more than one theme in a mini-case is advantageous in illustrating the interrelationship among themes while still focusing on a segment of the case.

12

Conceptual and semantic elements within a mini-case are referred to as perspectives. Perspectives represent fundamental ideas, concepts, and definitions relating to the themes. Perspectives provide intra-case and inter-case connectedness. Intra-case perspectives connect basic or surface elements within the individual cases to the abstract or conceptual ideas that provide the learner with deeper understanding of these features. Inter-case linkages connect perspectives among the various comprehensive cases.

13

While the TreePad interface is a hierarchical menu, its drop-down features allow the student to enter a case library through different theme pathways.

14 Establishing a case library requires value judgments on the part of the instructional designer. Many cases in finance touch on all the themes listed in Table 1. However, for some cases certain themes are more prevalent than others. To a large extent, themes should be judged on the richness of their mini-cases.

8

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

9

varying judgmental weights can be assigned to different thematic dimensions (common and distinctive themes) in defining a similarity index. Table 1 - Knowledge Domain: Valuation of Healthcare Services

Thematic Dimensions

Partners Healthcare System

Description on Thematic Dimension

Henry Ford Health Systems (HFHS)

Columbia Cedars Medical Center

Business strategies

Organizational plans to expand services, acquire new technologies, meet governmental guidelines, achieve performance objectives, and confront competition

Established HMO, Health Alliance Plan; acquired Cottage, Wyandotte, and Kingswood hospitals; purchased Horizon Health Systems; developed joint venture with Mercy Health services and BonSecours Health Systems; and reorganized as HFHS.

New CEO examined possible nonprofit mergers and joint ventures. Two potential partners were approached, but negotiations were unsuccessful. Preliminary negotiation began with Columbia /HCA.

After a particularly frustrating meeting, a parking lot discussion set off a series of talks between MGH and BWH. Formal talks between the hospitals began in earnest. However, merging the two rivals was a formidable undertaking.

Economic environment

Stage of the business cycle as an operating background for organizational decisions, growth prospects for the aggregate GDP and healthcare sector, and atmosphere in the capital market

Sensitivity to cyclical changes in auto production and competitive strategies in the auto industry, particularly the goal to reduce healthcare cost per vehicle produced

Consolidation of local hospitals increased competition. Occupancy rates were declining. Other hospitals were in merger talks.

The greater Boston area faced significant excess capacity in hospital beds. Fifty-two acute care facilities were servicing a shrinking market. Community hospitals were expanding primary care services.

Financial planning

Financial decisions relating to product pricing, acquisitions and mergers, managing debt, working capital management, capital budgeting, accounting practice, and dividend policy

In 1998, reported a $43 million loss in operations, the first in its history; revenue growth limited by cost-effective measures in the auto industry

Profits were dwindling as operating income declined from a surplus of $609,000 to a loss of $6.9 million in 1991. Cash reserves had declined drastically. Investments were liquidated to cover debt payments.

Cost structure washigher than the non-teaching hospitals. The costs of HMS hospitals were 30% higher than Lahey and 65% higher than the lowest-cost community hospital. Capitation was limiting revenue growth.

Human resources

Issues encompassing compensation, diversity, grievances, morale, employment contracts, training, negotiations, hiring,

In 1998, substantial layoffs occurred. Changes in the organizational structure, external economic

Staffing levels decreased after the conversion. Between 1993 and 1995 staffing levels declined by

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

testing, and occupational safety

circumstances, financial position, and shortage of personnel impacted morale negatively.

Internal communications

Integration of information architecture, intranet, committee structure, resource groups, and project management

Degree of “corporate paralysis,” personalization of corporate issues, and communications breakdown between medical group and insurance providers

Organizational culture

Values of the organization, organizational personality, public perceptions, consensus building, and social responsibility

Vision as leader in patient care, medical education, and research. Mergers and acquisitions over several years created a multiplicity of cultures.

Leadership ethics

Patient care versus cost containment, accurate information disclosure, and faithful compliance with laws, regulations, and standards

CEO hailed as visionary and top deal-maker, appointed by President Clinton to the Federal Advisory Commission on Consumer Protection and Quality in the Health Care Industry

Regulatory environment

State and federal laws, licensures, regulatory rulings and procedures, medical boards and oversight committees, certifications, and standards

Balanced Budget Act of 1997 reduced Medicare payments costing the company $200 million over five years. The Personal Responsibility Act of 1996 drastically increased the number of uninsured patients.

