A dose of reality

No one learning method is perfect, but seminars and case studies have plenty to offer students, writes Dr Ronald K Chung

Previously, we looked into two of the five most popular learning methods: lecturing and tutorials. This week, we shall work on two more: case studies and seminars.

The "case studies" teaching method was developed and popularised by the Harvard Business School. The rationale is that the traditional "professor lectures - students listen" learning model is too passive and, therefore, not very useful for students applying theories to real-life business situations. Thus, business schools needed to find a way to encourage (1) participation and (2) the application of theories in real-life situations.

Harvard therefore developed case-teaching, whereby students are given a real-life business problem, pretend to be CEOs, CFOs, business analysts or consultants and the like and use tools learned in class to solve actual problems filled with complicated real-life issues. In addition, because of the complexity of typical cases, no single Einstein is expected to solve cases alone. Students need to work as a group. This approach provides yet another advantage, since students practice working with their peers.

Unfortunately, real-life cases are so complex that their undiluted adoption for classroom use is simply impossible. They are usually reconstructed from second-hand information and sprinkled with assumptions to make them usable in the classroom. Most cases are therefore fabricated and designed to lead students down certain paths and towards the application of certain tools.

Moreover, since cases are so complicated, there are, typically, no correct answers. This makes students very frustrated, especially after they have spent hours working on "the solution". Some even emerge from the classroom more confused than before, wondering "What have we learnt?" Somehow, students are more comfortable with structured information; wide-perspective, unstructured learning, such as "case studies", makes most of them uneasy.

Another frequent complaint targets group work. First, getting everyone together to discuss a case is challenging. You then have to deal with "free-riders" who opt to do nothing and take advantage of work performed by other group members. (That's why, in a prior article, we discussed the importance of choosing the student body.) Professors receive complaints about this in every class.

If the traditional "professor lectures - students listen" is too theoretical and the "case studies" approach relies overmuch on second-hand information and assumptions, seminars are another option. To get a real perspective, what could be better than having people who experienced something at first hand tell you face-to-face what actually happened and what they thought during the process?

Seminars typically involve getting a "real person" to deliver their "real" experience. A seminar's advantage is that it's real, without assumptions or filtered second-hand information. The downside is that there is no preparation, nor any follow-up mechanism. What students learn depends on (1) speakers' willingness to share their experience and (2) their own ability to accept and retain information. In most cases, after a good seminar, students applaud and leave ... then what? There's no way to ensure or re-inforce learning.

We have gone through four of the five learning tools. Distance-learning remains. With technological advances in the form of the Internet, web-based distance-learning will be used increasingly frequently. Let's spend more time on this in the next article.

Remember ... BE PREPARED for tomorrow. Until next time, work hard, play hard.

Acknowledgement Dr Ronald K Chung is academic development director of the ET Business College, a member of the Hong Kong Economic Times Group. He has worked for a number of private companies and universities in the United States, as well as Hong Kong's Consumer Council. To contact Dr Chung, please write to DrChung@etbc.com.hk.

Taken from Career Times 2004/01/09