What is the “Case Method”?

Teaching using case studies has typically been used in Business Schools, Law Schools, and Medical Schools but it is a technique being used by other disciplines to provide exposure to complex real world problems for which there is no “right” or “wrong” answer. At Waterloo, cases have been used in disciplines including Engineering, Biology, Accounting, Social Work, Environment and Business, English and others.

The traditional “Case Method” used in Business Schools involves a three stage process where:

  1. students are given the case and asked to work on it individually to come up with a recommendation or course of action (done outside of class time). The key here is for students to be able to justify and support their choices or decisions.
  2. students meet in small groups of 4 or 5 to discuss the case and their recommendations (done outside of class time) – the objective here is to share perspectives, not come to a consensus as a group
  3. the case is discussed in class with the entire class with the Professor acting as a facilitator to guide discussion.

The amount of learning increases over each stage with exposure to different perspectives.

Learning using the Case Method

While this is the typical method used in MBA programs where cases are used in most courses, it can be modified and adapted. For instance, students can read the case and prepare before class and class time can be used for small group discussion and then discussing the case as a large group (i.e. the entire class). It is important to communicate expectations to students about coming to class prepared as the quality of discussion depends on proper preparation. One technique to encourage students to prepare is to give them questions about the case to answer and submit before class begins.

These techniques of using small group work for peer teaching (i.e. small group work to share perspectives) and facilitating a discussion with the entire class can be adapted and used for other contexts than just cases.

If you’re interested in learning more about the Case Method or using cases in your course, contact Scott Anderson in the Centre for Teaching Excellence.

Waterloo Cases in Design Engineering also writes and supports the use of cases in Engineering courses.

References

Erskine, J., Leenders, M., and Mauffette-Leenders, L. (2012). Learning with Cases, 4th Edition, Ivey Publication Services, Richard Ivey School of Business, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.

Erskine, J., Leenders, M., and Mauffette-Leenders, L. (2003). Teaching with Cases, 3rd Edition, Ivey Publication Services, Richard Ivey School of Business, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.

Mauffette-Leenders, L., Erskine, J. and Leenders, M. (2001) Writing Cases, 4th Edition, Ivey Publication Services, Richard Ivey School of Business, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.

A Prelude to Pedagogy – Ilia Zenkov

LigImage of Neural Pathways in a Brainhts dim. A bright yellow beam illuminates the path to an exquisite 480kg creation: A Steinway & Sons Model D. The instrument’s golden cast-iron plate is striking against its velvet black finish. The silence is deafening. Energy and anticipation emanates from my fellow audience members. Without a semblance of warning enters Denis Matsuev – winner of the 11th International Tchaikovsky Competition at age 23. As if struck by lightning, the piano begins to produce a breathtakingly intricate melody.

A brief pause arrests your attention. Two seconds of profound silence follow, the air all but crackling with emotion surging through the concert hall.

The audience’s inaudible sigh of relief is palpable as the second movement begins. We slide back in our seats, relax our shoulders, and resume breathing.

However, there is more to be examined here than a simple pause. These interludes are not just a component of the spectacular solo put on by Matsuev this past weekend – rather, the very nature of these interruptions has a deep-seated rooting in the neurological wiring of our brains.

Event segmentation: “The process by which people parse a continuous stream of activity into meaningful events” and “A core component of ongoing perception, with consequences for memory and learning.” (Zacks & Swallow, 2007).  The brain naturally separates perceived information into spatial (Biederman, 1987) and temporal parts (Zacks & Swallow, 2007). For example, a lecture hall contains chairs, desks, a podium, and a board. The brain automatically segments your perception of the lecture hall into such components so as to better remember it – to better store it in memory. In much the same way, boundaries in time allow the brain to temporally segment your perception of, for example, a piano concerto. Untitled

A graph of BOLD (Blood Oxygenation Level Dependent signal) responses in various regions of the brain in a 10 second window surrounding a transition period, whereby the body rapidly increases blood flow to active neuronal tissues. From Sridharan et al (2007).

