The IRAC method of case study analysis.AuthorsBittner, M.So.docx

The IRAC method of case study analysis.
Authors:
Bittner, M.
Source:
Social Studies. Sep/Oct90, Vol. 81 Issue 5, p227. 4p.
Document Type:
Article
Subjects:
SOCIAL sciences
Abstract:
Describes the use of case study analysis in teaching social
studies. Making value judgements; Using the IRAC (Issue,
Rule, Analysis, and Conclusion) method; Gives examples of
various case studies; How case studies help students.
Full Text Word Count:
3029
ISSN:
0037-7996
Accession Number:
9103185336
THE IRAC METHOD OF CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Contents
1. Acquisition of a Process to Analyze Case Studies
2. An Example of the IRAC Method
3. Translating Theory into Practice
4. Example for a Government Class
5. Example for a World History Class
6. Example for an American History Class
7. A Tool for Making Value Judgments
8. Summary
9. REFERENCES
Listen
A Legal Model for the Social Studies

Not only did the legal profession give educators the
instructional technique of case studies, but it also contributed a
concomitant method of case study analysis. Although
disciplines such as business management, social sciences, and
medicine have extensively used the methodology of case
studies, students in these disciplines were not provided with a
method to analyze a case. Some of these cases required only an
individual value conclusion; other cases required a specific
conclusion based upon substantive knowledge of the discipline.
Still others required both types of conclusions. Only in law
classes are students given an unequivocal method for case
analysis. According to this method, students recognize a legal
issue from the facts in the case and then analyze the facts
according to a legal precedent and reach a conclusion.
The underlying assumptions of teaching-effectiveness research
can be applied to this topic in a social studies class: Teachers
cannot assume that all students on their own will develop a
method of case analysis; that initial success will motivate the
student to continue the analysis process; and that the students
require a clear demonstration or modeling of the case analysis
method (Brophy and Good 1986). The social studies literature
does not give examples of these analysis methods. Because the
use of case studies in the social studies fosters critical thinking,
class interaction, and personal initiative, a method of case study
analysis warrants the attention of social studies teachers.
When the case study instructional technique is used in the social
studies classroom, students are often required to comprehend,
assess, and evaluate amounts of information that may be
overwhelming. Unfortunately, students do not receive enough
practice in the method of case study analysis before they are
required to comprehend relationships, generalizations, and
patterns. Such a situation is self-defeating for students because
without acquiring the rudimentary skills of case analysis, they
will not be able to contribute to the lesson at hand.
In addition, students are then expected to make value judgments
about the facts, issues, and conclusions of a case study. To

make an informed and coherent value judgment, students must
first comprehend the facts, recognize the issues that arise from
those facts, analyze the facts in relation to the definition or rule
of a term, and then reach a conclusion about the analysis. To
make a value-laden decision such as "I don't agree with that,"
the student should first say that the facts produce issue X and
then analyze the facts in accordance with each element of the
rule in order to make a viable conclusion about whether the
issue is proved or disproved. With this procedure, the value
decision becomes meaningful to the individual student and to
the group participating in the case study discussion. This
process of analysis is known as the IRAC method.
The IRAC Method The IRAC method is an instructional tool
that can aid students in the comprehension and evaluation of
information so that they can make informed value decisions. It
is an acronym for Issue, Rule, Analysis, and Conclusion.
Although this is a legal model used to evaluate hypothetical
situations in law cases, it is by no means limited to the study of
the law. Useful for case studies presented in varied mediums
such as narratives, videos/films, or recordings, the IRAC
method may be applied to other activities such as defining a
term or demonstrating a concept, principle, relationship,
analogy, or contrasting idea. Often the instructional focus is on
the end result of case study discussion rather than on how to
"walk through" a method or approach to be used by the students
in the case analysis.
By using the IRAC method, social studies teachers can help
their students acquire a process for analyzing a case study. This
building block method, which starts with smaller chunks of
material, develops understanding relationships. It enhances the
immediate application of learning by translating theory into
practice to help students enlarge their vocabulary and attain new
concepts. The method demonstrates to students that the correct
analysis of a case gives them an evaluation and verification tool
to assist them in making meaningful value judgments.
Acquisition of a Process to Analyze Case Studies

