Download
1 / 56
560 likes | 860 Views
Lily EFS Semester 2, 2010, Granville TAFE. Case Study. Why case study?. Case study is a very effective promotional tool.
E N D
Lily EFS Semester 2, 2010, Granville TAFE Case Study
Why case study? • Case study is a very effective promotional tool. • Next to White Papers, it is the second most popular device used to promote the benefits of a product, a service, ora point of view -- EFS point of views in our case.
What is a case study? • A case study is often a review or analysis of a real life situation. If the case study is based on a business problem, it may be written in the style of a business report. If the case study relates to the social sciences, then the type of writing required may be more reflective. They are often used where there have been limited solutions found to a particular problem. Case studies generally report factual information as well as opinions (good and bad).
A case, a problem, a pain or a success • A case study is a puzzle that has to be solved. The first thing to remember about writing a case study is that the case should have a problem for the readers to solve. The case should have enough information in it that readers can understand what the problem is. • After thinking about it and analyzing the information, the readers should be able to come up with a proposed solution. In general, writing an interesting case study is a bit like writing a detective story. You want to keep your readers very interested in the situation.
The opening • The opening 'problem' section usually carries a punch line. In other words, it has to mean something to the reader, something that they can relate to. • Always write about an issue that has significant social/political/financial/health/business impact for the reader. The more specific the case study, the more effective it will be. Case Studies do not propose to solve problems that are not taken seriously.
The formula So what is the formula for a case study that packs a punch but is digestible enough to appeal to a reader? • 1. Organize your information with sign posts / build suspense • 2. Reveal a real political pain/problem • 3. Include specific, and quantifiable results. Solve a generalizable business problem (make money or save money). A case study demonstrates how a specific situation was initially identified, which solution was selected to resolve the issue. Demonstrate how your product resolved a critical business issue. What you’re implying in your case demo is that if they choose your service, you can also resolve their issues. • 4. Have a satisfying conclusion.
Good case study • A good case is more than just a description. It is information arranged in such a way that the reader is put in the same position as the case writer was at the beginning when he or she was faced with a new situation and asked to figure out what was going on. • A description of the case, on the other hand, arranges all the information, comes to conclusions, tells the reader everything, and the reader really doesn't have to work very hard.
Writer vs. reader • When you write a case, here are some hints on how to do it so that your readers will be challenged, will "experience" the same things you did when you started your investigation, and will have enough information to come to some answers. • If you have written a good case study, your readers will have enough information to understand the situation and have their own opinions afterwards.
Methodology There are three basic steps in case writing: • research reading • information analysis • the actual writing Note: you start with research, but even when you reach the writing stage you may find you need to go back and research even more information.
The title • Instead of writing “Aerospace Case Study”, say “Case study on How Product Improved Sales by 300%”. • Grab the reader’s attention from the start and then keep it!
What does a case study contain? Generally a case study contains the following sections: • Department or Faculty assignment cover page (EFS) • Title page • Table of contents • Introduction (what this case is about) • Body sections (may include identification of problems and analysis) • Possible solutions • Recommendations • Conclusion or Implementation plan • References • Appendices
Step 1: Research phase • Library and Internet research. Find out what has been written before and read the related articles about your case. When you do this, you may find there is an existing problem that needs solving, or you may find that you have to come up an interesting idea that might or might not work at your case site. • For example, your case study might be on a national park where there have been so many visitors that the park's eco-system is in danger. Then the case problem would be to figure out how to solve this so the park is protected, but tourists can still come. • Or, you might find that your selected site doesn't have many tourists, and one reason is that there are no facilities. Then the case problem might be how to attract the right kind of businesses to come and build a restaurant or even a hotel -- all without ruining the park.
Step 2: Information analysis phase • Put all the information in one place. Now you have collected a lot of information from people, from articles and books. You can't include it all. So, you need to think about how to sort through it, take out the excess, and arrange it so that the situation at the case site will be understandable to your readers. Before you can do this, you have to put all the information together where you can see it and analyze what is going on. • Try to formulate the case problem in a few sentences. When you do this, you may find that you need more information. Once you are satisfied with the way you have defined the problem you want your readers to think about, break the problem down into all small parts. Each one represents a piece of the puzzle that needs to be understood before the problem can be solved. Then spend some time discussing these with the others in your group. • Once you have broken down the problem into pieces, you can analyze the information you now have and see if you can think about possible answers to each of the pieces. Once you have enough information, you can think about how to write the case study itself.
