Journal of Science Teacher Education (2007) 18:423–430 DOI 10.1007/s10972-007-9056-5

Ó Springer 2007

An Exploration of the Relationship Between Case Study Methodology and Learning Style Preference Judy Beck School of Education, University of South Carolina Upstate, 800 University Way, Spartanburg, SC 29680, U.S.A. e-mail: [email protected]

The purpose of this study was to look at the use of the case method approach in relation to the preferred learning style of students in an elementary science methods course. Ninety-seven students enrolled in an elementary and elementary/middle level science methods course at Midwest university participated in this study. Participants completed a Barsch Learning Styles Inventory to determine learning style preference. At the end of the semester, students were asked to rate the eight identified teaching methods utilized throughout the semester as to their effectiveness. This research shows that pre-service teachers found the use of case studies as potentially useful in helping them learn and process course content no matter what learning style preference the pre-service teacher has.

Introduction TodayÕs teacher education programs are moving away from the teacher as technical decision-maker model toward a reflective practitioner model of teacher preparation. In this model, pre-service teachers must develop the skills necessary to be reflective practitioners who view teaching as a life-long learning process. Recent reform documents such as Science for All Americans (American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1989) and the National Science Education Standards (National Research Council, 1996) support this position. Teacher educators have incorporated case study methodology to develop these reflectivity skills in pre-service teachers. But do all types of learners receive the purported benefits of the case study methodology and therefore, develop the skills necessary to be a reflective practitioner? The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between the utilization of the case method pedagogy in an elementary methods course and the learning style preference of pre-service teacher candidates.

424

BECK

Introduction to Case Method Pedagogy The case method approach is not new to teacher education but has received renewed interest as a pedagogical tool since ShulmanÕs wake-up call to teacher educators in his 1985 presidential address to the American Educational Research Association (as cited in Merseth, 1996). This approach to teacher education mirrors the school reform initiatives that are grounded in the constructivist theory of learning. This theory underlies the belief that knowledge is constructed, is built on prior knowledge, is coupled with experience, is transformed, and is evolving (Harrington, 1991). Teacher education programs based on this philosophy move beyond the declarative (what) and procedural (how) knowledge of teaching to incorporate the conditional (contextual) knowledge of teaching and learning. The case method approach can be an effective way to present conditional knowledge, which is often not explicitly incorporated within a teacher education program (Harrington, 1991). Koballa and Tippins (2000) argue that cases can be used to ‘‘explicate and clarify the professional knowledge of teachers’’. Cases can help pre-service teachers make connections between theory and practice as well as be exposed to the uncertainty and complexity of science teaching (Arellano et al., 2001). Ertmer, Newby, and MacDougal (as cited in Koballa & Tippins, 2000) make the point that the literature on case-based pedagogy makes the general assumption that ‘‘cases are more motivating than traditional methods for all learners, that they promote better transfer in all learners, and that they can transform all learners into better problem solvers and critical thinkers.’’ But is the case method approach beneficial to all learners? One way to define all learners is through the lens of learning styles research. Learning Styles Learning styles research is not new to educational circles either. Much work has been done to apply the theory of Jung (1927) who noted differences in the way people perceive information, the way they make decisions, and their level of reflection or action while interacting with others. Briggs and Myers (1977) explored JungÕs theory and developed the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator which has become a well-known and well-respected psychological instrument designed to permit people to learn about their own personality type. Educators have benefited from the work of Hanson and Silver (1996) who have developed learning and teaching style applications based on JungÕs work. Two well-known researchers in the field, Dunn and Dunn (1979), describe learning styles as ‘‘the manner in which at least 18 different elements of four basic stimuli affect a personÕs ability to absorb and to retain information, values, facts, or concepts.’’ One aspect of learning style in which differences can be noted is the way in which learners give and receive

CASE STUDY METHODOLOGY AND LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCE

425

messages (perception). The channels through which perception occurs are called modalities and include visual, auditory, and kinesthetic. Visual learners seek out the written word, pictures, charts, and graphs to help them understand and remember new information. Auditory learners remember what they hear and what they themselves express verbally. Kinesthetic learners want to touch and be physically involved in what they are learning. Dunn, Dunn, and Price (1975) developed the Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) as a self-report by students to measure preference for using one or more modalities for learning. Ertmer, Newby, and MacDougal (1996) assert that the literature on case-based pedagogy implies that this methodology is beneficial for all types of learners. Koballa and Tippins (2000) state that there is a need for further research into whether or not case-based instruction is indeed valuable for all learners. This paper continues the research on the usefulness of case-based instruction as it applies to different types of learners. It analyzes the use of the case method approach in relation to the preferred learning style of students in an elementary science methods course. Specifically, the author was interested in determining whether a particular learning style would show preference for the case method approach more than another. Methodology Participants and context Ninety-seven students enrolled in four different sections of a science methods course during the 2001–2002 academic year participated in this study. All participants were students in an elementary and elementary/ middle level teacher preparation program at Midwest university. Students in this course are typically in their final year of preparation prior to a semester-long student teaching experience. The course instructor was the same for each section of the class and taught each section in a consistent manner. The course syllabus was identical for each section. The materials, activities, and case studies utilized were the same across sections. Each of the indicated methodologies (case studies, concept mapping, cooperative learning activities, graphic organizers, lecture, microteaching, modeling, and powerpoint) was utilized by the instructor in such a way to maintain equivalence in percent of instructional time. Cases were taken from Tippins, Koballa, and Payne (2002) as well as from Howe and Nichols (2000). Procedures In the first week of the semester, students completed a Barsch Learning Styles Inventory. This inventory consists of 24 questions (eight per subsection) designed to determine the learning preferences of the individual

426

BECK

completing the survey. Statements about learning conditions are rated by the individual on a scale of one to five. Scores are then tallied for the three subsections of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning style. The higher the score for the sub-scale, the stronger the preference for that learning style. For example, a question from the visual subsection is: I like to write things down or take notes for visual review. A question from the auditory subsection is: I can remember more about a subject through listening than reading. A sample question form the kinesthetic subsection is: I enjoy working with tools or working on models. This inventory was selected because it measured auditory, visual, and kinesthetic preferences, which was the focus of this study. The instrument was readily available to the researcher and was also available to the pre-service teachers after the course for use in their own classrooms. This inventory is straightforward to score and provides for clear-cut analysis. At the conclusion of the semester, students were asked to fill out two surveys regarding the methods used to teach the science methods course. The first survey listed various approaches used throughout the semester and asked the students to first rate and then rank the approaches on how each helped the students to understand course content. The second survey asked students to rate and rank the approaches on how each approach helped the students to acquire the knowledge, skills, and/or attitudes to become effective science teachers. Data Analysis and Results Descriptive statistics were calculated on the learning style inventory (Figure 1). Forty-seven percent of the students indicated a preference for the visual learning style, while 26 indicated kinesthetic, and ten percent indicated auditory. Seventeen percent of the participants had equal high scores in two learning style areas with twelve percent showing a preference for visual-kinesthetic. Descriptive statistics were also calculated for the two surveys related to teaching strategies utilized throughout the course. The average rating for case studies helping students learn course content was 3.32 on a scale of 1 (least effective)–5 (most effective) (Figure 2). Case studies received the 3%

12%

2% 47%

26% 10%

Fig. 1. Learning Style Preferences.

Visual Auditory Kinesthetic Visual/Auditory Auditory/Kinesthetic Visual/Kinesthetic

427

CASE STUDY METHODOLOGY AND LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCE 4.47

4.50

4.33 4.10

4.08

4.00 3.61

3.50

3.66

3.57

3.32

3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00 Case Study Concept Map Coop. Learning Graphic Organizer

Lecture

Microteaching

Modeling

Powerpoint

Fig. 2. StudentsÕ average rating of methods for learning course content.

lowest rating of the eight strategies listed. Cooperative learning activities received the highest-average rating of 4.47. The average rating for case studies was 3.49 on the survey related to helping students become effective science teachers (Figure 3). This rating placed case studies fifth in average ratings among the eight identified strategies. Lecture was the lowest rated at 3.29 and cooperative-learning activities again was rated the highest with a score of 4.54. Only one student ranked case studies as the most helpful strategy used in learning course content (Figure 4). Twenty-six percent ranked it in the top half of the eight strategies listed. Only one student ranked case studies as the most helpful in becoming an effective science teacher. Thirty-one percent ranked it in the top half of the strategies listed. Analysis of Variance showed no interaction between learning style and teaching method (Table 1). This result indicates that the learning style preference of the students had no bearing on the teaching method that was preferred by those students. Discussion and Conclusions Given that students ranked case studies as helpful to very helpful (3.87 out of 5.0) in learning course content, one can conclude that the use of case studies can be effective for all learners. The ANOVA results lend credence to the assumption that case study methodology is effective for all learners since no interaction occurred indicating the preference for learning