10

13%. The reduction in staff affected employee morale.

County government initiated efforts to take over the hospital through the power of eminent domain. The hospital opposed the takeover.

The Brain plex is highly adaptable to the thematic mapping idea of the cognitive flexibility model. The plex houses the parent and child thoughts that form the Brain’s architecture. At the center of the initial plex is the knowledge domain, valuation of healthcare service providers. The case library consists of the three cases shown as child thoughts of the parent knowledge domain. This small library is for illustrative purposes only. Course libraries should include many more cases (experiences). Having numerous cases would expand the child nodes of the knowledge domain. Figure 4 shows the initial Brain plex.

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

11

Figure 4. Initial Brain Plex: Subject Domain

To illustrate the thematic architecture of the plex consider the case of Henry Ford Health Systems. Figure 5 shows the HFHS case as the active thought. The text box above the plex includes the complete case narrative (only a small portion of the case is actually shown). The student can refer to it at any time. The eight thematic dimensions are the child thoughts to the HFHS parent. The interconnections are readily apparent by the links running from the themes to the other cases. The nonlinearity of the thought structure means that students can enter the learning process with any theme. This aspect is very important in applying the cognitive flexibility approach. For each theme, there is a mini-case. Activating a theme, such as economic environment in Figure 6, reveals its definition and links to other aspects of the plex. The mini-case coded as EE:HFHS1 describes the impact of a slowdown in the auto industry on the profit position of HFHS. At the end of each mini-case, there is an opportunity for reflection (question, data application, or issue) entitled Your Thoughts, asking the student to relate the factual information to the net present value formula (abstract perspective). Providing a reflective question or issue encourages students to evaluate the meaning of the mini-case in the context of the current knowledge domain and past experiences. The reflective questions center on the net present value equation as a means of keeping the student aware of the equation’s context through which the different thematic dimensions are filtered. Advanced students should have the mechanics of the equation firmly in the taxon memory. The point here is to contextualize the equation to improve knowledge transfer. As shown in Figure 7, this mini-case also includes a perspective on

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

12

healthcare costs as a sibling thought. This perspective deals with the reversal in the growth rate of healthcare costs and explains how healthcare providers are coping with this issue. Each perspective has a reflective moment as well. Figure 5. Henry Ford Healthcare Comprehensive Case

The plex in Figure 5 lists the other cases on the far right. A set of links connects these cases to their themes and mini-cases. At any point in the plexes the student can follow the interconnecting pathways among the cases, themes, mini-cases, and perspectives. For example, clicking on CCMC moves the student to another plex, where the overlapping themes are child thoughts with links to all other relevant aspects in the knowledge domain. Five themes are prevalent in the Columbia Cedars case. Each of the themes has a link back to the other comprehensive cases. For example, moving to the financial planning theme reveals the mini-cases for all three comprehensive cases. The perspective, Physician’s Dilemma, shown for these mini-cases is actually an audio interview with a physician discussing the tradeoff between patient care and cost containment. Clicking this thought plays the audio using Real Player. A transcript of the interview is in the textbox at the top of the plex. Figure 8 shows the links of this perspective to other aspects of the knowledge domain. The plex provides the student with a plethora of learning pathways to follow. The student can literally enter the thought process anywhere she/he desires. However, all of the pathways are anchored to the thematic dimensions of the comprehensive cases.

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

13

Figure 6. The Economic Environment Theme

Instructional Scaffolding and Cognitive Flexibility The purpose of the present section is to reflect on the instructional design elements of the Brain, or other comparable interfaces, in the context of the theory of cognitive flexibility. Cognitive flexibility theory approaches a knowledge domain in terms of its thematic components. The thematic dimensions map a comprehensive case or case history just as the crisscrossing roadways map a geographical area. The more detailed the map the better the travel decisions. Mini-cases are the contextual basis of the themes. Mini-cases are the scenic vignettes that add detail to the map’s route. Just as the vignettes offer important information on which route to take, the mini-cases provide information for making financial decisions. The mini-cases’ perspectives give more detailed information like the signs along a roadway. Starting at the initial knowledge domain, the computer interface allows students to follow different financial decision paths. By taking different roads, the students gain experience that is transferable to their next journey.

