Chapter 1 introduces the general logic and motivations behind turning regression models “inside out.” Here, we explain how Regression Inside Out (RIO) facilitates a case-oriented approach to regression, detail the benefits of such an approach, and provide a roadmap for the rest of the book.

Chapter 10 concludes our book, outlining the benefits of a case-oriented approach to regression. We review key substantive findings from the analyses presented in previous chapters and highlight directions for future research.

Like Chapter 7, this chapter also discusses the sequencing of case study designs. Here we particularly focus on the deductive–inductive sequencing. Using an exemplar case study, we discuss how prediction outliers (deviant cases) identified during the initial study can guide the sequencing of designs in further stages. In the context of the example, we discuss the research question, theoretical sampling, cases, levels of analysis, and the potential requirement for additional data collection. Furthermore, we discuss the issue of omitted variable bias and internal validity in the context of sequenced case study designs. We end the chapter with a discussion on how to report sequenced case studies following deductive–inductive reasoning.

In this chapter, we move on from the archetypical to the sequenced case study designs. First of all, we discuss what sequencing case study designs entail. Using an illustrative example, we discuss one type of sequencing in detail (i.e. the inductive-deductive sequencing). In the context of the example, we discuss the research question, theoretical sampling, controls, cases, embedded units, and the levels of analysis involved in the sequenced design. Lastly, we briefly discuss how to report the sequenced case study design.

Overview of the book including reasons for writing it, what it addresses, and summary of content in different chapters.

A body of law is currently being developed in response to algorithms which are designed to control increasingly smart machines, to replace humans in the decision-making loops of systems, or to account for the actions of algorithms that make decisions which affect the legal rights of people. Such algorithms are ubiquitous; they are being used to guide commercial transactions, evaluate credit and housing applications, by courts in the criminal justice system, and to control self-driving cars and robotic surgeons. However, while the automation of decisions typically made by humans has resulted in numerous benefits to society, the use of algorithms has also resulted in challenges to established areas of law. For example, algorithms may exhibit the same human biases in decision-making that have led to violations of people’s constitutional rights, and algorithms may collectively collude to price fix, thus violating antitrust law.

Stories are an everyday part of our lives: we make sense of the world through the stories we hear and tell. This chapter explores how you can build on your experience in storytelling and your knowledge of expository writing to write thought-provoking case stories. You will learn about the benefits of dividing story writing into two processes: ‘writing it down’ or gathering observations, and ‘writing it up’ or drawing conclusions and making compositional decisions. Separating observations from conclusions enables you to create stories that are rich in layers of detail. These details make them more ‘real’, and better represent the complex web of conditions and participants’ perspectives that characterise teaching situations. After reviewing the elements of narrative, you will learn to use a simple five-step model, the ‘SISDA’ steps, to help select, develop and refine your case story. You will also explore three variants of the SISDA steps. Opportunities for collaboration in writing and refining case stories will be highlighted throughout the chapter.

You might be tempted to skip or skim this chapter and jump straight into the case stories. This is understandable as the whole premise of this book is that learning through stories is often more inviting than learning with discursive texts. However, if you do choose to jump into the case stories first, you need to return to this chapter later in order to stand back and see the broader landscape across which you are travelling as you read and write case stories. This metacognitive distance will deepen your understanding of the ways case learning helps you build your skills in problem solving, perspective taking and conditional thinking, which in turn will help you better develop these foundational skills of reflective teaching practice.

How we think we read stories or real-life situations, and how we actually read them are often very different. This chapter explores what the differences are, and how they can get in the way of effectively interpreting case stories. You will see how applying a systematic approach to reading case stories helps you become more self-aware and skilful in your interpretive practices. Following a systematic approach will enable you to separate observations from interpretations or evaluations and make you less likely to jump to conclusions. The approach presented in this chapter is the ‘SNAAPI’ steps, a simple five-step inductive reasoning–based process that will help you make sense of both the case stories in this book and the real-life situations you will encounter in schools. The chapter will also introduce three variants of the SNAAPI steps that you can use when you want to be more specialised in your engagement with a case story. All the interpretive approaches can be undertaken individually, but you will gain most benefit from discussing your thinking with others at all stages of the process.

Welcome to Case Learning for Teachers: Strategic Knowledge for Professional Experience. This book is primarily aimed at preservice teachers preparing for placement in schools. However, both the case stories and the model of case learning also provide rich professional learning material for teachers at all career stages. The book’s approach stems from the recognition that reading and writing cases builds the kinds of personal and/or professional knowledge that leads to significant change in thinking, attitudes and practice.

Chapter 2 sets forth the book’s theoretical framework. It also provides background on the history of membership rights to subgroups within the Muslim American population. It focuses especially on cases deciding the granting and revocation of whiteness from non-Western groups. 

The Indian Supreme Court has been called “the most powerful court in the world” for its wide jurisdiction, its expansive understanding of its own powers, and the billion plus people under its authority. Yet scholars and policy makers have a very uneven picture of the court’s functioning: deep knowledge about the more visible, “high-profile” cases but very little about more mundane, but far more numerous and potentially equally important, decisions. This chapter aims to address this imbalance with a rigorous, empirical account of the Court’s decisions from 2010 to 2015. We use the most extensive original dataset of Indian Supreme Court opinions yet created to provide a broad, quantitative overview of the social identity of the litigants that approach the court, the types of matters they bring to the court, the levels of success that different groups of litigants have before the Court, and the opinion-writing patterns of the various judges of the Supreme Court. This analysis provides foundational facts for the study of the Court and its role in progressive social change.

The Indian Supreme Court sits in panels and can have up to 31 judges. This chapter explores how the Indian Supreme Court developed its current structure and the impact of this structure on its functioning. It argues that the Supreme Court’s structure has a range of inter-related effects that includes increasing access to the Court, producing a “polyvocal” jurisprudence that destabilizes stare decisis, spurring experimentation among judges, fostering a “Chief Justice dominant” Court, and reducing the perceived partisanship of judges. Mapping the structure of the Court, as well as the Court’s relationship with the rest of the judiciary, helps us appreciate how judges ultimately interpret the law and the Constitution not in isolation, but within a larger judicial architecture.