The key takeaways from this research are Butterfly model, AoT, TTP and DeStoRe.
146
Expanding on these takeaways of the EnhanceEdu design story, Figure 7.1 shares multiple threads of future work possibilities:
The Butterfly model thread allows for smart design artifacts leading to smart learning environments, with appropriate metadata to guide these environments.
There can be further course development in computer science, IT and electronics en-gineering courses using the Butterfly model and energizing and empowering teach-ers to use these courses in a blended learning mode, conducting studies of cognitive load reduction and personalization.
For group or team-oriented work which began in the TTP, the POGIL (Process oriented guided inquiry learning) thread can be further developed. The experiments with such learning can be furthered, building on existing work (Kode & Cherukuri, 2014), and can expand to build an interactive POGIL environment (iPOGIL), leading to smart learning environments for both individuals and groups of learners through learning technology. iPOGIL could help determine in real time the state of under-standing of the entire class and to fine-tune class teaching and learning processes.
Further research could be done both on iPOGIL and on the scholarship of teaching
Figure 7.1 Future work based on research threads seeded in the regional context
147 and learning related to POGIL, studying different models for classroom use for the highest impact. Further team-based learning and assessment can also be conducted.
The Art of Teaching (AoT) thread can be followed through to further improve AoT and conduct deeper studies into the joy of teaching already initiated in En-hanceEdu. Studies can be conducted of reflecting teachers and scholarly teaching, analyzing what works in the classroom and conducting studies on “Why I’m teach-ing what I’m teachteach-ing” (WIT) and “Why I’m learnteach-ing what I’m learnteach-ing” (WIL). An-other thread could involve the further application of multiple change strategies to effect change in the education system.
The learning analytics (PIII) thread can be followed on collecting student data to understand learning behavior, measuring engagement in the online STEP/CIT pro-gram and classifying students based on their interests and background. Such data collected and analyzed combined with metrics will yield a better understanding of student engagement and identification of success factors leading to more effective student enhancement programs. These can be developed for and applied to various possible other threads, such as personalization and customization, curricular analyt-ics and smart learning environments.
The TTP thread so thoroughly discussed in this dissertation can be followed through for further studies on the proposed stakeholder engagement model with an improved smart learning environment. A Level 3 evaluation can also be conducted to improve the trained teachers’ impact on student learning. Further studies on the engineering and management of information technology education can be con-ducted. Further, use of positive deviance (Heath & Heath, 2010; Singhal et al., 2010) for creating higher impact in the faculty development communities can be explored.
The DeStoRe thread can be followed through to examine various applications of the DeStoRe method to enhance education, strategy planning and implementation, radical innovation creation and the application of the EnhanceEdu model in different contexts. DeStoRe needs to be explored further to bring rigor to design stories through systematic use of DSR. Also, future work includes further elaboration of De-StoRe, its features, methodology, uses and benefits. Another step would be to exam-ine more design stories using DeStoRe approach. In particular, efforts to improve information technology education in India and beyond, using the EnhanceEdu model, may be furthered using the artifacts created as concrete steps in a design story.
My hope is that many PhD students will take up work on these and other possible threads and take the research in each of the threads to useful conclusions. By apply-ing the ideas in this thesis to their own contexts, and by developapply-ing new designs and models to enhance education in India and other countries, a large body of contextual work would be produced that can influence policy and transform education. It is
148
with this hope that I embarked on this doctoral research, and I have enjoyed this journey tremendously.
I am very positive about this research and the EnhanceEdu design story and its potential for application. Given the results, the feedback and the enthusiasm of all the stakeholders and participants, be they management, teachers, students or EnhanceEduians, the present applications need to be more widespread. I am confident that this work when replicated across different regions and different disciplines will yield positive results with tangible benefits to teachers, students, colleges, industry and society.
149
8 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Agarwal, P. (2006). Higher education in India: The need for change (Working Paper, No. 180). New Delhi: Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER).
Altbach, P. G. (2003). Centers and peripheries in the academic profession: The special chal-lenges of developing countries. In The decline of the Guru (pp. 1–21). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Amrita Vishwa Vidhyapeetham (n.d.) A-VIEW: Amrita Virtual Interactive E-learning World (Version 3.5) [Software]. Available from http://aview.in/aview
Ananth, M. S. (2011). National programme on technology enhanced learning (NPTEL): The vision and the mission. In Technology for Education (T4E), 2011 IEEE International Con-ference on (p. 8). IEEE.
