Case Studies | “Debriefing” the case
Summarizing, concluding, and assessing
In 2000, the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy published a guide for professors looking to bring the case study method to their classroom, called “The ABCs of Case Teaching.” Prepared by Vicki L. Golich, Mark Boyer, Patrice Franko, and Steve Lamy — all pioneers in the case study field — the guide presented a comprehensive assessment of how professors can systematically deploy the case study method in their classroom.
At the end of this spring semester, and in the sixth part of our series spotlighting the book’s key insights, we look at how to wrap up a case discussion and assess students’ learning.
To ensure that students leave class having learned the objectives you selected for the day, you will need to “debrief” them. This is especially true when using case studies. It is best to vary your approaches to the final debrief. Using any one approach quickly becomes too routine, and student lose interest.
The following approaches to debriefing have a proven track record in case teaching.
Faculty-led summary and conclusion
Here you might return to your board space — or wherever you have kept track of the conversation — and highlight important elements of the case which connect specifics to general principles. At this point, you can choose to move from the specific to the general, or vice versa; the point is for students to see how different types of material support and relate to each other.
Explore more ISD resources on how to use case studies successfully.
Since most cases, are run inductively (specific to general), you should summarize with a deductive (general to specific) process at least once to keep students’ attention.
With this faculty-led approach, you — as instructor — will likely do most of the talking during the last ten to fifteen minutes of the class. This gives you the opportunity to segue into the next class session as well, explaining how this session has laid the groundwork for the next.
Student-defined summary and conclusion
A student-led process might require students to report out — from groups or as individuals — what they consider to be the summary and conclusion of the session. Or, you may ask them to take a few minutes and write down their thoughts. If you do the latter, since you want to be sure they get the lessons you have in mind, you should:
- be sure to ask a specific question — or set of questions — designed to elicit the kind of information you seek; and
- feed that information back to students either during the next class session or as a handout for the next class session.
Completing the feedback cycle
Asking students to evaluate the utility of a particular case — or set of cases — further invests them in the case process. If students are to “own” the material, they should have some voice in commenting on the outcome of the process. You can do a quick case evaluation immediately following each case, or an end-of-the-semester evaluation.
Assessment is critical to all good teaching, and especially so for case teaching. High-quality assessment connects faculty and students in a powerful way, and is key throughout the various stages of case teaching:
- preparation;
- participation;
- the case itself;
- the process of case teaching over the course of the semester; and
- whether students are learning more or less using cases.
Assessment can help students evaluate their own learning — what they are learning, how they learn best, and what they can do to enhance their learning. Assessment helps faculty evaluate their teaching performance and informs course and pedagogy revisions. Assessment conducted properly — ongoing, purposeful, including appropriate feedback loops — engages students, enhances mutual accountability, and keeps student learning at the center of the enterprise.
Although too often resisted or considered only as an afterthought, effective assessment is critical to the teaching and learning process overall.
Sources:
[1]: Angelo, “Relating Exemplary Teaching;” T.A. Angelo, “Ten Easy Pieces: Assessing Higher Learning in Four Dimensions,” New Directions for Teaching and Learning Classroom Research: Early Lessons from Success, №46, (Summer 1991), pp. 17–31.
[2]: T.A. Angelo, ed., Classroom Research: Early Lessons from Success — New Directions for Teaching and Learn- ing, №46 (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1991); T.A. Angelo and K. Patricia Cross, Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers, 2nd Edition (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1993); K. Patricia Cross, “New Lenses on Learning,” About Campus, Vol. 1, №1 (March/April 1996), pp. 4–9; K. Patricia Cross, “Involvement in Teaching,” Paper presented at the Fifth Annual Faculty Development Institute, University of California, Berkeley, August 11, 1993; K. Patricia Cross, “Classroom Research: Helping Professors Learn More About Teaching and Learning,” in Peter Seldin and Associates, How Administrators Can Improve Teaching (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1990), pp. 122–42; Gilbert J. Cuevas, “Feedback from Classroom Research Projects,” Community/Junior College Vol. 15 (1991), pp. 381–90; Regina Eisenbach, Renée Curry, and Vicki L. Golich, “Classroom Assessment Across the Disciplines,” New Directions for Teaching and Learning, №75 (Fall 1998), pp. 59–66; Michael J. Fratantuono, “Evaluating the Case Method,” International Studies Notes, Vol. 19, №2 (1994), pp. 34–44.
Read more on case studies from ISD:
