Effective Use of Case Teaching in Large Undergraduate Classes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it