Archer, L. (1984). Systematic method for designers. In N. Cross (Ed.), Developments in design methodology. London: John Wiley:.
Aspiring Minds (2011). National employability report: Engineering graduates. (Annual report 2011). Gurgaon: Aspiring Minds.
Aspiring Minds (2014). National employability report: Engineers. (Annual report 2014). Aspiring Minds.
Aspiring Minds (2016). National Employability Report. (Annual Report 2016). Aspiring Minds.
Atrey, M., Parmar, M., Shiriskar, R., & Dhebar, K. (2016). T10kT: Scaling up professional de-velopment of teachers: Evidences and recommendations from large scale implementa-tion. In 2016 International Conference on Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineer-ing (LaTICE) (pp. 81–88). IEEE.
Au, Y. (2001). Design science: The role of design science in electronic commerce research.
Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 7.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Macmillan.
Barnett, E., & Casper, M. (2001). A Definition of "Social Environment". American Journal of Pub-lic Health, 91(3).
Berges, M., Mühling, A., & Hubwieser, P. (2012, November). The gap between knowledge and ability. In Proceedings of the 12th Koli Calling international conference on computing educa-tion research (pp. 126-134). ACM.
Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2010). Applying constructive alignment to outcomes-based teaching and learning. In Training material for “quality teaching for learning in higher education” workshop for master trainers (pp. 23–25). Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Higher Education.
Biggs, J. B. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. UK: McGraw-Hill Education.
Blom, A., & Saeki, H. (2011). Employability and skill set of newly graduated engineers in India. The World Bank.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Vol. 1: Cognitive domain (pp. 20–24).
New York: McKay.
150
Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Instruction and curriculum. Regional education la-boratory for the Carolinas and (Virginia Topical Papers and Reprints, Number 1). Eval-uation Comment, 1(2), n2.
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain (No. 373.19 C734t). New York: D. McKay.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991).
Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Edu-cational Psychologist, 26(3–4), 369–398.
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. 1991 ASHE-ERIC higher education reports. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, The George Washington University.
Borrego, M., & Henderson, C. (2014). Increasing the use of evidence-based teaching in STEM higher education: A comparison of eight change strategies. Journal of Engineering Edu-cation, 103(2), 220–252.
Boud, D., & Feletti, G. (1997). Changing problem-based learning: Introduction to the second edition. In D. Boud & G Feletti (Eds.), The challenge of problem-based learning (pp. 1–14).
London: Kagan Page Limited.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (1999). How people learn: Mind, brain, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
Bregman, P., & Jacobson, H. (2000). Searching for answers: Yes, you can measure the business results of training. Training 38(8), 68–72.
Bringula, R. P., Balcoba, A. C., & Basa, R. S. (2016). Employable Skills of Information Technol-ogy Graduates in the Philippines: Do Industry Practitioners and Educators have the Same View? In Proceedings of the 21st Western Canadian Conference on Computing Educa-tion (p. 10). ACM.
Carter, M., Vouk, M., Gannod, G. C., Burge, J. E., Anderson, P. V., & Hoffman, M. E. (2011).
Communication genres: Integrating communication into the software engineering cur-riculum. In 2011 24th IEEE-CS Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEE&T) (pp. 21-30). IEEE.
Chism, N. V. N., & Szabó, B. (1997). How faculty development programs evaluate their ser-vices. Journal of Staff, Program, and Organization Development, 15(2), 55–62.
Cox, M. D. (2004). Introduction to faculty learning communities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2004(97), 5–23.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.
Sage publications.
Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, 209, 240.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement. Education Policy Anal-ysis Archives, 8, 1.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Profes-sional learning in the learning profession. Washington, DC: National Staff Development Council, 12.
151 Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and
the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
Depieri, A. A., & de Deus Lopes, R. (2014, April). Students' skills perceptions for engineering.
In 2014 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 402-407). IEEE.
Desimone, L. (2002). How can comprehensive school reform models be successfully imple-mented? Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 433–479.
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: To-ward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199.
Desimone, L. M., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of pro-fessional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81–112.