A case study is a realistic application or demonstration of a
theory or principle. The student is required to relate textbook
material to a concrete situation and then make a practical
judgment. Students can relate to case studies because they
understand that they could possibly find themselves in similar
situations.
After reading, viewing, or hearing a case, students use the IRAC
method to recognize the facts that raise the issues. They then
apply the elements of the rule or definition to the facts to verify
or disprove the issues in the conclusion.
Students' analytical skills are developed through a systematic
mastery of complex problem solving in a rational manner.
Students become more aware of their own abilities and
limitations and are given the opportunity to practice in a
positive environment.
Another variation of this method includes informing students
about the entire case-i.e., issues, rules, analysis, and
conclusions-and then soliciting their input. In another method,
the teacher presents two cases with all of the aforementioned
elements and does not tell the students which is the correct one.
The teacher then has them choose. The danger in using either of
these methods is that the student is slighted. The teacher has
done too much work for the students, who are not required to
discover the issue, review the rule, and analyze the facts to
determine the correct conclusion (Lee 19X3).
An Example of the IRAC Method
Case: John told Sara that his sports car would travel 150 mph on
the freeway. John was anxious to impress Sara, so he crossed
the double yellow lines to pass the car in front of him. A car
was coming from the opposite direction and was forced off the
road; the other driver sustained head injuries when his car
overturned.
Issue: Has negligence been demonstrated?
Rule: Negligence requires that a duty was owed, that the duty
was breached, and that the breach was the actual and proximate
cause of damage.

Analysis: As a driver on the public freeway, John owed a duty
of due care not to pass a car when double yellow lines divide
the road. John had a duty not to expose this foreseeable plaintiff
to an unreasonable risk of harm. John failed to act as a
reasonable person in the same or similar circumstances when he
passed a car. John breached his duty of care when he violated a
statute not to cross the double yellow lines. John is the actual
cause of the other driver's injury; but for John, the accident
would not have occurred. It was foreseeable that another car
would be coming from the opposite direction. John is the
proximate cause of the driver's personal and property damage
because there is a connection between John's action and the
result.
Conclusion: John is liable for negligence because he violated a
statute.
Instead of plunging into the case analysis, the student takes the
elements of negligence, applies them to the facts, and builds a
relationship so that a conclusion can be reached. The five
elements are essential if negligence is to be proved. The student
is responsible for verifying each element in the facts that
corresponds with the rule. The conclusion will be correct if this
method is used.
Translating Theory into Practice
Social studies teachers may assume that students can analyze a
case without having had some prior sequential instruction. An
IRAC model can be used for vocabulary building and concept
attainment, even before students are introduced to a full-blown
case. In the following examples, the IRAC method either proves
or disproves the issues raised in a government class, a world
history class, and an American history class.
Example for a Government Class
Case: Sixty of the 100 senators present voted to cut off the
debate on an environmental issue. A petition with sixteen votes
had been circulated in the Senate. Senator Brown then spoke for
only an hour on this issue the first day after the petition was
signed.