Step 3: Writing phase Describe the problem or case question you want the reader to solve. In a detective story, the crime happens right at the beginning and the detective has to put together the information to solve it for the rest of the story. you can start by raising a question. You can, for example, quote someone you interviewed. For example, suppose you interviewed a tourist official and she told you she thought more people should be interested in visiting the park, and she can’t understand why they don’t come. Then you could write something like this: The historic town of Port Stephens is located in the east coast of Sydney. The town tourism supervisor, Mrs. Joan Smith, said that she thought "many more people should visit here, but they just don’t come. I don’t know why – maybe we don't have the right kinds of places for them to eat or sleep and it's too far to travel in one day from Sydney.” What would have to happen in order to make the town more attractive to tourists? Because you are the author, you can write questions like this and set the stage for the rest of your case story. What your introduction does is give clues to the reader about what they should be thinking about. Once you have told the reader what one person associated with the tourist area thinks the problem is -- how to make the place more attractive -- you can give them the information they need to come to their own conclusions.
Conclusion (1) Your case will need a conclusion. For example, you might have learned that there is a government policy that says "No private enterprise is allowed to change any part of the historic site." So you might conclude with a paragraph like this: The mayor and tourism minister discussed with the case writers whether or not it would be a good idea to prepare a plan for putting a snack bar inside the old fort without changing the way the building looks. The plan could be used to show the government that a policy change to allow private enterprise would be a good idea. "Is there enough value in adding jobs in the village?" asked one of the case writers. Another said, "I think there is enough evidence that expansion would be the right thing to do." Still another case writer disagreed. What is your conclusion?
Conclusion (2) • By ending your case on a question like this, you let your readers discuss the situation themselves. If you have written a good case, they will have enough information to understand the situation and have a lively class discussion. The whole purpose of writing cases and sharing them with others is to share experience without all of us actually having to be in the same place. There is a trade-off between developing a place to make it more accessible to tourist so local jobs can be created and on the other hand protecting the environment from too many visitors.
Trade off solution • There is a trade-off between developing a place to make it more accessible to tourist so local jobs can be created and on the other hand protecting the environment from too many visitors. • And this is a question that faces more than one country. One country's solution might be useful for another country to know. But how the trade-off is resolved can vary from country to country.
Follow-up • It is often interesting to record any changes that actually occurred after or while the case was being researched and written. Once students have learned about a situation, they find it is very interesting to learn more.
Reducing barriers • Use your judgment when compiling the final case study document. Avoid making it too technical or overloading it with excessive statistics. • Make the statistics stand out so that the reader can easily digest them and then remember them later on.
Highlight the solution • In your case study, concentrate on the solution. Address a very specific issue. Be very careful here, as the entire case study is built around this single issue. • Do not dilute the case study by addressing more than one issue. Stick to one area and explain how you can solve the problem in measurable and quantifiable terms. For example: support your case study with statistics, figures and tables where appropriate. • If your readers can’t skim quickly to get the gist, you’re wasting your efforts.
A soft sell approach • In the IT world, for instance, case studies tend to be short -- somewhere between 300-500 words. • In general, aim for three pages, and include one graphic per page at most. Anything more makes it look like hard sell; case studies typically adopt asoft-sell approach.
Short, candid and revealing • A case study may also propel the reader into the first step of the thinking process. • Ellis Booker, editor of B to B magazine published a “from the trenches” case study in B to B Hands-On, the print pub's free weekly e-newsletter, in 2002. His tips on case study are: • Short, candid and revealingThe best case studies, Booker said, are ones “that sound like a legitimate problem. The reader wants candor. They want to see the pain point. Readers want something to be revealed.” • Even more effective is a story that says, “We screwed up.” It should offer “a dialectic. Readers like opposing points of view.” • The case study “has to be specific and easily digestible. It has to be tactical information that can be generalized,” he said. “Unless you have results, the case study is not nearly as powerful as it should be.”