Dewey, J. (1938). The theory of inquiry. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Dill, D. D. (1999). Academic accountability and university adaptation: The architecture of an academic learning organization. Higher Education, 38(2), 127–154.
Dougiamas, M., & Taylor, P. (2003). Moodle: Using learning communities to create an open source course management system. In EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 171–178). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Edu-cation (AACE).
D'Souza, M. J., & Rodrigues, P. (2015). Extreme pedagogy: An agile teaching-learning meth-odology for engineering education. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 8(9), 828–
833.
Duveskog, M., Kemppainen, K., Bednarik, R., & Sutinen, E. (2009). Designing a story-based platform for HIV and AIDS counseling with Tanzanian children. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 27–35). ACM
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1040.
Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House Digital, Inc.
Edelson, D. C. (2002). Design research: What we learn when we engage in design. The Journal of the Learning sciences, 11(1), 105–121.
Eekels, J., & Roozenburg, N. (1991). A methodological comparison of the structures of scientific research and engineering design: Their similarities and differences. Design Studies, 12(4), pp. 197–203.
Emerson, J. D., & Mosteller, F. (2000). Development programs for college faculty: Preparing for the twenty-first century. Educational Media and Technology Yearbook, 25, 26–42.
Ewell, P. T. (1997). Strengthening assessment for academic quality improvement. Planning and management for a changing environment: A handbook on redesigning postsecondary institu-tions, 360–381.
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2009). Active learning: An introduction. ASQ Higher Education Brief, 2(4), 1–5.
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2010). The National Effective Teaching Institute: Assessment of im-pact and implications for faculty development. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(2), 121–134.
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blasé, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la
152
Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231).
Fulcher, A. J., & Hills, P. (1996). Towards a strategic framework for design research. Journal of Engineering Design, 7(2), 183–193.
Fullan, M. (1985). Change processes and strategies at the local level. The Elementary School Jour-nal, 85(3), 391–421.
Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change. Routledge.
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes pro-fessional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.
Gibbs, G., & Coffey, M. (2004). The impact of training of university teachers on their teaching skills, their approach to teaching and the approach to learning of their students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(1), 87–100.
Goel, S. (2006a). Investigations on required core competencies for engineering graduates with reference to the Indian IT industry. European Journal of Engineering Education, 31(5), 607–
617.
Goel, S. (2006b). Competency focused engineering education with reference to IT related dis-ciplines: Is the Indian system ready for transformation? Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 5, 27–52.
Goldstein, J., Hazy, J., & Lichtenstein, B. (2010). Complexity and the nexus of leadership: Leveraging nonlinear science to create ecologies of innovation. Springer.
Gow, L., & Kember, D. (1993). Conceptions of teaching and their relationship to student learn-ing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 20–23.
Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. Teachers College Press, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Gupta, D., & Gupta, N. (2012). Higher education in India: structure, statistics and chal-lenges. Journal of Education and Practice, 3(2).
Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching, 8(3), 381–391.
Guskey, T. R. (2009). Closing the knowledge gap on effective professional development. Edu-cational Horizons, 87(4), 224–233.
Hawley, W. D., & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of effective professional development: A new consensus. Teaching as the Learning Profession: Handbook of Policy and Practice, 127, 150.
Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2010). Switch: How to change when change is hard. New York, NY.
Henderson, C., Beach, A., & Finkelstein, N. (2011). Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(8), 952–984.
Henderson, C., & Dancy, M. H. (2007). Barriers to the use of research-based instructional strat-egies: The influence of both individual and situational characteristics. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 3(2), 020102.
Herbsleb, J., Zubrow, D., Goldenson, D., Hayes, W., & Paulk, M. (1997). Software quality and the capability maturity model. Communications of the ACM, 40(6), 30–40.
Heslop, L. (2014). Understanding India: The future of higher education and opportunities for interna-tional cooperation. British Council.
153 Hevner, A., March, S. T., & Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science research in information
systems. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 28, 75–105.
Hevner, A. R. (2007). A three cycle view of design science research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 4.
Hevner, A. R., & March, S. T. (2003). The information systems research cycle. Computer, 36(11), 111–113.
Ho, A., Watkins, D., & Kelly, M. (2001). The conceptual change approach to improving teach-ing and learnteach-ing: An evaluation of a Hong Kong staff development programme. Higher Education, 42(2), 143–169.