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

14

Figure 7. Mini-case for the Economic Environment Theme

Transferring Financial Knowledge The ultimate goal of applying the cognitive flexibility approach to the presentation of finance cases is to enhance the ability of students to transfer knowledge from one contextual circumstance to another. Transfer also provides an important means for the instructors to evaluate their teaching effectiveness. However, the issue for finance instructors is what constitutes a legitimate demonstration of transfer, and what teaching techniques seem to foster transference. The traditional view of transfer is what Bradford and Schwartz (1999) call the sequestered problem solving / direct application approach (SPS/DA). Students apply their previous knowledge to a new set of circumstances that are the same or similar to those covered in other cases and solve or fail to solve a specific problem. Moore’s (1999) single-test assessment of knowledge transfer from finance cases is an example of SPS/DA. In this approach, students are sequestered in the sense that no opportunities exit to seek other resources, experiment, receive feedback from peers, or revise incorrect answers. Bradford and Schwartz blame this approach for the pessimistic view of transfer among educational researchers. They suggest an approach to transfer that focuses on the students’ preparation for future learning (PFL).

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

15

“When organizations hire employees, they do not expect them to have learned everything they need for successful adaptation. They want people who can learn, and they expect them to make use of resources (e.g., texts, computer programs, colleagues) to facilitate this learning. The better prepared they are for future learning, the greater the transfer (in terms of speed and/or quality of new learning).” (Bradford and Schwartz, p. 68)

Figure 8. Perspective from the Mini-case: Video Presentation Titled Physician’s Dilemma

In the present context, PFL focuses on students’ preparation to make financial decisions in new situations, not their ability to force the situation into a preconceived schema. PFL goes beyond replicative and applicative knowledge to what Bradford and Schwartz refer to as knowing with. Replication and application are taxon memory functions. Knowing with relies on the networked locale memory. Courses of action are assessed in terms of contrasting cases, experiences, and judgments. Transfer in this sense is the ultimate learning goal of the cognitive flexibility approach. PFL emphasizes multiple points of view in making financial decisions and the social construction of knowledge. Successful transfer is observed in the students’ tolerance of ambiguity, persistence in the face of difficulty, willingness to learn from others, sophistication of questioning, relinquishment of previously held assumptions, and degree of self-assessment. In contrast to SPS/DA, PFL assesses transfer as a learning process, not a one-test evaluation. The cognitive flexibility approach to learning fosters PFL transfer by presenting multiple representations of knowledge, confronting domain complexity rather than abstracting from it, stressing the interrelatedness of knowledge, and encouraging knowledge assembly rather than memorization of a hierarchical solution schema. For