Appendix If your case uses long, and special terms, words, or refers to cultural customs that people in another country might not recognize, information about them should be put in the case at the end in an appendix. (Foot note can be used for short explanation.)
Choice of words • Asylum seekers - boat people (1970’) - unauthorized arrivals (2008) - illegal arrivals (2009 – 2010) - arriving undocumented by boat (2009 debate) • Asylum seekers issues present an Australian political controversy, which involves public and media allegations.
Xenophobia • It has been acknowledged by UNHCR that “Xenophobia and intolerance towards foreigners and in particular towards refugees and asylum seekers” have “increased in recent years and present a major problem”. Certain media and politicians appear increasingly ready to exploit the situation for their own ends. (2009)
The global security context • In addition, security concerns since the attacks in the United States on 11 • September 2001 dominate the debate, including in the migration area, and have at times overshadowed the legitimate protection interests of individuals. • A number of countries have, for instance, revisited their asylum systems from a security angle have in the process tightened procedures and introduced substantial modifications, for example, by broadening grounds for detention or reviewing claims for the purpose of detecting potential security risks. • In some situations, it has been noticeable that the post-September 11 context has been used to broaden the scope of provisions of the 1951 Convention allowing refugees to be excluded from refugee status and/or to be expelled. • The degree of collaboration between immigration and asylum authorities and the intelligence and criminal law enforcement branches has also been stepped up. The growth of irregular migration, including the smuggling and trafficking of people, presents a further challenge. These developments are in part a consequence of globalization.
Who is an asylum seeker? • 'An asylum seeker is an individual who is seeking international protection. In countries with individualized procedures, an asylum seeker is someone whose claim has not yet been finally decided on by the country in which he or she submitted it. Not every asylum seeker will ultimately be recognized as a refugee, but every refugee is initially an asylum seeker.‘ (TheUnited Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Master Glossary of Terms, June 2006)
The Autralian context • In the Australian context, this means an asylum seeker is a Protection visa (PV) applicant until his or her application has been finally determined by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship or the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT). • Fact Sheet 61 - Seeking Asylum within Australia
What is our case? What happened on 16th April 2009? • A vessel carrying 47 Afghan asylum seekers and two Indonesian crewmen was apprehended (taken into custody) in Australian waters near Ashmore Reef on 16 April 2009. • The boat blew up, leaving five people dead and seriously injuring others. The north western police stated that the boat was deliberately set on fire. • Of the injured, there were 23 burns victims, including 22 Afghan nationals and one Indonesian. They were transferred to hospitals in Darwin and Brisbane. • The Department of Immigration said the patients released from hospital would be held in immigration residential housing in Perth while they underwent outpatient treatment at RPH. (ABC News, 16th April 2009)
Asylum seekers’ myths • These people should not be released until further investigation is conducted. • These people should not be given permanent visas. • There is a huge influx of asylum seekers in the last 24 months. There were 6 asylum seekers on Christmas Island when Kevin Rudd was elected in 2007, and there are more than 2000 since the Labour changed the border protection policies. Now Kevin Rudd is blocking asylum seekers from Afghanistan and Sri Lanka. He “is a complete hypocrite”. -- Joe Hockey (Opposition Treasure/the Liberal, 2GB 13th October, 2009), at an ABC TV interview
Case news update October 2009 • It was reported by Allen Jones on 2GB on 12th October 2009 that 42 boat blast Afghan asylum seekers had been granted with permanent resident status in Australia, 5 months down the track and were sent to Perth and Brisbane to stay, to look for a job or to have further treatment.
Case concluding? 20th April 2010 • Honours for navy crew who saved asylum-seekers • Fourteen Australian navy personnel were given commendations on 20 April 2010 for rescuing and treating survivors of the SIEV 36 asylum-seeker vessel, which blew up near Ashmore Reef last April, reported by the Australian on 20th April 2010. • Next slide’s Pdf file shows the original news report.
The Sri Lankan asylum in 2009 • It was reported that 200 Sri Lankans arrived by boat in November 2009 and were taken to the Christmas Island detention centre. • Another 253 Sri Lankans plea to be allowed into Australia from Indonesia in the same month.
