The case study pedagogy illustrated here in detail frames the lecture method as the culprit for why people are not choosing to be STEM majors, and lose interest in science. More importantly, why people do not develop critical thinking skills, or why educators do not how to teach critical thinking skills. Note that editors do not call for wholly abandoning the lecture method, they argue that it shouldn't be the go-to method for science education.
Editors allege that:
A notable quote:
"The lectures, textbooks, and perfunctory laboratory activities that are typical of science education often leave students with incomplete or incorrect knowledge of scientific principles, underdeveloped intellectual skills, and little awareness of the influence of science on their lives. Students are often successful when solving formal textbook problems, but incorrectly interpret the same scientific principles when asked to solve problems posed in real-world contexts" p. 31.
Following researchers are cited to show why lectures are framed as the main culprit. Most research is cited between 1990s-early 2000s. It is clear that the policy-setting report by AAAS in 1989, Science for all Americans, advocated for the use of case studies to mimic real scientific work.
The editors advance ideas about science from UC Berkeley Museum of Paleontology's Understanding Science project, which aims to introduce the complexity of actual scientific investigation at K-16 levels.
The book came out of the National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science hosted at the University of Buffalo, where Clyde Herreid worked. Their website is now defunct as most of their case studies are available to download at the National Science Teaching Association, NSTA website, except for the teaching notes and the answer key, which require subscription for access.
The editors point to storytelling using case-based teaching at the Harvard Business School to prepare students for the actual scenarios that they are likely to face once they graduate. Early history of problem-based learning at McMaster University's medical school, where medical students met with faculty facilitators to diagnose ailments based on limited information that they received piecemeal. This is intended to mimic scientific investigation that proceeds with limited information, competing tentative hypotheses, and relies on a community of scientists.