Case Study Analysis

(Responding to a Heated Classroom Discussion: Affirmative

Action Example)
1. Situational Characteristics Relevant to the Case
Specific context of teaching and learning
o The class was divided evenly between first- and second-year students.
o It was taught in a large lecture hall with about two-thirds of students(350).
o The State U. was located in a rural area of the Midwestern United States.
o Most students were of traditional age and lived on or near campus.
Expectation of External Groups
o The external groups (students) expect that the course will help them to better
understand the impact of business decisions on people and on society.
o Whatever decisions they will make going forward, they will do so more
consciously and thoughtfully than they would have before the class.
Nature of the Subject
o The course was taught with the objective of helping the students to better
understand and appreciate the complexity of decisions that they will take as
a manager and to begin to develop a more sophisticated way of making
decisions within this environment.
Characteristic of Learners
o Most State U. Students were of traditional age and lived on or near campus
(rural area of the Midwestern United States).
o Professor Jeffrey Moran noted that most students at State U. were those
whose first choice was a more elite school.
o A number of white students perceived themselves to be victims of reverse
discrimination in the college admission process.
Characteristic of Teachers
o David Horowitz, best-selling author of The Professors: The 101 Most
Dangerous Academics in America had named two state U. professors in his
book, which sought to expose liberal bias and lack of qualifications among
faculty at U.S. universities.

o Jeffrey Morans only teaching assignment so far had been BUS220 Social
Responsibility and Business Ethics, a course he designed from scratch.
Special Pedagogical Challenge
o State U. had passed a policy that in part required family members to refrain
from discussing controversial topics not relevant to the subject of the course.
o But some teachers like Jeffrey Moran felt that shying away from important
topics out of fear that it might get heated up is not the right thing to do.

2. What should Jeff Moran do now?

He should first have discussion with his department chair, Tim Stewart, about his
conversation with Rikki and explain him the entire case about the last class.
He should then have a discussion with Rikki Jonson and let her know that the way
she expressed her opinion in the class could have been better.
Then he should take up the discussion in the class but by first introducing the topic
himself. Letting the class know what went wrong in the class and how it could be
done better.
The topic Affirmative Action should not be restricted to racial discrimination but
cover all kinds of discrimination providing the class with some historical facts
which would help in building a good discussion.

3. How to deal with hot moments in the classroom?

Directions should be clearly given to students providing them a road map about how
the discussion should go.
The instructor should intervene as soon as he/she realizes that the discussion is
leading to a heated argument and not serving the purpose for which it was
conducted.
The purpose and idea behind the discussion should be made clear to the students
which will help them in understanding each others perspective.