“Tampa” background information • In the early afternoon of 6 October 2001, a southbound wooden hulled “Suspected Illegal Entry Vessel” designated SIEV 4, carrying 223 asylum seekers and believed to be operated by people smugglers, sank and was intercepted by HMAS Adelaide 100 nautical miles (190 km) north of Christmas Island. • The next day, which was the day before the issue of writs for the 2001 federal election, Immigration Minister Philip Ruddock announced that passengers of SIEV4 had thrown children overboard. This claim was later repeated by other senior government ministers including Defense Minister Peter Reith and Prime Minister John Howard.
Howard government’s case: Children over the board affair, the Tampa incident From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia See also: Australian federal election, 2001 • The Children Overboard affair was an Australianpolitical controversy involving public allegations by Howard government ministers in October 2001, in the lead-up to a federal election, that sea-faring asylum seekers had thrown children overboard in a presumed ploy to secure rescue and passage to Australia. • The government's handling of this and other events involving unauthorized arrivals worked to its advantage. The Tampa incident had led the government to adopt stricter border protection measures to prevent unauthorized arrivals from reaching Australia by boat. Polls indicated the measures had public support. The government was able to portray itself as "strong" on border protection measures and opponents as "weak". In November 2001, the Liberal-National coalition was re-elected with an increased majority. • The Australian Senate Select Committee for an inquiry into a certain maritime incident later found that no children had been thrown overboard, and that the government knew this prior to the election. The government was criticized for misleading the public and cynically "(exploiting) voters' fears of a wave of illegal immigrants by demonizing asylum-seekers”. • Although reports indicated that the strain of being towed was the proximate cause of the asylum seeker boat eventually sinking, in 2007, Australian Prime Minister John Howard asserted that the asylum seekers "irresponsibly sank the damn boat, which put their children in the water”.
Senate inquiry • A Senate select committee inquiry, composed mainly of non-government senators, found that no children were thrown overboard from SIEV 4, that the evidence did not support the Children Overboard claim, and that the photographs purported to show children thrown into the sea were taken after SIEV 4 sank. In response, Howard said that he acted on the intelligence he was given at the time. • A minority dissenting report, authored by government senators on the committee, described the inquiry as driven by a "misplaced sense of self-righteous outrage [felt] by the Australian Labor Party at its defeat in the 2001 federal elections". An appendix to their report documented cases where passengers aboard other SIEVs had threatened children, sabotaged their own vessels, committed self-harm and, in the case of SIEV-7 on 22 October, thrown a child overboard who was rescued by another asylum seeker. • Stream: Australian and New Zealand Politics by Dr Megan Kimber, Lisa Ehrich, Neil Cranston, Queensland University of Technology
Scrafton revelations • Michael Scrafton, a former senior advisor to Peter Reith, revealed on 16 August 2004 he told John Howard on 7 November 2001 that the Children Overboard claim might be untrue. Howard said they only discussed the inconclusive nature of the video footage. In light of the new information, the Labor opposition called for further inquiry. • On 29 August, Howard announced the 2004 federal election. On 1 September, a second inquiry composed mainly of non-government senators was convened. While the final report on 9 December found Scrafton's claims to be credible, government committee members questioned the reliability of Scrafton's recollections and wrote a minority dissenting report challenging that finding.
Time dims memory In the earlier part of 2009 John Howard launched a vigorous campaign to clear his name after his former department chief Max Moore-Wilton directly implicated Howard in the 2001 “children overboard” controversy. On 9 July 2009, Moore-Wilton rang to report that he had reflected on the situation and said “As a result I formed the view that my recollection was not sound”. Daily Telegraph, Time dims memory , p18 September 7 ,2009
Percentage • The number of asylum seekers worldwide has increased significantly over the past two years. When comparing 2008 figures with 2007, for example, asylum seeker numbers rose by 122% in Italy, 121% in Norway, 89% in the Netherlands, 70% in Turkey, 53% in Switzerland, 30% in Canada and 20% in France, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. In the same period, Australia had only a 19% increase. • Australia’s numbers are small in absolute terms, too. About 1700 asylum seekers have come by boat in 2009, but Italy had 36,000 boat arrivals in 2008, while most asylum seekers prefer the United States (49,000 in 2008), Canada (36,900), France (35,200), and Britain (30,500). • ZhiYan, p17, 16th October 2009, Hardline faction peddles fear and punitive policies for asylum seekers, the Sydney Morning Herald
Numbers and figures • It was reported that there were six boat arrivals a year under the Howard Government ‘s governing, but six boat arrivals a week in the Rudd Government’s administration years. (Joe Hockey, Radio Interview in August 2010) • There have been 99 boats until 3rd Oct 2010, according to ABC Radio. Morris Yemoncommented,”It’s proven that the labour’s policy isn’t working in the most significant area.” (border protection/immigration) • It was reported on 3rd Oct 2010 that the number of asylum seekers arriving in Australia by sea was over 5000 up till that point of the year. This is something this government should be deeply embarrassed of. The Labour government has spent 7 billion dollars on asylum seekers this year, which is something this government shouldn’t be pride of. (ABC Radio, News report, 3pm 3rdOct 2010.)
