Page Title


	Written By Olusegun A. Williamson Introduction: What is a case Study? There are various facets in the definition of case study. There are those that believe that the word “case” is an object of study (Stake, 1995), others contend it is a methodology (Merriam, 1988),which means an exploration of a “bounded system” or a case or cases studied for many years, involving rigorous data collection from various sources that are deemed to be of substance. There is even a bold proclamation that case studies are universally utilized as a method of research due to its natural humanistic identification in terms of life experiences that we are all faced with (Gomm & Hammersley & Foster, 2000). When speaking of “bounded system”, it is a concept that is often characterized by time and place, and it is the case being studied. The word “system” being referred to, could involve a program, an event, an activity, or even an individual. The selection process of a study sometimes involve more than one program, which could extend the study to include various sites, or a single program, involving a solo site. As previously mentioned, this exploration involves a number of sources where information needs to be gathered. These sources include, but not limited to observations, interviews, audio-visual material, and documents and reports. The other component is the context of the case. To be identified as a case study, and in order to experience the experience, the physical atmosphere or the social, historical, and/or economic setting should be highly representative of the study. It is important that the focus should center on the uniqueness of a study or an issue where the outcome is used to be of a narrative form in a comparable fashion. In a situation where multiple cases are evaluated, this is referred to as collective case study (Stake, 1995). A university, department, a railway company, a city, and even a child can all qualify as a case individually. “A case is considered from a specified perspective and with a special interest. It is unique, and among others (Stake, 1995, p. 2), and always related to something general.” Because of its relationship to scientific and practical interest, cases are empirical units, theoretical constructs (Ragin, 1992), and the ability to be evaluated. They are both tied in education and research for purposes of demonstration and learning (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). A very good example, and especially with its unique curriculum characteristics and how it radically resembles a system approach is the Department of Environmental Sciences at the Swiss Federal Institution of Technology (ETH Zurich) being viewed as a case. The focal question, as it relates to this particular institution, could be which students and professors are attracted to the program? How is learning organized? How are the outcomes (i.e., the students’ performances) to be evaluated. The Italian Railway Company may also be classified as a case, because of its unique culture and geographic location. This could be very interesting looking at the fact that it has the second highest number of cars per capita relative to other large European countries, coupled with the factor that the railway transportation is not as developed as the other countries in the region, making it a subject of study in terms of whether the railway system has any future. Las Vegas could be another very interesting subject with many perspectives. Aside from the perception of business, civilization, and social issues, the city can be studied from an environmental point of view. It can also be viewed as a subject because of its exceptional civil engineering and its water management application in a geographic location, which is considered to be a growing desert city (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). Researchers are urged to make a decision on the type of case study that is most useful in providing solution or explain the proposed concern. This may be a single or a collective case, multi-sited or within-site case targeted to provide an answer to an issue (intrinsic, instrumental) (Stake, 1995; Yin, 1989). Creswell (1998) in the presentation of the dimensions for comparing the five research traditions in qualitative research used focus, discipline origin, data collection, data analysis, and narrative form in expressing his analysis. The focus of a case study is the development of a thorough examination of a single case or a number of cases. It was identified that the discipline originated from political science, sociology, evaluation, urban studies, and other social sciences. Data is collected from a number of sources, but not limited to documents, archival records, interviews, observations, and physical artifacts. In analyzing data, case study utilizes description, themes, and assertions. The final product is a thorough study of a case or cases. Somewhere in this picture, is the one problem that seems to plague many researchers, in that if the ultimate goal is to present an external view that deviates from the perception of the researcher, then how subjective can the result be, especially in cases where the objects are people (Gomm & Hammersley & Foster, 2000). In summary, regardless of the inquiry, all researches could be classified as case study. There is an inherent mechanism in terms of units, or a set of units in data collection and analysis, but the term has been historically utilized to specifically identify a form of inquiry when dealing with multiple kinds of social research, otherwise known as experiment and social survey (Gomm & Hammersley & Foster, 2000). The expectation of a case study is to demystify the complexity of a single case. It is very rare to come across objects like a leaf and a single toothpick