Issue: Has cloture been demonstrated?
Rule: The Senate cuts off debate if three-fifths of the senators
present vote to do so two days after sixteen senators sign a
petition for it; each member may then speak for only one hour.
Analysis: The sixty represent three-fifths of the hundred
senators. Senator Brown spoke on the first day after the petition
was signed, making it the second day after sixteen senators
signed it. Senator Brown spoke for only one hour.
Conclusion: Therefore, cloture was demonstrated.
Example for a World History Class
Case: Elena and her family had moved from El Salvador to the
United States. During a current events discussion about natural
disasters such as the San Francisco earthquake and Hurricane
Hugo, Elena said she heard that certain buildings had been
expropriated by the U.S. government during these disasters.
Elena also said that her grandfather's farm had been taken by
the revolutionary soldiers and that the farm was now owned by
one of the soldiers and his family. Elena stated that in the
United States, some of the post offices and fire stations had
been used by the federal government to provide homes for the
disaster victims. She wondered if this arrangement by the U.S.
government were comparable to that experienced by her
grandfather in El Salvador.
Issues: Was the grandfather's farm expropriated by the
government of El Salvador? Were the post offices and fire
stations expropriated by the U.S. government? Rule:
Expropriate means that the federal government takes private
land or possessions from the owner for public use.
Analysis: The grandfather's farm qualifies as land, and we can
assume that he owned it or that it was in his rightful possession
until he had finished making payments on it. Consequently, it
was his private land. If it had been public land, it would have
been everyone's land, not just the grandfather's land. We do not
know if the grandfather and his family took their personal
possessions; the farm supplies, animals, crops, and other farm
buildings can be considered possessions and therefore part of

the farm. These possessions probably remained on the farm. It
appears that both the land and possessions were taken, although
either could be taken for expropriation to occur. Elena stated,
however, that the farm was taken by a soldier, not the
government of El Salvador. That statement would indicate that a
private soldier took the farm for his personal use and that the
farm was not taken by the federal government for public use.
The post offices and fire stations are public buildings paid for
by taxing private citizens. Their use is for everyone; therefore,
they are public buildings on public land and are possessions of
the public. During the disasters, the U.S. government did not
take private land for public use. The U.S. took public land for
public emergency use. The buildings were used for their normal
purposes after the disaster period.
Conclusion: The farm was not expropriated. The post offices
and fire stations were not expropriated.
Example for an American History Class
Case: Responding to the suggestion of his uncle, Phil, an
assembler at a ship-building plant in Alabama, decided to move
to Michigan to work at a new car plant. Phil moved in with his
uncle and applied for a job at the plant. Because the plant was
just beginning production, not all workers were hired for a
forty-hour week. Phil was told that he could work twenty hours
per week until he was hired full time. Phil started working but
was told that he could not receive group medical insurance
coverage until he was hired on a full-time basis. The group plan
applied only to union members for whom the car plant paid 100
percent of the premiums. Phil could not join the union until he
worked forty hours per week. Phil's uncle became very angry
when he heard about this and urged Phil to take the auto
workers union to court because the union was operating a closed
shop. Phil was not sure about this. He had read his contract that
stated that the union could enforce union shop contracts.
Issues: Did the auto workers union operate a closed shop? Was
the auto workers union allowed to enforce union shop contracts?
Rule: The 1947 Taft-Hartley Act outlawed closed shops that

required new workers to join a union before they could be
employed. This same act allowed a union shop contract that
forced new workers to join the union after they accepted
employment.
Analysis: The facts state that Phil was hired by the auto firm to
work twenty hours per week until he was hired later for a forty-
hour week. Phil had nothing in writing to guarantee that he
would be hired later for a forty-hour week. Phil did not have to
join the auto workers union as a condition for employment. He
could not, however, receive medical benefits or join the union
until he was scheduled to work forty hours per week. Phil's
uncle reached his conclusions before he knew all the facts.
Therefore, the auto plant was not a closed shop because the
union allowed Phil to be employed, even though he was not a
union member (see Garraty and McGaughey 1989).
Phil could have secured medical insurance at his own expense.
The auto firm, of course, paid for the cost of the insurance for
its full-time employees. It would certainly be to Phil's benefit to
have the company pay for the policy rather than his paying the
higher cost for individual insurance. Although the union did not
physically force the auto firm workers to join the union, it did,
by indirect means, require the auto workers to join the union in
order to receive medical coverage. In other words, the auto
workers union was allowed to enforce union shop contracts.
Conclusion: The auto workers union did not operate a closed
shop in defiance of the Taft-Hartley Act. The auto workers did
enforce a union shop contract as allowed by the Taft-Hartley
Act because Phil would not receive medical coverage if he did
not join the union.
Students can use these exercises as self-checking devices to
acquaint themselves with what is required to reach a coherent
conclusion in a case study. This beneficial technique increases
students' "vocabulary of experience," which reduces anxiety
about the unanticipated (Gullette 1982). In this manner,
students start with simple concept comprehension and build
toward more complex relationships.

