MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038133191 · doi:10.28945/4591

Effective Use of Case Teaching in Large Undergraduate Classes

2020· article· en· W3038133191 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth A. Grant, Michael D. Moorhouse, Candace T. Grant

Bibliographic record

VenueInforming Science and IT Education Conference · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Marketing Education
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningComputer scienceField (mathematics)Teaching methodGraduate studentsFocus (optics)Mathematics educationMedical educationPsychologyPedagogyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim/Purpose: To guide faculty who wish to use the case method in large undergraduate classes Background: The paper reviews a range of case teaching methods and provides specific guidance on how to use them in various classroom situations. Methodology: Literature review, reflective experience, interviews, and surveys Contribution: This paper addresses a gap in case teaching research which tends to focus on its use in graduate classes Findings: Case teaching can be used effectively in large undergraduate classes, but needs to be used in different ways and with different techniques from those commonly recommended for graduate classes. Recommendations for Practitioners: Be creative and go beyond the Harvard: case method and draw on the broader range of techniques used in active and experiential learning Impact on Society: Better and more relevant classroom experiences Future Research: Examine and evaluate field examples of innovative case teaching, especially in hybrid and online environments.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.098
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.098
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0050.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInforming Science and IT Education ConferenceSame topicManagement and Marketing EducationFrench-language works237,207