 

Perhaps by using these concepts and even combining them in lectures, we can better cater to the brain’s natural information processing circuitry and facilitate a greater degree of learning. According to Zacks & Swallow (2007), ”Those who identify appropriate event boundaries during perception tend to remember more and learn more proficiently.” By creating appropriate temporal and spatial boundaries in lectures – perhaps a minute break between two related notions, a short discussion period, or even carefully planning how to situate problems and solutions on a board – professors may well aid their students’ learning by approaching pedagogy with event segmentation in mind.

Stanford University School of Medicine researchers have shown that the peak of brain activity is at those moments of silence between transitions, when it indeed appears that nothing is happening (Sridharan et al, 2007).

fMRI images taken of subjects’ cognitive activity in the left and right sides of their brain while listening to music show that neurological signaling increases dramatically around the point between two movements. From Sridharan et al (2007). 

Perhaps most notable about this study is that while subjects’ attention to music differed, the anticipation of a transition point between movements was a universal phenomenon. Considering that the way our brains resolve our ongoing perception into discrete events is directly related to how our long-term memory updates from our working “short term” memory (Kurby & Zacks, 2008), this may very well be an effect worth exploring.

To encapsulate this compelling feature of the brain, I will provide a rather simplified analogy. Imagine a resonance effect: When you push a swing at just the right moment, you not only preserve the energy from its descent but add more energy to the system. However, if you push at the wrong moment you will not add energy. In fact, you will be taking it away! Similarly, we must use the brain’s inherent approach to information processing to our advantage, not to our detriment. Instead of longwinded lectures to drain students of motivation, it’s better to push them often and at just the right moments to promote a higher degree of learning. Event segmentation can help educators rethink the structuring and organization of their lessons, which in turn will help students expand on concepts and develop a more complete understanding of the ideas presented to them.

For further reading, this research and supplementary data is available online at these links:

Event segmentation

Segmentation in the perception and memory of events

Neural dynamics of event segmentation in music: Converging evidence for dissociable ventral and dorsal networks

References

Biederman, I. (1987, April). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94(2), 115–117

Kurby, C. A., & Zacks, J. M. (2008, February). Segmentation in the perception and memory of events. Trends in Cognitive Science, 15(2), 72-79.

Sridharan, D., Levitin, D.J., Chafe, C.H., Berger, J., & Menon, V. (2007, August). Neural dynamics of event segmentation in music: Converging evidence for dissociable ventral and dorsal networks. Neuron, 55(3), 521-532

Zacks, J. M., & Khena, M. S. (2007, April). Event segmentation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(2), 80-84.

Learning from Challenge and Failure – Julie Timmermans

C009637_teaching-conference-750x150-web-banner

This year’s University of Waterloo Teaching and Learning Conference theme, Leaning from Challenge and Failure, is an opportunity to open up discussions with our colleagues, our students, and ourselves around the beliefs we hold about challenges, setbacks, and failure in the context of teaching and learning at the University.

How do these beliefs shape the ways in which we teach, learn, and lead? How do we work to cultivate a culture that encourages risk-taking, growth through experimentation, and learning from our earnest attempts that lead to failure? What measures can we put in place to ensure that the members of our community have the opportunity to flounder, perhaps fail, and flourish?

During the Conference, we will explore not only challenges and failures, but the work of learning from these challenges and failures. The difficult cognitive and emotional work of learning from these experiences does not happen automatically or autonomously. It takes time and must be guided by people who care deeply about our development.

Airing our experiences of challenge and failure publically may certainly feel vulnerable and risky. But what might be the risks of not sharing these stories? Engineers Without Borders Canada (EWB) publishes annual ‘Failure Reports’ in which they highlight a dozen or so stories of failure – and learning from failure – in their international development efforts. This is risky in many ways – financially, for an organization that depends on contributions from donors; emotionally, for the people in the field sharing their stories. But EWB has determined that the benefits of disclosing these failures outweigh the costs of hiding them. Because hiding them does not help them, or other organizations, solve the problems which they are hoping to solve – poverty, access to clean water, food security, etc. This approach recognizes that we are involved in a collective endeavour to improve our communities.

