Case Writing Guideline – Final Case Project (7.5-10 Pages, single-spaced/Due
Date Posted on Canvas)
This is what a typical case study (case + teaching note) should include. It is
strongly recommended to review sample cases and teaching notes published
in case journals.
1. Required Elements of Case Content
● Title
● Abstract
● Learning Outcomes (List 3-5)
● Key Words (list 4-5)
● List of References Cited (Lists only References for the case using APA
7th)
● Main Body of Case using headings and subheadings
2. Teaching Notes Requirements
Clearly state how a case could be used in coursework and the pedagogical
outcomes that can be expected from its use. Provide information on the intended
audience for the case. Teaching notes should provide suggested answers (or
solutions) for the discussion questions. Give insight on how teaching this case can
work in practice.
Your Teaching Note should be organized under the following headings:
1. Case Overview/Abstract – Provides a clear, concise overview, summarizing key
facts, ethical/legal principles, and the ethical dilemma; engaging and well-organized
roadmap.
2. Research Methods – Identify how data was collected. This can include
primary data collection via interview (if applicable) or secondary data
collection. Here’s an example:
○ “This decision-based critical incident and the names used in the
CI are real and were based on the secondary sources cited.”
(Wells, Dunn-Jensen, L. M., & Yang, I. (2019). But I Can’t Eat
That: Should Babcock Ice Cream Change its Ingredients?
Journal of Critical Incidents.).
○ “This decisional critical incident (CI) is based on contact with top
management employees and interviews with the Global Blood
Therapeutics, Inc. CEO, Dr. Ted Love. Other pertinent data
were provided by the firm or retrieved from company records
and public domain sources such as research studies. The
company name, facts, events, and people are not disguised and
the CEO has granted the authors a publication release.”
(Whaley, Gupta, A., & Raorane, S. (2017). Global Blood
Therapeutics, Inc.: What is the Best Funding Choice? Journal of
Critical Incidents, 10, 13).
3. Learning Outcomes – Learning outcomes should identify what students can do
after completing the case analysis, highlighting the key lessons students should take
away from the case. Provide 3-5 Learning Outcomes expressed with Bloom’s
Taxonomy terms (Identify, Analyze, Evaluate, Recommend, etc.). See Using
Bloom’s Taxonomy to Write Effective Learning Outcomes:
20a%20classification%20of%20the%20different%20outcomes%20and,at%20the%2
0University%20of%20Chicago
Links to an external site.
.
4. Intended Course and Audience –Identify the courses this case is intended for. In
which courses should this case study be taught? For which level of students is this
case most appropriate? Here is an example:
“This critical incident is most appropriate for graduate and advanced undergraduate
courses in strategy, business policy, decision-making, and entrepreneurship as well
as graduate management classes in biotechnology, related life science fields, and
workshops for life science industry professionals.”
5. Discussion Questions – Provide four discussion questions for students to
answer based on the case. Discussion questions must include connections to
ethics/compliance, regulations, principles, or policy. The questions should be related
to the learning outcomes in order to make them achievable for students. Here is an
example:
Learning Objectives from Whaley, Gupta, A., & Raorane, S. (2017). Global Blood
Therapeutics, Inc.: What is the Best Funding Choice? Journal of Critical Incidents
1. Identify the difference between internal and external factors and determine the
effect these factors have on funding approaches for startup organizations attempting
to meet stakeholder needs. (Q #1)”
2. Evaluate the needs of key stakeholders in startup firms prior to FDA product
approval. (Q #2)
3. Analyze and defend decision criteria for feasible funding approaches that allow
startup biotechnology firms to sustain operations prior to the commercialization
phase. (Q #3)
6. Suggested Answers (or Solutions) to Discussion Questions –Provide a
high-quality, “A”-level response to each discussion question. Each answer should
consist of 2-3 well-developed paragraphs. Refer to the sample teaching notes on
Canvas for guidance.
7. Further Reading: Provide any literature or other resources that would support
teaching of this case study (if applicable).
8. References: Lists only References for the Teaching Notes citations (Use APA
7th).
9. Epilogue: Include the follow‐up information about the decision actually taken (if
applicable).
Style Guidelines (Midterm Case Proposal + Final Case Project)
● Use the following style guidelines to complete the midterm case proposal
and final case project: Times New Roman font, size 12 point, 1-inch
margins and single-spaced.
