To begin with, the case study approach used is good in that it begins with a brief history of what Golden Rice is. In the brief introduction which also serves as an explanation for the topic under study the explanation is neutral and not biased. This is also another aspect that is good about this approach. Based on the fact that this is an argumentative topic the neutral introduction offers the debaters a platform to come up with generalized decisions. The other good thing about this approach is the fact that the group members were subdivided into two subgroups. One subgroup was arguing for and the other group was against the motion. The group that was arguing for was given some supportive points as well as the group that was arguing against. These supportive facts and literature played a key role in forming the necessary arguments for each side.
On the other hand the approach also has some limitations. One of the limitations comes in when members of one group are separating and interaction with members of the opposition team. This separation may bring out confusion of arguments. On the other hand after separating the group members are also forced to change their sides meaning if initially you were in the pros group now you are forced to be on the cons group. This process seems to be lengthy and more to that it is a process that can bring about conflicting ideas. Also following this mixing up of sides it is difficult for the group members to determine which sides they actually fit in. Finally the approach is not offering the final conclusion about the topic. It is just presenting the arguments for and against and ending it there.
Golden_Rice_Debate Case Study Project….. pdf