SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.4 Emerging Insights
Tourism therefore did not meet the key requirements of the strategy.
5.3.2 Teachers’ use of case-based method in teaching Tourism
With regards to the teacher’s selection of case studies to teach according to the case- based method, the findings revealed that they used various sources such as prescribed books, previous question papers, and their own creative scenarios. Written texts were mostly selected by the teachers as a primary source of case studies when they used this strategy while case his own scenarios were used by one participant. The findings revealed that the participants dominated classroom activities by relying on teacher- directed instruction even when using the case-based method. It appeared that the participating teachers centred on using the case-based method for assessment purposes at the end of their lessons and for homework. For these reasons the case-based method seemed to be an additional teaching strategy to allow more time for direct instruction.
The findings revealed that the facilitation of critical thinking and discussions as required by the case-based method was the least implemented strategy by the participating teachers. In fact, such required strategies were marginalised and peripheral as, when learners were asked to answer questions or engage in discussions, only a limited number of learners were involved and only limited time was allocated. The participating teachers thus did not provide opportunities for learner engagement in discussions of a case study in a collaborative manner and the activities that they selected did not encourage adequate interaction among the learners. The findings showed that the participants’ use of the case-based method was not aligned with the key features and requirements of this teaching strategy that focuses on teachers as facilitators in learner-centred lessons in Tourism where they should discuss and analyse cases.
5.4 Emerging Insights
A significant finding revealed the common perception among the participants that the purpose of the case-based strategy is to expose their learners to the realities of the tourism industry. This understanding was not unique to the participants as other studies (Pietrzykowski & Szczyt, 2012; Jeggels et al., 2010; Shih et al., 2016) have also argued
that the case-based method in educational settings is to present learners with representations that simulate the real world of work. The data suggested that the participants understood the case-based method as important as it should play a major role in stimulating learners’ imagination regarding the realities of the tourism industry.
This notion is indeed praiseworthy, especially in classrooms where learners have been disadvantaged and have experienced limited or no exposure to the tourism industry outside the classroom. Given the rural context of the school under study, using the case- based method was valued for its immediate relevance to reducing the challenge of these poor learners’ exposure to the tourism industry. Chan (2010) urges that the case-based method be used as a valuable tool in linking theory with practice and reducing the gap between Tourism as a subject and the tourism industry. In this vein, the participants in this study seemed to accept that they were responsible for using the case-based method to expose their learners to tourism practices and realities and thus reduce the gap for those who did not have the means to access the industry in person.
A second significant finding was that the teachers understood that the case-based method should contribute significantly to preparing their learners for examinations. The teachers understood that they could – and should – use the case-based method to familiarise their learners with the questioning style that is used in examinations – particularly the Grade 12 NSC examination. This focus obviously resulted in an assessment-driven use of the case-based method by the participating teachers. For example, they presented case studies right at the end of lessons rather than during their lessons to be used as assessment instruments. They argued that the more practice the learners were exposed to in using the case-based method, the better they would be in mastering the skill of answering examination questions based on case studies. This understanding illuminated the predominant focus on the case-based method as a mechanism for preparing learners for examinations. This focus on assessment is contrary to the literature that discourages the use of the case-based method for assessment purposes only. For example, Giancalone (2016) and Watsson and Satton (2012) argue that questions based on case studies should go beyond the mere elicitation of correct answers and should be more aligned with critical thinking. Contrary to this assertion, the findings revealed that, for the participants, the use of the case-based method supported assessment and thus it was not aligned with critical thinking
development, particularly in terms of the nature of the questions that were asked. Having made this statement, I must acknowledge that an exploration of the nature of the questions was beyond the scope of the study as questions were perused only peripherally when they appeared at the bottom of case study texts. However, as the literature suggests that the case-based method should be used for both learning and assessment, its use should focus on skills development such as analysis, critical thinking, and problem solving (Giancalone, 2016; Nkhoma et al., 2017; Oosthuizen et al., 2019; Peters et al., 2015) which did not occur beyond the presentation of the set questions for each case study. The fact that the participants linked the cases they gave the learners primarily to assessment emphasises their focus on examination preparation skills rather than on analytical and critical thinking skills in the learning process. This partly explains why they used this method only towards the end of their lessons and for homework.
It is arguable that the teachers were mainly concerned about maintaining good examination results as the NSC results are used as a yardstick to measure the success or failure of schools every year. The implication of this finding is that these teachers used the case-based method to promote ‘surface learning’ rather than ‘deep learning’ as they failed to develop various skills beyond the focus on examinations. While the literature (Hemphill et al., 2015; Nkhoma et al., 2017) highlights the positive contribution of the case-based method for the development of higher-order thinking skills, Oosthuizen et al. (2019) warn of the danger of an over emphasis on examination skills instead of deep- learning as this might stump learners’ cognitive development. In essence, the participants in this study understood the case-based method as an assessment strategy to help learners develop question answering skills that would enhance their ability to answer examination questions and thus maintain a 100% pass rate in Tourism for the school. This understanding is contrary to the tenets of cognitive constructivism that emphasise learner involvement in critical thinking activities in order to help them produce ideas and innovative solutions to real-world issues (Essien & Undie, 2018).
Another significant finding was that the teachers deemed the case-based method challenging and difficult to implement. The finding relates to contextual challenges, particularly large class group sizes and too small classrooms for appropriate seating arrangements, that hindered the teachers from effectively using the case-based method
in Tourism. This finding emerged from interview and observation data that suggested that limited space and large classes made the effective use of the case-based method impossible for the participants. While Harvey and Kenyon (2013) emphasise that teachers have to know how to organise and manage their classrooms to ensure that all learners participate actively in learning, the teachers admitted that they were not able to organise their learners in small groups or pairs for effective participation when using the case-based method. The desks were generally organised in neat rows and separated from one another, but it is my contention that they could have taken advantage of the spaces between rows to put single desks together to seat learners in pairs, at the very least. The participants could also have been more innovative by asking some to simply turn around in order to converse with two or three leaners behind them to maximise the effectiveness of the case-based method. I argue that grouping learners should never be an issue that hinders the effective use of case-based method as teachers can still guide discussions on a case study whether the learners are seated in groups or not. Given the need for the frequent use of casebased learning in Tourism, the study revealed that teachers, arguably not all, still need to be educated through workshops, seminars, symposia or other forums about creativity in using teaching strategies such as the case-based method.
An important but unexpected finding was that the participants did not use the case-based method in the same way that they understood its value and applications. Achieving the value of the case-based method that the teachers referred to when we discussed their understandings was crucial and depended on how they used this method as a teaching and learning strategy in their classrooms. While the participants concurred with the literature that claims that learners should be given opportunities to construct their own meanings when engaging in the case-based method (Ardalan, 2006; Krain, 2016;
Ukwetang et al., 2017), they seemed not to adhere to this conviction during lesson delivery as the findings revealed that their learners were barely given the opportunities to critically analyse the cases that were presented. Social constructivism views learners as active participants who need to be central in all teaching and learning practices, which was not the case according to the findings of this study. For example, all the teachers dominated their lessons by direct instruction and without requiring any active deliberations by their learners to debate issues or provide different points of view on the case studies presented to them. Katherine and Kalina (2010) argue that the case-based