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

16

example, the Brain plex interface embodies a resource-seeking methodology, emphasizing the interconnectedness of contextual-based themes. Self-appraisal is inherent in the reflective moments built into each component thought. What is the teacher’s role in implementing the PFL approach in a case course in finance? Studies by Gitman, Lewis, and Yates (1987), Roulac (1975), Simon (1979), Trahan (1993), and Viscione and Aragon (1978) outline the basic traits necessary for teachers to successfully use the PFL approach to transfer, although none really captures the essence. Gitman et al. relate the role of the teacher to the cognitive objectives of the course. They describe four teaching roles. The degree of direct teacher involvement in case discussions ranges from dominating for the demonstrator to collateral for the facilitator. Coaches and quarterbacks direct case discussions with varying degrees of participation. Demonstrators focus on lower-level cognitive skills, while the open forum of the facilitator is effective in achieving higher-order cognition. Gitman et al. do not address the issue of assessing transfer. However, the open-forum approach provides fertile ground for applying the PFL method. Rouclac sees the teacher as the initiator of the class discussion about a case. The teacher guides inquiries, stimulates questions, and acts as the moderator for a debate of the issues and solutions. On the affective side, the teacher functions as enthusiastic sponsor and motivator. Transfer is assessed by the direct-application SPS/DA method. Students prepare written case analyses. The evaluation of the social construction of knowledge in class or team discussions is not included as part of the evaluation process. According to Simon (1979) the teacher’s role is as moderator and discussion leader. His focus is on the social construction of knowledge, the give-and-take of peers making an important financial decision. Simon’s approach emphasizes the ambiguity of decision making, the need for intense discussion, and the avoidance of teacher-directed solutions. A PFL approach to assessment develops as a byproduct of Simon’s discussion pedagogy. “At all times the instructor must require the student to make detailed observations and above all to substantiate them. The substantiation helps to develop their analytical skills, as well as serve as a learning approach to other students. Substantiating their views often provokes other students into an open discussion, which is again, a major objective of the case method. Invariably, such open discussions swing the solution of the case from pro and con, and often to some of the other solutions.” (Simon, p. 66) Simon is describing the social construction of knowledge, which forms the basis of the PFL approach to transfer. After reviewing the literature on the role of the teacher in case courses, Trahan (1993) concludes, much in the vein of Gitman et al., that teacher participation depends on the course objectives and the experience of the students. Trahan suggests using a combination of lectures and cases in upper-level finance courses. Sequencing is from lectures to cases. This sequencing format is interesting in a PFL context. An experiment by Bradford and Schwartz (1999) indicated the usefulness of cases did not appear until students were given an opportunity to learn new information. The new information in their experiment was from lectures by experts in the field. Hence, they suggest going from cases to lectures. Trahan’s teamwork assignments provide a basis for assessment by the PFL methodology. Viscione and Aragon focus on the social construction of knowledge through open class discussion; however, they begin with highly directed conversations in the early classes. Detailed assignment questions are used to guide the students’ conversation in the early stages of the course. They purposely limit the discussion to these key points. As the course proceeds, the number of directed questions is reduced until finally a truly open discussion occurs. Their evaluation of transfer is fundamentally an SPS/DA approach. For example, their follow-up cases assess the students’ technical skills on specific concepts covered in other cases. Fragments of the PFL approach to the evaluation of transfer are contained in most of the teaching strategies discussed above, but the main focus is on SPS/DA. While SPS/DA tests current knowledge, it does not reveal the learning process. Application of the cognitive flexibility approach in case courses facilitates the use of PFL evaluation. As illustrated in the Brain interface, feedback and multidimensionality are at the heart of student learning. The approach suggested here is exploratory and reflexive. Self-assessment occurs at very node. Combining the Brain or a similar interface with either synchronous or asynchronous open discussion provides a framework for PFL assessment. Applying PFL requires the judgment of an expert, the teacher. It takes an expert to judge whether the right questions are ask, the appropriate financial data are used, reasonable financial strategies are suggested, the subject is

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

17

comprehended, cooperation is occurring, a realization of the need for new learning arises, ambiguity is confronted with confidence, and motivation is maintained in the face of difficulty. Assessing these factors evaluates the transfer of the learning process rather than merely factual information.15

