Over the summer, Phil Miller and I attended a workshop (via Zoom) hosted by the Harvard Business School. Professor David Moss has developed what he calls “The Case Method” format for teaching US History. Essentially, the curriculum teaches history by focusing on distinct cases that illustrate different concepts. For example, one of the cases examines James Madison’s idea of a “federal negative,” a proposal at the Constitutional Convention to give the national government the power to negate any state law. The case can be used to teach students about the Constitutional Convention and the creation of our current government. It also helps students understand some of the principles behind our constitution, like federalism.

The Case Method follows a pattern for each case: give the students background reading, leading to a socratic lecture during which the teacher reviews the reading by asking questions and probing the students’ understanding. Then, the students must make a decision – should Congress have the power to negate state laws, for example.

After Phil and I completed the training, we weren’t entirely convinced the curriculum would work for our students. The readings were developed for undergraduate and graduate students at Harvard, so they are relatively complex. Several high school teachers who helped lead the workshop explained that they take the readings very slowly, spreading them out over the course of a week or two. Phil and I questioned whether this was a great use of our precious time in the classroom.

Fast forward to the start of the year…

I decided to try a paired down version of the Case Method in my AP Gov classes. I provided the students a portion of the reading that was relevant for our topic, and I gave them a double-block to get started. What surprised me was how well the students handled the reading, and how useful it was for them. I instructed them to read together in small groups and annotate each paragraph. As I circulated among the groups and asked questions, I was amazed to observe how well they understood the material. It was awesome. And they really enjoyed stepping up to the challenge of “Havard-level” reading.

The second thing that surprised me was how poorly the subsequent socratic lecture went. I was not at all worried about this portion of the curriculum, as I am a comfortable lecturer. The students really didn’t find this engaging, though. 

So, at the end of this whole experiment, I discovered that the part of the Case Method I thought would fail (the reading) in fact worked great, and the part of the curriculum I wasn’t worried about (the lecture), was kind of a bomb. Who knew?

Bottom line: it’s important to try new things in the classroom, because you just never know what will really work and what won’t.