Stevens (1982) asserts that the case method is inappropriate if a
spectrum of cases cannot be presented to show generalizations.
Students, however, must first become familiar with the rule or
definition before making an informed analysis to reach
conclusions to be applied to future relationships.
A Tool for Making Value Judgments
Numerous case studies require students to share their personal
values and opinions about an issue. Frequently, this is the most
important overall objective of a case study. Little importance is
given to the "how to" process of the student's arriving at a
conclusionary value statement. Often students pass over the
IRAC steps and just make personal value-opinion judgments.
Some value-laden questions for case study analysis include: Do
you agree with what X did; what would you have done; what are
some alternative solutions; and how urgent is each issue? Van
Gundy (1981) refers to the deviation between "what is" and
"what should be" when students are required only to make value
judgments in case analysis. The interpretations may differ from
person to person, and incorrect information may render case
analysis worthless.
Summary
Case studies can be used in many disciplines, and social studies
teachers can aid their students in developing a systematic
method to approach case studies. Often students are called upon
to give information about a topic and then subsequently state
their opinions about how the topics affect them, which is a
value statement. Much of the focus of attention in the classroom
is upon active student participation rather than upon acquainting
the students with a hands-on method for analyzing a case
through a step-by-step process. Once students acquire this skill
they can transfer it to case study analysis in other classes.
The IRAC method gives the students a frame of reference when
dealing with a particular issue. It could be considered a formula
because students are required to learn first the definition (rule)
of a term, to read the facts of the case to determine if the facts
raise the issue, to compare the facts with each element of the