As we began to introduce and discuss the Conference theme with others on campus, we discovered that conversations about failure, challenge, and resilience are already going on in residence rooms and in meetings rooms. Often, however, these rooms are behind closed doors. Through the Conference, we hope to bring these conversations out into the public spaces of our University – a learning organization – so that when we share our stories of innovation, experimentation, and publication, they integrate the stories of uncertainty, failed attempts, and rejections. Because the whole story of our successes often include failure. We hope that the Conference will be one space of many in which we can collectively explore our potential to learn and grow from challenge and failure.

For links to resources on learning from challenge and failure, including an excellent blog series from the Faculty of Arts Teaching Fellows and CTE’s Kyle Scholz, please visit the “Resources“section of the Conference website.

Register for the Conference

Better Teaching Through Chemistry — Dylon McChesney

analogyBecause I do research in philosophy, it might be confusing to some people why I talk about the hard sciences so much in relation to teaching. The reason is simple: philosophy is very abstract, and abstract things are not so easy to understand, thus I look to outside disciplines for strategies to concretize ideas. It turns out, of course, that philosophy has no monopoly on abstraction. Dorothy Gale (1999) shows that even elementary chemistry, that is, the kind of material covered in grade school, is abstract and “inexplicable without the use of analogies or models.” It is easy to assume that because a subject has to do with the natural world (for example) that it is de facto concrete, but this assumption is harmful to pedagogy.

Chemistry—like so many other things—is taught through dividing the world into hierarchical levels of abstraction: we establish the relationship between macro level phenomena like a glass of water, and the sub-micro level (H20) of that same phenomena. Simple, right? Well, as Gale notes in the aforementioned article, there are numerous obstacles to strengthening the understanding of each level and how they are interrelated. One obstacle is language choice. Many technical terms have different meanings when used in everyday communication, which can lead to a situation where a “student will be thinking one thing, the instructor another” (ibid.). Surely this situation is a nearly universal academic experience, a kind of growing pain for students and (hopefully) a wakeup call for instructors. Philosophers could be more self-aware that the term “realism” refers to a class of ideas that probably seem anything but realistic, and what counts as a valid argument in formal logic can look like a completely invalid argument from a common sense perspective. So, one thing we can all learn from Chemistry is to anticipate a struggle to “override” intuitive, non-technical definitions and concepts. From the privileged perspective of hindsight bias, these struggles might seem trivial, but they are not.

Perhaps the problem of technical language use is obvious, but what is likely less obvious is how we do—and how we should—use analogies in teaching. If Chemistry (taken here to be paradigmatic) is “inexplicable without the use of analogies or models” then we need to be very aware of the strengths and weaknesses of analogies. A convenient example is the Bohr “solar system” model of the atom. Because atomic particles are unobservable, they are much more difficult to conceptualize than dogs, trees, or even the components of cells which can at least be viewed through microscopes. But since planets are observable, a solar system is relatively easy to conceptualize. Drawing an analogy between a solar system and an atom (where the “star” is the nucleus and “orbiting planets” are electrons) allows for some visualization and a sort of functional template of understanding. This is extremely powerful! Unfortunately, sometimes these templates can cause misunderstandings. The Bohr model of the atom, despite its elegant simplicity, is not the best model. In fact, we now know it is misleading; yet for many the cognitive damage is already done and the inherent virtue of learning through connections will consequently be difficult to reverse.  Thus we have a ubiquitous example of how analogies can help and hurt all at once; although we need them to teach and learn, we also need to learn how to teach with them carefully. While it is unlikely that many of us will be able to anticipate specific paradigm shifts, such as transition from classical mechanics to quantum mechanics, we need to at least anticipate that some paradigm shifts are likely on the horizon. Analogies and models are indispensable, but promoting a critical stance and stressing the limitations of our best knowledge-generating tools might be even more so.

Although the objects of analysis differ substantially from discipline to discipline, ultimately we all face the same difficulty: making the leap from unknown to known. For both the arts and sciences this leap is theoretical and requires special attention to methodology. Since our theoretic knowledge of, well, almost everything, is so dependent on analogy, we are impelled to reflect on how it factors into our teaching in order to use it to its full potential.

References

Gale, D. 1999. Improving Teaching and Learning through Chemistry Education Research: A Look to the Future. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4).