Huberman, M. (1995). Networks that alter teaching: Conceptualizations, exchanges and exper-iments. Teachers and Teaching, 1(2), 193–211.
Huberman, M., & Crandall, D. (1983). People, policies and practice: Examining the chain of school improvement. Implications for action, a study of dissemination efforts supporting school improvement, 9. Andover, MA: The Network Inc.
Johannesson, P., & Perjons, E. (2012). A design science primer. CreateSpace.
Kamppuri, M., Tedre, M., & Tukiainen, M. (2006). Towards the sixth level in interface design:
Understanding culture. Proceedings of the CHI-SA, 69–74.
Kannan, K., & Narayanan, K. (2015). A structural equation modeling approach for massive blended synchronous teacher training. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 1.
Karri, S. K. R., & Kode, S. (2011). Butterfly model: An innovative way to deliver and personal-ize content in the "learning by doing" methodology. In Technology for Education (T4E), 2011 IEEE International Conference on (pp. 103–108). IEEE.
Kasurinen, J., Mirzaeifar, S., & Nikula, U. (2013). Computer science students making games: a study on skill gaps and requirement. In Proceedings of the 13th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (pp. 33-41). ACM.
Kember, D., & Gow, L. (1994). Orientations to teaching and their effect on the quality of stu-dent learning. The Journal of Higher Education, 65(1), 58–74.
Kennedy, M. M. (1998). Form and substance in in-service teacher education (Research Monograph No. 13). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
Kezar, A. (2001). Understanding and facilitating change in higher education in the 21st cen-tury. ERIC Digest.
Khare, M. (2014). Employment, employability and higher education in India: The missing links. Higher Education for the Future, 1(1), 39–62.
Kirkpatrick, D. (1979). Techniques for evaluating training programs. Training and Development Journal 33(6),78–92.
Kode, S., & Cherukuri, J. (2014). Creating a learner centric environment through POGIL: Our experience in engineering and management education in India. In Technology for Edu-cation (T4E), 2014 IEEE Sixth International Conference on (pp. 72–75). IEEE.
Kode, S., Nagaraju, K., Gollapudi, L., & Reddy, S. K. (2013). Using MediaWiki to increase teaching expertise in engineering colleges. In Technology for Education (T4E), 2013 IEEE Fifth International Conference on (pp. 204–205). IEEE.
Kode, S., & Nori, K. V. (2016). Enhancing IT education: Education technology for teacher training. In 2016 International Conference on Learning and Teaching in Computing and En-gineering (LaTICE) (pp. 94–98). IEEE.
154
Kode, S., & Reddy, K. S. K. (2012). Effective and personalized content delivery through the Butterfly model. In Technology Enhanced Education (ICTEE), 2012 IEEE International Conference on (pp. 1–6). IEEE.
Kode, S., & Reddy, S. K. K. (2010). Enhancing the learning experience by addressing the needs of the learner through customization and personalization in the learning by doing methodology. In Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), 2010 IEEE 10th International Conference on (pp. 274–275). IEEE.
Kode, S., & Sutinen, E. (2017). Enhancing computing education in India: A design story. In 2017 International Conference on Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering (LaTICE) (pp. 82–86). IEEE.
Kode, S., Thadasina, S. R., Reddy, S. K., Nagaraju, K., & Gollapudi, L. (2012). Adapting to learning by doing (LBD): Challenges faced in implementing the student enhancement program (STEP). In Technology for Education (T4E), 2012 IEEE Fourth International Con-ference on (pp. 1–6). IEEE.
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70.
Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2):59-67.
Kotter, J. P., & Schlesinger, L. A. (2008). Choosing strategies for change. Harvard Business Review 86(7/8):130-139.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–218.
Krishnan, M. S. (2009). NPTEL: A programme for free online and open engineering and science education. In Technology for Education, 2009. T4E'09. International Workshop on, 1–5. IEEE Kumar, A., & Ambrish, K. (2015). Higher education: Growth, challenges and opportunities.
International Journal of Arts, Humanities and Management Studies, 1(2), 19–32.
Lerman, S., & Potts, J. P. (2006). Unlocking knowledge, empowering minds: MIT's Open-CourseWare project. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 23(5), 11–15.
Levinson-Rose, J., & Menges, R. J. (1981). Improving college teaching: A critical review of re-search. Review of Educational Research, 51(3), 403–434.
