Abstract
The case method of instruction (CMI) is a viable instructional strategy for use in early intervention personnel preparation, particularly when the focus of instruction is to enhance learners' application, synthesis, and evaluation skills. The case method of instruction promotes decision-making and self-reflection through use of case stories, which depict real-life dilemmas early interventionists encounter in their interactions with children and families. Learning to use CMI effectively is not self-evident or easily mastered without guidance and supportive resources. In this article, we present information related to selecting quality cases, preparing for case discussion, facilitating case discussion, and evaluating learner outcomes. Strategies described have been field-tested and validated with 128 early intervention instructors who participated in intensive training designed to increase their knowledge about and use of CMI.
THE CASE METHOD OF INSTRUCTION (CMI) is an active instructional strategy, which has been demonstrated to enhance learners' application, problem-solving, and decision-making skills (Snyder & McWilliam, 1999). The case method of instruction also is believed to foster reflective thinking and is used to help learners appreciate multiple perspectives, clarify beliefs, and analyze how beliefs influence decisions (Lundeberg, 1999; McNaughton, Hall, & Maccini, 2001).
Case studies are the primary tools used in CMI; they describe real-life situations individuals are likely to encounter. A type of case study commonly used in CMI is the problem- or dilemma-based case, which requires learners to offer solutions for or make decisions about complex problems. Led by a skilled facilitator, learners participate in case analysis using their knowledge and experiences to arrive at reasoned courses of action, which address the dilemmas presented.
Learning to analyze complex situations and to evaluate various solutions critically are important skills for early interventionists who often interact in situations where ambiguous or competing perspectives operate. As McCollum and Catlett (1997, p. 109) noted, "The crucial point for early intervention training, in which processes, values, and relationships are the core of service delivery, is that these must become an explicit part of the curriculum." The case method of instruction represents a viable instructional approach for helping students learn how to analyze complex situations, make informed decisions, predict outcomes, and think critically and reflectively.
Increasing numbers of instructors who conduct preservice and inservice training are using CMI and some are exploring its effectiveness for teaching application and problem-solving skills (Elksnin, 1998; Lundeberg, Levin, & Harrington, 1999; McNaughton et al., 2001; Wasserman, 1994). The advantages of CMI as an instructional strategy in early intervention personnel preparation also have been recognized, particularly with regard to instruction in areas of family-centered service provision, teaming, and cultural diversity (Johns & Harvey, 1993; McWilliam, 1992, 1995; Snyder & McWilliam, 1999; Snyder, McWilliam, Lobman, & Sexton, 1998). The availability of compiled case studies related to early childhood (eg, Driscoll, 1995; Rand, 2000) and early intervention (eg, McWilliam, 2000a; McWilliam & Bailey, 1993) has made it somewhat easier for instructors to incorporate CMI into their instructional repertoires.
Despite recognition of CMI as an effective instructional strategy and the availability of case stories, surveys of educators in both regular and special education have shown that these individuals would like practical guidance before using CMI, particularly in areas related to case selection, case preparation, case facilitation, and learner evaluation (Elksnin, 1998; McNaughton et al., 2001). Our work with CMI in early intervention through a series of federally sponsored projects from the US Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has confirmed that instructors value the opportunity to receive guidance about how to use CMI effectively. Further, we have found that the number of instructors who currently use CMI effectively in early intervention is relatively small. Most instructors have never experienced CMI in their own professional development and it is not a method that is easily learned without supportive resources and instructional guidance (McWilliam & Snyder, 2002).
The purpose of this article is to provide general guidance for using CMI effectively in early intervention personnel preparation. Following a brief overview of CMI, we offer criteria for case selection, describe case preparation strategies, offer tips for case facilitation, and discuss issues associated with evaluating learner outcomes. All strategies presented in this article have been field-tested and validated with 128 early intervention instructors from 6 states who participated in the CMI Outreach Project funded by OSEP from 1998 through 2001.