428

BECK

5.00 4.54

4.45

4.43

4.50 4.00 3.68 3.49

3.50

3.31

3.35

3.29

3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Case Study Concept MapCoop. Learning Graphic Organize r

Lecture

Microteaching

Modeling

Powerpoint

Fig. 3. StudentsÕ average rating of methods for becoming an effective science teacher. 50 45

course content

44

effective science teacher

41

40 35 30 25

25

25

22

20 17

15 12

10 5

4

3 1

1

0 Sum of case study

2 0

0

Sum of concept mapping

Sum of cooperative learning

0

1

Sum of graphi c Sum of lectures Sum of Sum of modeling Sum of organizers microteaching powerpoint

methods

Fig. 4. #1 Rankings of methods for learning course content and becoming an effective science teacher.

style did not impact the effectiveness of the case method approach. However, it is interesting to note that case studies were rated the lowest of the eight strategies in learning course content by students showing a

CASE STUDY METHODOLOGY AND LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCE

429

Table 1 ANOVA results Source

Sum of Squares

df

Mean square

F

Significance

Effective Teacher Course Content

16.047 24.660

35 35

.458 .705

.667 .927

.931 .591

preference for visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning styles but fared much better in helping students become better science teachers. These results may indicate an acknowledgement by the students of the value of reflection in the teaching and learning process. This research supports the researchers cited in the literature review who claim that case method pedagogy can be an effective tool for use in pre-service teacher education classrooms. This research shows that pre-service teachers found the use of case studies as potentially useful in helping them learn and process course content. This research also shows that case studies, when combined with other pedagogical tools, can be helpful in supporting pre-service teachersÕ acquisition of the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of effective science teachers. This appears to be true no matter what learning style preference the pre-service teacher has. More research needs to be conducted to further substantiate this and to broaden the scope of identified types of learners. Also of interest for further exploration would be what it is about the other strategies that are also valued as a tool to explore the teaching of science. In summary, case method pedagogy can be an alternative to the traditional, didactic model of teaching that can reinforce stereotypes that portray science and science teaching as boring and lacking relevancy. Case method pedagogy can support pre-service teachersÕ reflectivity and provide a context for the application of information. As a result, case method pedagogy can be a useful tool to add interest, variety, and applicability to a science education classroom. References American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press. Arellano, E. L., Barcenal, T. L., Bilbao, P. P., Castellano, M. A., Nichols, S., & Tippins, D. J. (2001). Case-based pedagogy as a context for collaborative inquiry in the Philippines. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(5), 502–528. Briggs, K. C., & Myers, I. B. (1977). The Myers-Briggs type indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

430

BECK

Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1979). Learning styles/Teaching styles: Should they, can they, be matched? Educational Leadership, 36(4), 238–244. Dunn, R., Dunn, K., & Price, G. (1975). Learning styles inventory. Kansas: Price Systems. Hanson, J. R., & Silver, H. F. (1996). Learning styles and strategies. Woodbridge, NJ: The Thoughtful Education Press. Harrington, H. L. (1991). The case as method. Action in Teacher Education, 7, 2–10. Howe, A. C., & Nichols S. E. (Eds.), (2000). Case studies in elementary science: Learning from teachers. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Jung, C. (1927). The theory of psychological type. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press. Koballa, T. & Tippins, D. (Eds.), (2000). Cases in middle and secondary science education: The promises and dilemmas. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Levin, B. B. (1996). Using the case method in teacher education: The role of discussion and experience in teachersÕ thinking about cases. Journal of Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(2). Merseth, K. K. (1996). Cases and case methods in teacher education. In Sikula & John (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teacher Education (2nd ed., pp. 722–741). New York: Macmillan and the Association of Teacher Educators. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences. Tippins, D. J., Koballa, T. R., & Payne, B. D. (2002). Learning from cases: Unraveling the complexities of elementary science teaching. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.