Conclusions This paper applies the theory of cognitive flexibility to case-based learning in finance. Instructional designs grounded in the theory of cognitive flexibility aim to improve a learner’s ability to transfer his/her decision-making skills from one financial scenario to another. The approach to transfer suggested in this paper is more holistic than the general view in finance courses and requires greater judgment on the part of the teacher. Usually transfer is interpreted as reproducing declarative information from previous work on a specific examination or evaluative case. The summative evaluation proposed here relates to transfer of the learning process to decision-making situations. At a fundamental level, learning requires recall and understanding. Advanced learning involves the ability to transfer knowledge to novel situations. As Bradford and Schwartz (1999) reiterate, learning has three parts, knowing that (declarative knowledge), knowing how (procedural knowledge), and knowing with (knowledge transfer). Cognitive flexibility focuses on advanced learning; i.e., learning in the functional and capstone courses. The cognitive flexibility approach developed as a way of addressing the reduction bias in upper-level courses. Reduction bias results from applying a declarative pedagogy in advanced courses. Cognitive flexibility shifts the focus to a teaching philosophy emphasizing knowing with. The cognitive flexibility approach to course design has advantages to both the student and the instructor. Advance knowledge formation means recognizing meaningful patterns in diverse financial scenarios. These patterns are context dependent and not reproducible from a set of memorized facts. The multidimensional focus of the cognitive flexibility approach provides students with a process for confronting cross-case diversity and transferring knowledge to novel experiences. By revisiting the same themes in different contexts, from different conceptual perspectives, and in different time frames, students strengthen their ability to make complex financial decisions. From the instructor’s perspective, many of the advantages of the case method are enhanced by accepting the cognitive flexibility pedagogy. Confronting the complexity and ambiguity of financial decisions, sharing multiple points of view, giving up preconceived notions, asking relevant questions, contrasting similar decisions in varying environments, and constructing knowledge from multiple experiences are important aspects of the case method emphasized in the cognitive flexibility approach. Cognitive flexibility focuses on a multidimensional learning process (developing pathways from the taxon to the locale memory) in contrast to rote memorization (aimed at the taxon memory). As a consequence, instructors are challenged to shift from static assessment (sequential problem solving) to a more dynamic analysis of the students’ responses to the learning environment. The resulting instructional design for advanced finance courses is one of multiple representations of actual financial scenarios. The library of comprehensive cases defines the subject domain. Each comprehensive case is decomposed into mini-cases based on its thematic dimensions. Case themes are mapped within and across the cases. The mapping process is best accomplished through a hypermedia instructional design. The Personal Brain, an advanced knowledge management software, was used in this paper to illustrate the applicability of the cognitive flexibility pedagogy to upper-level finance courses. However, other software packages (e.g., Mind Manager and TreePad) are available as well.

References

15

Rubrics for the evaluation of these criteria are available from the author.

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

18

Bradford, J., and D. Schwartz. 1999. “Rethinking Transfer: A Simple Proposal with Multiple Implications.” Review of Research in Education, 24: 61-100. Bransford, J., A Brown, and R Cocking. 2001. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (expanded). Washington DC: National Academy Press. Brigham, E., D. Fischer, K. Johnson, and R. Jordan. 1973. “What Makes Short Cases Work in Basic Finance Courses? “Journal of Financial Education. 1: 65-68. Caine, R., and G. Caine. 1991. Making Connections: Teaching and the Human Brain. Alexandia, VA: ASCD. Center for Health Affairs. May 1997. The Community Impact of Hospital Mergers and Conversions. Clement, C. and D. Genter. 1991. “Systematicity as a Selection Constraint in Analogical Mapping.” Cognitive Science. 15: 89-132. Collins, A., and A. Stevens. 1983. “Goals and Strategies of Inquiry Teachers.” Advances in Instructional Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Dunkle, M., G. Schraw, and L. Bendixen. 1995. Cognitive Processes in Well-Defined Problem Solving. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Gibbons, A. and J. Nelson. 2000. “The Nature and Origin of Instructional Objects.” The Instructional Use of Learning Objects: Online Version. Retrieved May 17, 2002 from http://www.reusability.org/read/chapters/gibbons.doc Gilboa, I. and D. Schmeidler. 2001. A Theory of Case-Based Decisions. New York : Cambridge University Press. Gillani, B. 2002. Design of Multimedia Learning Environments: An Integrated Thematic Approach. Paper presented at the meeting of the IBM Make IT Easy Conference, San Jose, CA. Gitman, L. W. Lewis, and R. Yates. 1987. “An Approach for Assessing, Selecting, and Using Cases.” Journal of Financial Education. 16: 56-64. Golnaraghi, M. April 15, 1997. Partners Healthcare System, Inc. (A) (No. 9-696-062, pp. 1-23). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School. Green, J. June 16, 1995. Quorum Health Group, Inc. (No. 9-295-156). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School. Healthcare System Heal Thyself. 2000. Retrieved April 15, 2002, from http://www.sdlcg.com/sdlsite/Stories/HFHS/StoryHFHS.htm Jacobson, M. and R. Spiro. 1993. Hypertext Learning Environments, Cognitive Flexibility, and the Transfer of Complex Knowledge: An Empirical Investigation: Vol. 573. Technical Report (pp. 1-36). Champaign, IL: Center for the Study of Reading, University of Illinois. (ED 355508). Jonassen, D. 1997. “Instructional Design Models for Well-Structured and Ill-Structured Problem-Solving Learning Outcome.” Educational Technology: Research and Development.45(1): 656-694. Jonassen, D. and H. Kwon. 2001. “Communications Patterns in Computer-Mediated vs. Face-to-Face Group Problem Solving.” Educational Technology: Research and Development. 49(1): 35-52.