Asylum seeker clampdown / The Labour’s asylum freeze • The current government has put a blanket suspension of processing on asylum seekers from Afghanistan and Sri Lankan in April 2010 • The former Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, says his government makes no apology for deciding when to send rejected asylum seekers home, according to Kirsty Needham, reported in The Sydney Morning Herald on 29th March 2010 (in attempt to stop the escalating numbers of boat people). The increase of the influx of asylum seekers was not because the Rudd Government softened the border protection policies. • Malcolm Farr, Simon Benson and Steven Lewis from Daily Telegraph (p 1, 12 April 2010) maintain that “The Rudd Government is slamming the door on refugees from Afghanistan and Sri Lanka in a desperate bid to keep out thousands of boat people. The announcement, banded an ‘election fix’, means applications for Sri Lankans would be frozen for at least three months and at least six months for Afghans.” • The Rudd’s Government’s asylum freeze is “an election fix”, says Tony Abbott (9 April 2010).
Elements of your case study Title - What? (no more than 3 lines):The title describes the project or the focus of the case study. Use a headline style to catch people's attention: Case Study on Asylum Seekers’ Boat Blast The introduction • The purpose of this case study (the effectiveness of the political process in Australia on asylum seekers) • Scope of the study (what is going to be covered) April boat blast (summary) View points of the major Australian political parties (key differences) Review of the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention (at least 2 related articles) and the Australian Human Rights Commissioner’s guidelines on asylum seekers (at least 2 related articles) My point of view (informed opinions, and suggest solutions) The conclusion (summary of the main points) References Appendix if applicable
Elements of a case study Introduction - What, How? (approx 50 words): • Start with a sharp and brief line of the political pain/concern/problem • State what is covered in this case study
Event summary The case - How, Who, When? (approx 100 words): • Move to a briefing of this scenario. • What was the scenario, what happened to those asylum seekers on 16 April 2009 (47 Afghani asylum seekers)? You need a summary of the news stories in this paragraph. The injured - what happened to those injured? Use examples that can help to evaluate the effectiveness of the current government’s political policies on asylum seekers.
Review of view points (approx. 100 – 150 words) What are some of the view points from the major parties’ spokespersons on this incident? • Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young protested that the boat blast was a “Wake up call” / endanger lives / change policies • Malcolm Turnbull, the former leader of the Opposition, called for “border protection” / a high alert for the possibility of a further arrival of asylum seekers”. The Rudd Government is “still too soft”… said the Opposition immigration spokeswoman Sharman Stone • Kevin Rudd, the former leader of Labor Party, warned the influx of asylum seekers. He maintained that people’s smugglers were to blame. / To be humane and tough. (longer term solution?)
Signatory country Why does Australia have to take asylum seekers? • Review the 1951 United Nations Refugees Convention (about 2 articles) • the Australian Human Rights Commissioner’s guideline (about 2 articles)
What is your informed point of view on this asylum seekers’ case? (approx. 100 - 150 words) EFS places a high value on students’ ability to think for themselves, and I want you to express your own opinions as long as you can support your own views convincingly. • Comment on the current government’s position and practice on asylum seekers. • To your mind what should the government do with an influx of more asylum seekers? • Should the government reinstate the Howard government’s policies on asylum seekers in the Australian public interest? • What is your opinion? What makes you think so?
