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:
- Lectures reproduce the "classic method that school children memorize and parrot back: observation, question, hypothesis, experiment, data collection, and conclusion". This does not mimic how science actually happens.
- Lectures reproduce attachments to authority and passivity of the learners.
- Instead, the following strategies should decrease reliance on the lecture method: active learning, learning by doing, problem-based learning, inquiry-based learning. Case studies are vital intervenetion to address this concern.
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.
- American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). 1989. Science for all Americans: A project 2061 report on literacy goals in science, mathematics, and technology. Washington, DC: AAAS.Antepohl, W., and S. Herzig. 1999. Problem-based learning vs. lecture-based learning in a course of basic pharmacology. Medical Education 33 (2): 106–113.
- Bradley, A. Z., S. M. Ulrich, M. Jones Jr., and S . M. Jones. 2002. Teaching the sophomore organic course without a lecture. Are you crazy? Journal of Chemical Education 79 (4): 514–519.
- Knox, J. A. 1997. Reform of the college science lecture through storytelling. Journal of College Science Teaching 26 (6): 388–392.
- Naumes, W., and M. J. Naumes. 1999. The art & craft of case writing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
- Tobias, S. 1990. They’re not dumb, they’re different: Stalking the second tier. Tucson, AZ: Research Corporation.
- Tobias, S. 1992. Revitalizing undergraduate science: Why some things work and most don’t. Tucson, AZ: Research Corporation.
- Wyckoff, S. 2001. Changing the culture of undergraduate science teaching: Shifting from lecture to interactive engagement and scientific reasoning. Journal of College Science Teaching 30 (5): 306–312.