Assessing Group Work Contribution – Monika Soczewinski

skydivingDuring my post-secondary education I always had some mixed feelings when I would find out that there was group work in a course I was taking. On the one hand, I was excited at the prospect of learning with and from my peers. On the other hand – as anyone who had a poor group experience in the past – I worried that some members in my group might not be as committed and would not put in effort into the project.

Group work in the classroom has many learning benefits. Students get an opportunity to work on some more generic skills, such as working in a team, collaboration, leadership, organization, and time management, among others. These are the kinds of skills that are valued by employers, and as competitiveness in the entrance into many professions grows, it is becoming increasingly important to teach them in university.

Despite these positive points, many students (and some instructors) have mixed feelings about group work, just as I did in my classes. One major concern in group work is that some students will not contribute equally to the work within their group – a behaviour called free-riding. According to studies, free-riding was identified as one of the greatest concerns students had about group work, across faculties and disciplines (Gottschall & Garcia-Bayonas, 2008; Hall & Buzwell, 2013). Since most of the work is done in a setting where the instructor cannot observe the group dynamics, instructors might have similar concerns about free-riders. The fairness of the assessment process might be compromised if students do not contribute equally but receive the same group mark.

One solution to determine how much individual students contributed to the group project is to ask group members to assess each other, in a process of peer assessment. In this situation, peers are providing feedback on their group members’ contribution levels to the project, not assessing the actual project itself. This is a popular technique because group members are in a position where they clearly see how their peers have contributed. Students are also able to decide what kinds of contributions were valuable in their unique group setting. This can include the forms of contribution that are more difficult to quantify, such as attitude, receptivity, insightfulness, organization, etc. Each student’s final grade is then a reflection of both the whole group project, as graded by the instructor, plus the peer assessment of their contribution. Each student will then come out with a unique grade.

Final Grade = group project (marked by instructor)

+/- individual contribution level (rated by peers)

Some considerations for peer assessment of group work contribution include:

  1. Set the expectations for group work: Start off the group projects with a class discussion about the expectations for each student, and why the peer assessment of contribution is important. Students will have a better understanding of their responsibilities in the group, and will know that contribution is an important factor in their grade.
  2. Criteria of the peer assessment: The best practice is to provide students with at least some guidance or criteria to help rate their peers (Goldfinch & Raeside, 1990; Wagar & Carroll, 2012). Depending on the type of project, the instructor can ask students to rate members based on contribution to each project task, they might ask for ratings on generic skills such as level of enthusiasm, organization, etc., or a combination of the two. Whatever criteria the instructor selects, it is beneficial to involve the class in the decision.
  3. Open peer assessment versus private peer assessment: Should students have an open discussion about group member contributions, or should they rate each other anonymously? According to Wagar and Carroll (2012), students show a preference for confidential peer assessment. Having an open peer assessment can detract from the sense of collaboration, and students might be afraid of openly criticizing and offending their peers.
  4. Timing of the peer assessment: Ideally, students should be given the criteria of the peer assessment at the start of the project, and fill it in once the project is completed. This allows students to understand from the start how they will be assessed, especially if they divide the work in unconventional ways that might do not fit into the criteria. Students can also pay closer attention to contributions throughout the project, and make more accurate assessments (Goldfinch & Raeside, 1990).

Visit the CTE Teaching Tips to read more about methods for assessing group work, and other group work resources.

 

References:

Goldfinch, J., & Raeside, R. (1990). Development of a peer assessment technique for obtaining individual marks on a group project. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 15(3), 210-231.

Gottschall, H., & Garcia-Bayonas, M. (2008). Student attitudes towards group work among undergraduates in business administration, education and mathematics. Educational Research Quarterly, 32(1), 3-29.

Hall, D., & Buzwell, S. (2013). The problem of free-riding in group projects: Looking beyond social loafing as reason for non-contribution. Active Learning in Higher Education, 14(1), 37-49.

Wagar, T. H., & Carroll, W. R. (2012). Examining student preferences of group work evaluation approaches: Evidence from business management undergraduate students. Journal of Education for Business, 87(6), 358-362.

A primer on case-based teaching – Stephanie Verkoeyen

6765941543_7e250390fb_m

Last semester I was allocated a half RA-ship to develop case studies for a second year course in the Faculty of Environment. Case studies have traditionally been applied within the fields of Engineering, Business, and Health Sciences, though their application is slowly starting to trickle into other disciplines. In the social science context that I was working in, students would be applying some of the concepts and ideas discussed in lecture to a real world situation in an attempt to offer insight into some of the complexities surrounding environmental decision-making, and to get students comfortable with there being no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answer.