rule to establish if the issue is existent or nonexistent, and to
give the conclusion.
By using the IRAC method, students will have a working tool
that can be used for practicing case study analysis on a smaller
scale. In this manner, students move in a linear fashion from
simple to more complex. By working through the method,
students can immediately see the application of the concept they
just learned to the facts of the case study. The students can
check themselves to determine if they understand the meaning
of a term and how it is practically applied before they are
required to assert a value judgment, which could be given on
the basis of a misunderstanding of the term and the issue arising
from the facts. The IRAC method both creates confidence in
students and positively reinforces the acquisition of accurate
information.
REFERENCES
Brophy, J., and T. Good. 1986. Teacher behavior and student
achievement. In Handbook of research on teaching 3rd ea.,
edited by M. Wittrock. New York: Macmillan.
Garraty, J., and R McGaughey. 1989. A short history of the
American nation. New York: Harper and Row.
Gullette, M. 1982. The art and craft of teaching. Boston:
Harvard University Press.
Lee, U. S. 1983. Public management and case study methods.
Teaching Political Science (Fall)2:6-14.
Stevens, B. 1982. Educating the nurse manager. Maryland: Lord
Publishing.
Van Gundy, A. 1981. Techniques of structured problem solving.
New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
~~~~~~~~
By MARIE BITTNER
MARIE BITTNER is a professor in the Department of Education
at California State University in Chico.
Copyright of Social Studies is the property of Taylor & Francis
Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple

sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.
Choose Language
1
EXCEL EXERCISE #7: Cost-Benefit Analysis
1. Enter the information in the spreadsheet below. Be sure that
the information is entered
in the same cells as given, or the formulas will not work. The
information is the stream of
costs and benefits (in millions) estimated for a proposed city
baseball stadium. Year 0
represents the initial investment while costs for years 1-10 are
the maintenance costs
incurred at the end of each year. The benefits are the revenues
from sport team contracts
and revenues at the end of each year.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
A B C D E F
Cost-Benefit Analysis: City Stadium
Total Discount Present
Year Costs Benefits Benefits Factor Value
0 60 0
1 1 3
2 1 3
3 1 10
4 1 10
5 1.5 12.5
6 1.5 12.5
7 1.5 12.5
8 1.5 15
9 2 15
10 2 15
NPV =
Discount
Rate =
2. Highlight the cell range B4:D14. Open the FORMAT menu,
select CELLS... Select
the category CURRENCY, select the format $1,234.10. Repeat

this procedure for the
cell range F4:F16.
3. Highlight cell B18. Open the FORMAT menu, select
CELLS... Select the category
PERCENT, select two decimal places.
4. To determine the desirability of the project from an
efficiency criteria, first calculate the
Total Benefit for each year of the project. To do this, enter the
following formula.
D4: =c4-b4
5. Copy the formula in cell D4 to the cell range D5:D14.
6. We must next discount future costs and benefits to put them
into today’s value (i.e.,
find the present value). First, enter the following value for the
discount rate (a 10%
discount rate).
2
B18: 0.1
7. Second, calculate the discount factor for each year. Enter the
following formula.
E4: =1/(1+$b$18)^a4
8. Copy the formula in cell E4 to the cell range E5:E14.
9. Third, multiply the total benefit for each year by the discount

factor for each year.
Enter the following formula.
F4: =d4*e4
10. Copy the formula in cell F4 to the cell range F5:F14.
11. Find the Net Present Value. Add together the Present
Values for each year. Enter the
following formula.
F16: =sum(f4:f14)
Note: Steps 9-11 could be accomplished with one simple
formula:
=sumproduct(d4:d14,e4:e14)
12. Change the discount rate and see what happens to the Net
Present Value of the
stadium project. With a discount rate of 7% or below, the
project would not be cost
effective.
13. Enter the following information.
A20: Shortcut:
A21: NPV =
A22: IRR =
14. An easy way of calculating net present value can replace
steps 7-12. Excel has a net
present value function as follows: =NPV(rate,value1,value2,...)
This function assumes that each value occurs at the end of
consecutive years (i.e., year1,
year 2, year 3,...). Since any initial investments (i.e., costs)
occur at the beginning of the
project and not at the end of year 1, these initial costs are added

on to the result returned
by the NPV function. For this exercise enter the following
formula.
B21: =npv(b18,d5:d14)+d4
15. A usual piece of information for a cost-benefit analysis is
the discount rate that returns
a net present value of $0. This can be obtained with the IRR
function as follows:
=IRR(values)
3
For this exercise enter the following formula.
B22: =irr(d4:d14)
Your completed spreadsheet should look like the one below.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
A B C D E F
Cost-Benefit Analysis: City Stadium
Total Discount Present
Year Costs Benefits Benefits Factor Value
0 $60.00 $0.00 ($60.00) 1.00 ($60.00)
1 $1.00 $3.00 $2.00 0.91 $1.82
2 $1.00 $3.00 $2.00 0.83 $1.65
3 $1.00 $10.00 $9.00 0.75 $6.76
4 $1.00 $10.00 $9.00 0.68 $6.15
5 $1.50 $12.50 $11.00 0.62 $6.83
6 $1.50 $12.50 $11.00 0.56 $6.21
7 $1.50 $12.50 $11.00 0.51 $5.64
8 $1.50 $15.00 $13.50 0.47 $6.30
9 $2.00 $15.00 $13.00 0.42 $5.51
10 $2.00 $15.00 $13.00 0.39 $5.01
NPV = ($8.11)
Discount
Rate = 10.00%
Shortcut:
NPV = ($8.11)
IRR = 7.398%

16. Save the spreadsheet: A:CBASTAD.XLS

The IRAC method of case study analysis.AuthorsBittner, M.So.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to The IRAC method of case study analysis.AuthorsBittner, M.So.docx

Similar to The IRAC method of case study analysis.AuthorsBittner, M.So.docx (17)

More from oreo10

More from oreo10 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The IRAC method of case study analysis.AuthorsBittner, M.So.docx