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

19

Jonassen, D., D. Dyer, K. Peters, T. Robinson, M. Harvey, M. King, et al. 1997. “Cognitive Flexibility Hypertext on the Web: Engaging Learners in Meaning Making.” Web-Based Instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publishing. Kester, G. 1999. “An Approach to Integrating Cases and Lectures in the Undergraduate Introductory Finance Course.” Journal of Financial Education. 25: 98-104. Kolodner, J. and M. Guzdial. 2000. “Theory and Practice of Case-Based Learning Aids.” Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Leamnson, R. 2000. “Learning as a Biological Brain Change.” Change. 32(6): 34-40. Leamnson, R. 2001. “Does Technology Present a New Way of Learning.” Educational Technology and Society. 4(1): 1-7. Moore, S. 1999. “Cases vs. Lectures: A Comparison of Learning Outcomes in Undergraduate Principles of Finance.” Journal of Financial Education. 25: 37-49. O’Keefe, J., and L. Nadel. 1978. The Hippocampus as a Cognitive Map. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press. Oliver, K. 1997. A Case-Based Pharmacy Environment: Cognitive Flexibility + Social Constructivism. Paper presented at the meeting of the Ed-Media, Ed-Telecom, Calgary, Canada. Resnick, M. 1996. “Beyond the Centralized Mindset.” Journal of Learning Sciences. 5(1):1-22. Roulac, S. 1975. “The Use of the Case in Financial Education.” Journal of Financial Education. 3: 63-71. Sherman, L. 1980. “A Proposed Method for Financial Case Analysis.” Journal of Financial Education. 8: 57-65. Shinn, N., D. Jonassen, and S. McGee. forthcoming. “Predictors of Well-structured and Ill-structured Problem Solving in an Astronomy.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Simon, S. 1979. “The Case Method Approach to Teaching Decisions Making and Analysis.” Journal of Financial Education. 8(Fall): 63-69. Spiro, R. 1977. “Remembering Information from Text: The"State of Schema" Approach.” Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Spiro, R. and J. Jehng. 1990. “Cognitive Flexibility and Hypertext: Theory and Technology for the Nonlinear Multidimensional Traversal of Complex Subject Matter.” Cognition, Education, and Multimedia Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Spiro, R., R. Coulson, P., Feltovich, and D. Anderson. 1988. “Cognitive Flexibility Theory: Advanced Knowledge Acquisition in Ill-structured Domains.” Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Spiro, R., P. Feltovich, M., Jacobson, and R. Coulson. 1991. “Knowledge Representation, Content Specification, and Development of Skill in Situation-specific Knowledge Assembly.” Educational Technology. 31: 24-33. Spiro, R., P. Feltovich, M. Jacobson, and R. Coulson. 1995. Cognitive Flexibility, Constructivism, and Hypertext: Random Access Instruction for Advanced Knowledge Acquisition in Ill-StructuredDomains . Retrieved September 6, 2000, from http://www.ilt.columbia.edu/ilt/papers/Spiro.html

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 3 • Number 1 • Winter 2004

20

Spiro, R., W. Vispoel, J. Schmitz, A. Samarapungavan, and A. Boerger. 1987. “Knowledge Acquisition for Application: Cognitive Flexibility and Transfer in Complex Content Domains.” Executive Control Processes in Reading. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Stohs, M. 1999. “Teaching Corporate Finance by Valuing a Corporation.” Journal of Financial Education. 25: 66-74. Trahan, E. 1993. “Bridging the Theory-practice Gap: An Integrated Case-study Approach.” Financial Practice and Education. 3: 19-22. Tversky, A. 1977. “Features of Similarity.” Psychological Review. 84(4): 327-353. Viscione, J. and G. Aragon. 1978. “The Case Method in Undergraduate Finance.” Journal of Financial Education. 6: 49-72. Wiley, D. 2000. Connecting Learning Objects to Instructional Design Theory: A Definition, a Metaphor, and a Taxamony. Retrieved April 2, 2002, from http://reusability.org/read/wiley.doc