Having never developed a case study previously, I struggled with where to start. Much of the material I read dealt directly with writing cases or teaching with cases, but did not go into detail on getting started with case-based teaching. As a result, I’ve put together a few steps to help anyone else who should wish to use case-based teaching in their own course.

  1. Integrating the case into your course

The first step is to decide how your case study fits into the existing course. This means thinking about the content it relates to (i.e. what concepts/ideas will students apply?), the amount of time required (some case studies are designed to be completed within a lecture, others span the duration of a course), as well as grade allocation, if there is to be an evaluation method attached. It is worth spending time mapping out these details because adopting a case-based teaching method can result in significant changes to how a course is taught.

  1. Defining the learning objectives

This step is closely tied to decisions relating to content. The goal here is to define why the case study is being presented – what are the goals of the discussion to take place? It is useful to refer back to lesson outcomes and/or course objectives to understand how a case study can be used to reinforce these aims. Or you may find that using a case study allows you to introduce new aims.

  1. Selecting the case

This may be the most challenging step of the whole process. Having clearly defined teaching objectives helps to simplify this stage by providing a set of parameters your case has to fit within. Once this has been established, there are a number of different suggestions about how to pick a good case example – it should be current, interesting or provocative, and/or relatable. When making my own selections, I tried to think about the range of views and opinions that might be expressed, the idea being that a broader range is more likely to stimulate discussion.

  1. Writing the case

Before writing the case, first define the questions students are expected to answer. This will determine what information needs to be included to allow students to answer these questions. Your teaching objectives will influence both the questions being asked and the presentation of the case. For example, if identifying what information is most relevant is an important learning outcome, you can also include irrelevant information in the case description. You need not restrict yourself to written materials when presenting a case study. Different multimedia, like videos and podcasts, can also be interesting alternative sources of information.

Once the case is developed, it is highly recommended that you create a teaching note. This document serves as a personal reference guide for how you will actually teach the case study, including information related to the planned agenda and your analysis of the case. The case analysis should consider the type of discussion that might result from each of the assignment questions, as well as follow-up questions that can be used to prompt this discussion.

For those interested in further information about case-based teaching, Teaching with Cases by Erskine, Leenders, and Mauffette-Leenders (2003) is an excellent resource. Developed for the Ivey School of Business, much of the information presented within can be adapted to a social science setting.

Graduate Student Teaching on Campus

As a Graduate Instructional Developer who works mainly with CTE’s Certificate in University Teaching (CUT) program, I have the privilege of observing graduate students teach in classrooms across campus. Over the past year, I’ve had the opportunity to observe over 35 classes taught by graduate students in all six faculties. I have been incredibly impressed by the quality of teaching by graduate students. They have taken concepts from CTE workshops (e.g., active learning, group work, formative assessment) and applied them directly in their teaching. They are using innovative teaching strategies, technologies, and engaging students in their lessons. The University of Waterloo community should be proud of graduate students’ dedication to, and passion for, teaching.

So how can we support graduate students in continuing to develop their teaching skills?

  • I think many of us would agree the best way to improve our teaching is to practice. In some departments, it’s difficult for graduate students to access teaching opportunities, but guest lectures are a great way to gain experience. If you’re teaching, consider asking the graduate students you supervise and/or your Teaching Assistants whether they’re interested in giving a guest lecture in the course.
  • If you know a talented Teaching Assistant or graduate student instructor, please nominate them for an award! Information regarding Graduate Student Teaching Awards can be difficult to find, so I’ve compiled a list here. If you know of any that are missing from this list, please post a comment and we will add them.

 

Graduate Student Teaching Awards

A) University-wide teaching awards

Amit & Meena Chakma Award for Exceptional Teaching by a Student (deadline: February)

B) Faculty-wide teaching awards

C) Department teaching awards

  • Biology – “Outstanding Graduate/Undergraduate Teaching Assistantship Award” (no link available)

 

Teaching Resources for Graduate Students: