This article was downloaded by: [Lakehead University]On: 08 December 2014, At: 14:40Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Multicultural PerspectivesPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hmcp20

Case Method Learning: Online Exploration andCollaboration for Multicultural EducationMarsha Gartland & Teresa FieldPublished online: 17 Nov 2009.

To cite this article: Marsha Gartland & Teresa Field (2004) Case Method Learning: Online Exploration and Collaboration forMulticultural Education, Multicultural Perspectives, 6:1, 30-35, DOI: 10.1207/S15327892mcp0601_6

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327892mcp0601_6

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Perspectives on Technology

Case Method Learning: Online Exploration and Collaboration forMulticultural Education

Marsha GartlandDepartment of Leadership, Foundations, & PolicyUniversity of Virginia

Teresa FieldDepartment of Teacher PreparationThe Johns Hopkins University

Increasing standardization and multiple layers of ac-countability spelled out in local and national educationpolicy today call for a more complex understanding ofmulticulturalism and its relevance to education. Asschools become more diverse, educators must rededicateto ensure equity and social justice, creating opportunitiesfor every student to achieve to his or her fullest, regard-less of race, ethnicity, gender, or any other identityaround which academic achievement gaps presently re-volve. Teacher educators and staff developers face thischallenge of preparing teachers to confront the array ofeducational, social, and moral problems and to do so in arapidly expanding electronic environment. Two recentinnovations in teacher education—case method peda-gogy and online course delivery—offer promising possi-bilities for addressing these challenges. This articledescribes the application of such innovations inpreservice and in-service learning experiences, combin-ing case methods, online learning, and multicultural ed-ucation.

The Case Method

Real-life scenarios are at the heart of case studies. Inthe education milieu, these problem-centered stories canfocus on issues related to teaching and learning in class-room situations; education policy conflicts; relationshipsbetween colleagues, parents, or administrators; and othercomplex challenges and opportunities. These slices oflife are considered cases because of the theories and

principles embedded in the narratives. Shulman (1992)argued that a case needs to be an instance of a largerclass or an example of a broader category—“a case ofsomething.” Typically, expert analyses assuming vari-ous perspectives accompany cases and suggest that thereare no “right” answers, but instead a variety of accept-able perspectives that teachers can assume as they learnto make thoughtful, reasoned, ethical decisions aboutteaching and learning.

Case methods are typically used in professions inwhich complex interactions require professionals to ex-ercise judgment rather than to apply rules and principlesin prescriptive ways. Used widely in law, business, andmedicine, the case method is just recently beginning totake root in teacher education. This method is used tocontextualize knowledge that students typically receivein a linear, fragmented way through separate coursesduring their teacher preparation. Case studies encouragea vibrant connection between theory and practice—onethat is often missing in lecture and textbook learn-ing—inviting solutions that must be found by an interac-tive consideration of means and ends. Because cases arebased in practical reality, they also lend credibility andrelevance to contemporary education issues while help-ing users build problem-solving skills.

Studies have demonstrated that teachers who partici-pate in case method learning are better at identifyingproblems, designing educational interventions to addressthem, and evaluating the effects of their teaching(Bronack, 1998; Kilbane, 2000; Welty, Silverman, &Lyon, 1991). A recent study of online and face-to-faceofferings of case-based courses also suggests that liveand virtual delivery are equally as effective for promot-ing the moral development of teachers who entered thetreatment with relatively low moral reasoning skills

Multicultural Perspectives

30

Multicultural Perspectives, 6(1), 30–35Copyright © 2004 by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Requests for reprints should be sent to Marsha Gartland, Univer-sity of Virginia, 250 West Main Street, Suite 310, Charlottesville,VA 22902. E-mail: mgartland@casenex.com

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lak

ehea

d U

nive

rsity

] at

14:

40 0

8 D

ecem

ber

2014

(Gartland, 2003). Continuing examination of curriculaand research on case pedagogy and teacher developmentwill reveal more about how participants extract meaningfrom their experience.

Moral Reasoning and Critical Reflection: TheNeed for the Case Method

The emergence of considerable discourse avowingthe moral basis of teaching suggests that teaching isamong the most morally demanding of all professions(Goodlad, 1990; Strike & Soltis, 1992). The cognitivedevelopmental theorists define moral reasoning asevaluative judgment, requiring the explicit applicationof an individual’s values about human welfare and so-cial justice. Current research and theory on the subjectof moral reasoning differs from previous eras in a fewsignificant ways. Current moral dialogue is (a) groundedin a cognitive developmental view of morality ratherthan a values-oriented approach, (b) focused on the abil-ities of the individual rather than the institutional levelof schooling, and (c) supported by objective, empiricallybased research (Bergem, 1990).

Models of reflective practice in teaching range fromtechnical, involving general instruction and managementissues, to critical, involving social, moral, and politicalconcerns (Valli, 1997). Teachers who are able to reflectcritically consider the aim of understanding and improv-ing quality of life for disadvantaged groups as primary,and are committed to unlimited inquiry, fundamentalself-criticism, and social action (Valli, 1997). This levelof reflection is understood as the intersection of reflec-tion and morality.

Zeichner and Liston (1987) distinguished betweenpreservice teachers who are trained as technicians con-cerned with application of teaching methods and thosewho are educated as moral craftpersons concerned withethical considerations for actions. They discovered thatconcrete cognitive models used to assess lower levels ofteacher reflection are not adequate for assessing criticalreflection or moral reasoning, and suggested studyingthese as separate phenomena altogether.

Empirical research made employing the moral rea-soning measures of Kohlberg and Rest allowed cogni-tive developmental theory to traverse the divide thathistorically has separated the philosophy of moralityfrom the science of practice (Reiman, 1999). Kohlbergand his colleagues developed a systematic stage frame-work of human development, the Moral Judgment In-ventory (MJI), to measure individuals’ moral judgmentproficiency. Kohlberg (1984) referred to the process ofmoral reasoning as the ability to place one’s selfempathetically in the shoes of another and to make deci-sions according to democracy and justice. Kohlberg

traced the evolution of one’s meaning making onquestions of rights and justice from preconventionalconcerns with obedience and punishment (Stage 1 and 2,focus on self) to conventional concerns with duty andbehavior norms of one’s social group (Stage 3 and 4, fo-cus on group) to postconventional moral thinking thattakes principled human values as the basis of moraljudgment (Stages 5 and 6, focus on inner-self).

Studies of teachers’ moral reasoning levels, unset-tling decades of educational research, have yielded aconsistent pattern: Teachers’ ability to engage in moralreasoning is markedly lower than that of other profes-sionals (Rest, 1986). The research suggests that someteachers are morally principled thinkers and can con-struct and reconstruct progressive democratic environ-ments in their classrooms, although most cannot. Thosewho process moral judgment issues at less complex lev-els are more rigid and authoritarian than those who pro-cess such issues at more complex levels (Sprinthall,Reiman, & Thies-Sprinthall, 1996).

Research also indicates that teachers who are taughthow to be reflective can engage in more culturally ap-propriate teaching and more readily take responsibilityfor classroom challenges rather than blaming their stu-dents (Noordhoff & Kleinfeld, 1988; Reiman, 1999;Sprinthall & Thies-Sprinthall, 1983). Critical reflectionnot only allows practitioners to develop a deeper under-standing of practice, but also permits them to analyzemoral and ethical classroom issues through a structuredprocess (Clift, Houston, & Pugach, 1990). Most educa-tion program designers have found that although it isrelatively easy to promote technical reflection, it is diffi-cult to foster critical reflection (Sparks-Langer et al.,1990). Developing a critically reflective stance requiresactive engagement or consciousness in the experience. Itrequires the ability to analyze and prioritize issues, touse tacit and research-based knowledge, and to developa feasible plan of action—all of which are embodied inthe case method approach.

Case Method Learning: Promoting Reflectionand Moral Reasoning

The part of the course that I will probably continue to usethe most is the case analysis process. I now do “case analy-sis” every week as I work with my students and try to meettheir needs. I really like breaking it down into the catego-ries of issues, perspectives, knowledge, actions, and con-sequences. This is a terrific approach to a situation and Iwill continue to implement in my classroom. (Participantin online course, The Special Learner)

At least since Dewey’s (1933) How We Think, educa-tors and psychologists have grappled with questions ofhow people learn from experience, and how to identify

Multicultural Perspectives Vol. 6, No. 1

31

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lak

ehea

d U

nive

rsity

] at

14:

40 0

8 D

ecem

ber

2014

experiences that are educative. Dewey theorized that,without reflection, no learning occurs. Experiencesthemselves are not learning, but opportunities for learn-ing through adequate reflection. The case analysis pro-cess bridges this gap, providing guidelines and aframework for exploring issues that might cause dis-comfort, and almost always lead to critical reflection.Considering case issues and confronting personal beliefsand understandings can bring about changes related topractice and cultural understanding.

Dewey and other practical theorists such as Vygotsky(1986) translated developmental theory to teacher edu-cation practices, stressing the importance of role-taking,active participation in real-world activities, discourse,and social interaction in development. According toVygotsky (1986), the critical combination for self-devel-opment includes requiring students to both experience areal-world teaching–learning situation as it is, not neces-sarily as it should be, as well as engage in a process ofexamining their own and others’ educational views (inHouser & Chevalier, 1996). All developmental theoristsagree that learning begins with a knowledge disturbance.This “perturbation” has prompted numerous studies toidentify elements and conditions necessary for suchgrowth. Proponents of a cognitive-developmental ap-proach to teacher education have begun to build on thework of Piaget, Dewey, Kohlberg, and others to moreeffectively structure and sequence learning to promotecognitive development.

Dilemma discussion is the technique most often rec-ommended for facilitating this perturbation and the devel-opment of moral reasoning and reflection (Reiman, 1999;Schlaefli, Rest, & Thoma, 1985). Dilemma discussion,better known as case discussions or case method learning,provides a vehicle to investigate the multifocal dilemmasof education. This approach is considered effective forpromoting the moral development of teachers as they areoften not aware of the moral impact of their actions, andreport feeling ill-prepared for dealing with the moral di-lemmas they identify in their work (Tirri, 1999).

Although methods of teaching cases vary, consistentcomponents include reflection and analysis. Case analy-sis as a professional development strategy creates oppor-tunities for in-service teachers to link theory andpractice, explore morals and ethics, and become morecapable problem solvers. As teachers confront differentvalues, they develop a process of inquiry-oriented teach-ing that might become a consistent teaching behavior.Cases provide a glimpse into urban schools for teachersfrom the suburbs and illustrate issues of multiculturaleducation to teachers from schools that are not seem-ingly diverse. Students, teachers, administrators, andparents often approach education with different valuesand different goals. Teachers using cases learn to respectthe legitimacy of these different opinions and to recog-

nize the impact their personal perspective has on theformation of their beliefs and attitudes.

The ability to develop well-reasoned solutions to re-curring and emerging professional problems is an im-portant goal for professional education. Althoughteacher preparation courses typically focus on the acqui-sition of concepts, there is a real need for programs thathelp prospective teachers analyze and solve authenticprofessional problems. Instruction without measures thathelp teachers see their strengths and shortcomings andcompare them to peers as well as to seasoned and exem-plary colleagues is unlikely to promote competence(Bebeau, Rest, & Narvaez, 1999).

CaseNEX: A Model Program for Case Learningin Education

There was a lot of diversity among the teachers taking thiscourse. We ranged from elementary through high schoollevel teachers, and taught in most every discipline. We allhad classes comprised of students from a variety of back-grounds. By participating in class discussions, we had theopportunity to create a microcosm of the course, provid-ing an environment for learning that was multicultural.Through class discussion, the materials became three-di-mensional, and offered an opportunity to grow both as stu-dents and as teachers. The anonymous nature of being on-line really let people speak the truth; this truth allows forpersonal exploration and real-life thinking. (Participant inonline course, Multicultural Studies)

CaseNEX (originally CaseNET), a project incorpo-rating the case method in an online environment, wasfounded at the University of Virginia. CaseNEX’s on-line case studies and courses depict the complex prob-lems and opportunities teachers face daily. The coursesand professional development programs offered supportincreased professional knowledge, heightened prob-lem-solving skills, and the purposeful use of technology.This approach has been used to help teachers identifyopportunities through the examination of educationalproblems by training them to break down complex is-sues, consider multiple perspectives, examine data, de-velop action plans, and anticipate consequences.

The pedagogical foundation of the CaseNEX ap-proach is the employment of a reflective process for de-veloping habits of professional thinking through caseanalysis (McNergney, Herbert, & Ford, 1994;McNergney & Medley, 1984). This conceptual frame-work for the analysis of the online case studies is neitherconceptually discreet nor rigidly sequential. Rather,throughout the course, students practice the analysis pro-cess though journaling and discussing (online orface-to-face) cases with their peers and instructor. A fi-nal written assignment requires students to constructanalyses that demonstrate that they can effectively (a)

Multicultural Perspectives Vol. 6, No. 1

32

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lak

ehea

d U

nive

rsity

] at

14:

40 0

8 D

ecem

ber

2014

identify educational issues, problems, or opportunities;(b) recognize different perspectives or values that drivepeople’s actions; (c) call up personal, theoretical, andempirical knowledge relevant to issues identified; (d)propose possible actions for handling the issues identi-fied; and (e) forecast the likely consequences of such ac-tions. The analyses should include an examination ofways in which the participants’ biases and prejudicesshape the way they understand the case and their ownpractice. As a result, participants are more adequatelyprepared for the challenges they will face in their teach-ing.

“This approach has been used tohelp teachers identify opportuni-ties through the examination ofeducational problems by trainingthem to break down complex is-sues, consider multiple perspec-tives, examine data, developaction plans, and anticipate con-sequences.”

Basic research on case method learning has providededucators with a solid set of directing constructs onwhich CaseNEX and similar programs are built. Whenplaced within an online environment, these constructsinteract with the interactive opportunities afforded byInternet technologies to weave unique educational op-portunities.

The recognition of different values and actions arewhat make cases rich and successful teaching tools. InPiagetian terms, the balance between discomfort andsafety allows participants to confront, rather than avoid,established beliefs, biases, and stereotypes (Houser &Chevalier, 1996). Piaget’s conception of cognitive de-velopment entails a process that leads people to reflecton the conflict and then achieve equilibrium by the con-struction of a new level of understanding within theirexisting system of thought. Vygotsky (1986), reversingthe order of development, wrote that the true direction ofthe thinking “is not from the individual to the social butfrom the social to the individual” (in Tappan, 1997). Hetheorized that peer interaction not only initiates change,but shapes the nature of change as well, as peers inter-nalize cognitive processes that are implicit in interac-tions and communication with others (Tappan, 1997).Both theorists consider the role of the group and socialinteractions in the development of thinking in cognitive,

moral, and social domains. Although their ideas differslightly, both offer a rationale for why discussion is animportant factor to consider in studying teachers’ think-ing.

Crucial to the research in teacher discussion and re-flection is the awareness of competing perspectives, ac-cording to Perry (1970). Reciprocity, a definingcharacteristic of better quality and evidence of maturingcommunication skills, implies attention paid by one ormore participants to what others say. Taking reciprocityto the next level, a dialectical style of thought isachieved by encouraging students to recognize and seekvalidity in other perspectives. Berkowitz and Gibbs(1983) found that there is a relation between transactivefeatures of students’ discourse and gains in moral rea-soning. Rather than merely providing consecutive asser-tions, discussants operate on each other’s reasoning,confronting one another in an ongoing dialogic dynamic.

A case study, when analyzed and discussed in an on-line environment, allows for this dynamic, as studentsare challenged to consider the various ideas and perspec-tives of their peers. Dialogue and collaboration are cen-tral to this online approach, as participants can engage inan ongoing process of reviewing and responding to com-ments and questions posed by the facilitator as well asclassmates. As the discussion flows in several direc-tions, facilitators can guide the focus of the analysis tocircle back, extending various perspectives and implica-tions. Structural growth does not come cheaply, as themove to more complex levels can involve significant“personal loss” (Sprinthall et al., 1996). However, withwell-trained instructors who can offer the support andextension necessary to deal with this loss, participantsmight be more open to continued opportunities forgrowth when the course is over.

Using case-based instruction online also allowscourse facilitators to differentiate instruction based onthe developmental needs of each participant (e.g., stu-dent teachers, beginning teachers, or experienced col-leagues), perhaps drawing on the work of Hunt (1974),who identified the need to systematically vary theamount of structure depending on the needs of thelearner. He suggested differentiated needs as (a) con-crete or abstract, (b) immediate reinforcement or spreadout, (c) numerous or few advance organizers, and (d) fo-cused or extended assignments. In addition, the technol-ogy that supports the courses allows participants toexplore the cases, video perspectives from experts in thefield, and relevant readings at their own pace. Whereasthis provides maximum flexibility and the ability to dif-ferentiate instruction, the collaborative, online discus-sions and one-on-one journal interactions with aninstructor provide the most powerful opportunities fordevelopment.

Multicultural Perspectives Vol. 6, No. 1

33

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lak

ehea

d U

nive

rsity

] at

14:

40 0

8 D

ecem

ber

2014

Extending on the weekly discussion interactionsamong peers, an online journal provides a forum inwhich to integrate and synthesize the materials and in-teractions surrounding the case study and to prepare par-ticipants for formal case analysis assignments.Participants are asked to draw on personal experiences,and are encouraged to examine ways in which their ownprejudices, biases, and assumptions influence under-standing of the cases, readings, their students, and teach-ing. The journal might become a log of a participant’sgrowth throughout a course and evidence that sustainedinquiry of one’s professional practice and dispositionsoften promotes significant growth.

The online nature of case-based courses also allowsparticipants from a wide variety of situations and experi-ences to share ideas and debate in a low-risk environ-ment. The time independence of online discussiongroups and one-on-one journals with instructors createsopportunities to communicate their perspectives abouttheir shared case experiences. Participants practice mov-ing beyond their own frame of reference, making mean-ing in ways that could be more open, inclusive, andintegrated than many face-to-face interactions. For thesereasons, online discussions that encourage the true shar-ing of ideas among essentially equal partners are likelyto be a fruitful way of encouraging people to test as-sumptions and develop thinking.

“Participants are asked to drawon personal experiences, and areencouraged to examine ways inwhich their own prejudices, bi-ases, and assumptions influenceunderstanding of the cases, read-ings, their students, and teach-ing.”

Conclusion

The counterintuitive coming together of greater stu-dent diversity and greater educational standardizationdraws forth the need for innovative approaches forteacher preparation. Although more research must bedone to measure the ultimate and long-term effective-ness of the case study method, including its online appli-cation, current philosophy and studies indicate that theemployment of cases in teacher preparation can be asvaluable as it is in law, business, and other fields. Byproviding an opportunity to bridge theory and practice,

share and be challenged by diverse perspectives, andsolve the sorts of problems they will face in their ownclassrooms, the case method has the potential to betterprepare participants for the complexity of today’s educa-tion milieu. By combining the power of the case methodwith the unique characteristics of an online environment,CaseNEX and other programs are poised to prepareteachers to think and act critically toward a multiculturaleducation end.

References

Bebeau, M., Rest, J. R., & Narvaez, D. (1999). Beyond the promise: Aframework for research in moral education. Educational Re-searcher, 28(4), 18–26.

Bergem, T. (1990). The teacher as moral agent. Journal of Moral Edu-cation, 19(2), 88–89.

Berkowitz, M. W., & Gibbs, J. C. (1983). Measuring the developmen-tal features of moral discussion. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 29,399–410.

Bronack, S. C. (1998). Analyzing multimedia cases: Teacher develop-ment in a Web-based environment. Unpublished doctoral disserta-tion, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.

Clift, R. T., Houston, W. R., & Pugach, M. C. (Eds.). (1990). Encour-aging reflective practice in education: A analysis of issues andprograms. New York: Teachers College Press.

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of re-flective thinking to the educative process. Boston: Heath.

Gartland, M. (2003). CaseNEX evaluation data. Unpublished manu-script, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.

Goodlad, J. (1990). Teachers for our nation’s schools. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

Houser, N., & Chevalier, M. (1996). Multicultural self-development inthe preservice classroom: Equity education in the dominant cul-ture. Delaware, MD.

Hunt, D. E. (1974). Matching models in education. Toronto, Canada:Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

Kilbane, C. R. (2000). Preservice teachers’ use of multimedia cases.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Virginia, Char-lottesville.

Kohlberg, L. (1984). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-de-velopmental approach. In L. Kohlberg (Ed.), Essays on moral de-velopment: The psychology of moral development (pp. 170–205).San Francisco: Harper & Row.

McNergney, R. F., Herbert, J. M., & Ford, R. E. (1994). Co-operationand competition in case-based teacher education. Journal ofTeacher Education, 45, 339–345.

McNergney, R. F., & Medley, D. M. (1984). Teacher evaluation. In J.M. Cooper (Ed.), Developing skills for instructional supervision(pp. 147–178). New York: Longman.

Noordhoff, K., & Kleinfeld, J. (1988). Rethinking the rhetoric of “re-flective inquiry” in teacher education programs. In H. Waxman etal. (Eds.), Images of reflection in teacher education (pp. 27–30).VA: ATE.

Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of ethical and intellectual development inthe college years: A scheme. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Reiman, A. J. (1999). The evolution of the social role-taking andguided reflection framework in teacher education: Recent theoryand quantitative synthesis of research. Teaching and Teacher Ed-ucation, 15, 597–612.

Rest, J. R. (1986). Moral development: Advances in research and the-ory. New York: Praeger.

Schlaefli, A., Rest, J. R., & Thoma, S. J. (1985). Does moral educationimprove moral judgment? A meta-analysis of intervention studies

Multicultural Perspectives Vol. 6, No. 1

34

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lak

ehea

d U

nive

rsity

] at

14:

40 0

8 D

ecem

ber

2014

using the Defining Issues Test. Review of Educational Research,55, 319–352.

Shulman, L. S. (1992). Toward a pedagogy of cases. In J. H. Shulman(Ed.), Case methods in teacher education. New York: TeachersCollege Press.

Sparks-Langer, G. M., Simmons, J. M., Pasch, M., Colton, A., &Starko, A. (1990). Reflective pedagogical thinking: How can wepromote it and measure it? Journal of Teacher Education, 41(4),23–32.

Sprinthall, N. A., Reinman, A. J., & Thies-Sprinthall, L. (1996).Teacher professional development. In J. P. Sikula T. J. Buttery,and E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher educa-tion (pp. 666–703). New York: Simon.

Sprinthall, N. A., & Thies-Sprinthall, L. (1983). The need for theoreti-cal frameworks in educating teachers: A cognitive developmentalprocess. In K. Howey & W. Garner (Eds.), Education of teachers:A look ahead (pp. 74–97). New York: Longman.

Strike, K. A., & Soltis, J. F. (1992). The ethics of teaching. New York:Teachers College Press.

Tappan, M. (1997). Language, culture, and moral development: AVygotskian perspective. Developmental Review, 17, 78–100.

Tirri, K. (1999). Teachers’ perceptions of moral dilemmas at school.Journal of Moral Education, 28(1), 31–47.

Valli, L. (1997). Listening to other voices: A description of teacher re-flection in the United States. Peabody Journal of Education,71(1), 67–88.

Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Boston: MIT Press.

Welty, W. H., Silverman, R., & Lyon, S. (1991). Student outcomesfrom teaching with cases. Unpublished manuscript, Pace Univer-sity Center for Case Studies in Teacher Education, White Plains,NY.

Zeichner, K. M., & Liston, D. P. (1987). Teaching student teachers toreflect. Harvard Education Review, 57, 1–22.

Multicultural Perspectives Vol. 6, No. 1

35

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lak

ehea

d U

nive

rsity

] at

14:

40 0

8 D

ecem

ber

2014