● Synthesize all the sources throughout your paper. Paraphrasing is most
often used to blend the ideas of another writer’s text with the prose style of
our own work. Do not use bullet points for the case proposal and final
case project, and make sure to write in complete sentences. Turnitin
and AI Generative Tools on the syllabus will be applied.
● The Midterm Case Proposal must be a minimum of 3.5 pages with single
spacing. The Final Case Project must be a minimum of 7.5 pages with
single spacing Paragraphs are usually about 150-200 words long.
● The Midterm Case Proposal and the Final Case Project must be
provided in Microsoft Word. Do not submit your paper in Google Docs,
PDF, or PAGES.
● Write in the third person, in the past tense, and establish an objectivity of
core dilemmas in the case.
The rubric for the final case has been updated based on the midterm case
proposal.
Criteria Poin
ts
Excellent Good Fair Needs
Improvement
Abstract/Cas
e Overview
8
(10%)
Provides a
clear, concise
overview,
summarizing
key facts,
ethical/legal
principles, and
the ethical
dilemma;
engaging and
well-organized
roadmap.
Concise
and mostly
complete
summary
with minor
gaps in
detail or
clarity.
Includes
some
relevant
information
but lacks
clarity or
completenes
s.
Overview lacks
clarity,
organization, or
essential details.
Keywords 4
(5%)
Includes 4-5
accurate
keywords
reflecting core
themes.
Includes 3-4
keywords
that mostly
capture
themes.
Keywords
are vague or
partially
relevant.
Keywords are
missing or do not
reflect core
themes.
Research
Methods /
Intended
Course
4
(5%)
Follows
Canvas
example
closely, with
clear research
methods and
intended
course/audienc
e.
Mostly
aligns with
Canvas
example;
minor
issues in
methods or
audience
specificatio
n.
Limited
alignment
with Canvas
example;
audience or
methods
unclear.
Does not align
with Canvas
example; lacks
clarity on
research
methods/audienc
e.
Title and
Introduction
12
(15%)
The title is
highly
engaging and
effectively
captures the
audience’s
interest. The
introduction
presents a
timely topic and
features a
well-formulated
thesis that
thoroughly
summarizes
key problems,
issues, and
analytical
outcomes,
providing a
clear and
compelling
overview of the
case’s purpose.
Title and
introduction
are mostly
clear and
engaging
with minor
detail gaps.
Title and
introduction
are present
but lack
clarity or
focus.
Title and
introduction are
unclear or
missing key
details.
Context and
Background
16
(20%)
Thorough
background
with relevant
facts,
regulations,
and financial
data; clearly
organized with
headings.
Mostly
well-researc
hed with
minor gaps;
generally
organized.
Some
relevant
information,
but lacks
depth or
clear
organization.
Insufficient
background
information;
poorly organized.
Learning
Outcomes
4
(5%)
3-4 measurable
outcomes
closely aligned
with case
content;
supports deep
analysis.
3-4
outcomes,
mostly
measurable
and
relevant,
with minor
alignment
issues.
Outcomes
lack clarity or
full relevance
to case
content.
Outcomes are
unclear, minimal,
or poorly aligned
with case.
Discussion
Questions
and Model
Answers
24
(30%)
4 thoughtful
questions
promoting deep
reflection; clear
model answer
guidance.
Mostly
effective
questions;
some
guidance
for model
answers but
may lack
depth.
Questions
are present
but lack
depth or
alignment;
limited model
answer
guidance.
Questions are
unclear, lack
depth, or fail to
align with case
content.
References
and
Bibliography
4
(5%)
At least 10
credible
sources, with
proper APA
citations,
including 3+
journal articles.
8-10
sources,
mostly
credible and
cited
correctly
with minor
format
errors.
5-8 sources
with some
credibility or
citation
issues.
Fewer than 5
sources; lacks
credibility or
proper citations.
Adherence
to
Guidelines
4
(5%)
Fully adheres
to guidelines;
clear
formatting,
length, style,
and objectivity.
Mostly
adheres,
with minor
deviations
in format,
length, or
style.
Some
adherence to
guidelines;
notable
issues in
format, style,
or length.
Does not adhere
to guidelines;
significant format
or style issues.