Lewin, K. (1947). Group decision and social change. Readings in Social Psychology, 3(1), 197–
211.
Lewis, L. H., & Williams, C. J. (1994). Experiential learning: Past and present. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1994(62), 5–16.
Lugmayr, A., Sutinen, E., Suhonen, J., Sedano, C. I., Hlavacs, H., & Montero, C. S. (2017).
Serious storytelling – A first definition and review. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 76(14), 15707–15733.
March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995). Design and natural science research on information tech-nology. Decision Support Systems, 15(4), 251–266.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) (n.d.). MIT OpenCourseSoftware (Version x.x) [Software]. Available from http://ocw.mit.edu
Matusovich, H., Streveler, R., & Miller, R. (2009). What does motivation really mean? An ex-ample from current engineering education research. In Proceedings of the Research in En-gineering Education Symposium, Palm Grove, QLD
155 Mazoué, J. G. (2012). The deconstructed campus. Journal of Computing in Higher Education,
24(2), 74–95.
Mettetal, G. (2001). Classroom action research as problem-based learning. In B. B. Levin (Ed.), Energizing Teacher Education and Professional Development with Problem-based Learning (pp. 108-120). ASCD.
Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) (2016). All India survey on higher edu-cation (AISHE). New Delhi: Ministry of Human Resource Development.
Moodle (n.d.) Moodle (Version 2.2) [Software]. Available from https://moodle.org
Moore, M. G. (1999). Monitoring and evaluation: Editorial. The American Journal of Distance Education 13(2).
Mramba, N., Apiola, M., Kolog, E. A., & Sutinen, E. (2016). Technology for street traders in Tanzania: A design science research approach. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 8(1), pp. 121–133
Myller, N., & Nuutinen, J. (2006). JeCo: Combining program visualization and story weaving.
Informatics in Education-International Journal, 5, 267–276.
NASSCOM-McKinsey. (2005). Extending India's Leadership of the Global IT and BPO Industries.
(Executive Summary). NASSCOM-McKinsey.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creation company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
Norman, D. A., & Verganti, R. (2014). Incremental and radical innovation: Design research vs.
technology and meaning change. Design Issues, 30(1), 78–96.
Norton, L., Richardson, T. E., Hartley, J., Newstead, S., & Mayes, J. (2005). Teachers’ beliefs and intentions concerning teaching in higher education. Higher Education, 50(4), 537–
571.
Novak, G. M., Patterson, E. T., Gavrin, A., & Enger, R. C. (1998). Just-in-time teaching: Active learner pedagogy with WWW. In IASTED International Conference on Computers and Ad-vanced Technology in Education (27–30). IASTED.
Nylen, A., & Pears, A. (2013). Professional communication skills for engineering professionals.
In Frontiers in Education Conference, 2013 IEEE (pp. 257–263). IEEE.
Owen, C. L. (1997). Understanding design research: Toward an achievement of balance. Special Issue of Japanese Society for the Science of Design, 5(2), 36–45.
Patil, A., & Codner, G. (2007). Accreditation of engineering education: Review, observations and proposal for global accreditation. European Journal of Engineering Education, 32(6), 639–651.
Paulk, M. (1993). Capability maturity model for software. Encyclopedia of Software Engineering.
Paulk, M. C. (1997). Software process proverbs. Crosstalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engi-neering, 10(1), 4–7.
Paulk, M. C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M. B., & Weber, C. V. (1993). The capability maturity model for software. Software Engineering Project Management, 10, 1–26.
Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science re-search methodology for information systems rere-search. Journal of Management Infor-mation Systems, 24(3), 45–77.
Perry, R. P., & Smart, J. C. (Eds.). (1997). Effective teaching in higher education: Research and prac-tice. Agathon Press.
156
Planning Commission. (2012). Faster, sustainable and more inclusive growth. An approach to the 12th five-year plan. Government of India.
Plowman, D. A., Solansky, S., Beck, T. E., Baker, L., Kulkarni, M., & Travis, D. V. (2007). The role of leadership in emergent, self-organization. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 341–
Plowman, D. A., Solansky, S., Beck, T. E., Baker, L., Kulkarni, M., & Travis, D. V. (2007). The role of leadership in emergent, self-organization. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 341–