as a case even though they both possess their own unique complexities. A case study is normally characterized by special interest, by searching for details of interaction with its contexts. It is the study of how complex and particular a single case is, what makes it different from others, and trying to understand its importance and how it relates to other things around us in certain circumstances of importance (Stake, 1995). Stake (1995), in his views regarding case studies draws from naturalistic, holistic, ethnographic, phenomenological, and biographical research methods. Much attention is not paid to quantitative studies with emphasis on any form of measurements of the case, a collection of descriptive variables, which happens to be the norm in medicine and special education. There is also no focus on the creation of case studies for instructional purposes that are commonly used in colleges of business and law. His idea is to present a disciplined, qualitative mode of inquiry into the single case. The goal of any qualitative researcher is to lay emphasis on episodes of nuance, the sequence of events in its context, and the overall variables of what makes the individual. As claimed by Hamel & Dufour & Fortin (1993), “The origin of the term case study is linked to that of case history. The latter is widely used in clinical fields as psychology and medicine. Sociological case studies (or their equivalent monographic studies) have proved to be investigations of particular cases. Such a study is conducted “by giving special attention to totalizing in the observation, reconstruction and analysis of the cases under study” (Zonabend, 1992, p. 52). Accordingly, a case study is an in-depth study of the cases under consideration, and this depth has become another feature of the case study approach” (p. 1). Types of case studies Design: Holistic versus Embedded It is very critical to point out the differences between holistic and embedded case studies (Yin, 1994, p. 41). “A holistic case study is shaped by a thoroughly qualitative approach that relies on narrative, and phenomenological descriptions. Themes and hypotheses may be important but should remain subordinate to the understanding of the case (Stake, 1976, p. 8).” Embedded case studies is involved with multiple units, or objects, of analysis and in most cases not limited to qualitative analysis. The multiple parts are investigated in subunits, with focus on different salient aspects of the case. In an organizational set up, the case study could view the main unit as the entire company, and the smallest units as departments or a group of individuals, such as owners and employees. In the case of clinical, neuropsychological case study, the organization of the units may be in form of biographically critical events in the childhood or the vocational world of the case. In situations that involve regional or urban planning, the application of the units may be different interest groups that are either involved or affected by the entire project. It should be pointed out that the embedded case study provides for a multiplicity of methods that allows for application within the subunits (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). Table 1. Dimensions and classifications of case studies Dimensions Classifications Design Holistic or embedded Single case or multiple case Motivation Intrinsic or instrumental Epistemological status Exploratory, descriptive, or explanatory Purpose Research, teaching, or action/application Data Quantitative or qualitative Format Highly structured, short vignettes Unstructured or groundbreaking Synthesis Informal, empathic, or intuitive Formative or method driven Source: “Embedded case study methods. Integrating quantitative and qualitative knowlege,” by W.R. Scholz & O. Tietje, 2002, p. 10. Single case versus multiple cases This is another alternative in case design characteristics, the issue of whether the case study design should be a single case or multiple cases, and it should be noted that there are multiple reasons why the single-case design is a choice of preference. A case could also be viewed as unique, prototypical, salient, or revelatory to the understanding of a phenomenon or problem. Using the logic presented by Newton’s experimentum cruces, it could also be the critical case in validating a well-informed theory. Considering that there is a lack of uniform understanding in the integration of separate single-case studies into a joint multiple-case design, there should be uniformity in the understanding that the synthesis process between the single-cases does not adhere to the rules of statistical sampling rationale. As pointed out by Yin (1994), “Every case should serve as a specific purpose within the overall scope of inquiry. Here, a major insight to consider multiple cases as one would consider multiple experiments-that is, to follow a ‘replication’ logic” (p. 45) (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). Motivation There is often an inherent motivation for a case study researcher to target certain case for reasons other than scientific. This is specifically true for a new type of educational or public health program, or projects specific to urban development. Considering an intrinsic interest, responsibility, analysis accountability, and its consequences are normally embraced by the study team (see Gibbons et al., 1994). On the other hand, if the motivation is different from the understanding of the particular case, then the case study would be considered an instrumental inquiry (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). As an example, in understanding the difference between these types of studies, let us dissect the characters of two separate physicians. The one with an intrinsic motivation is often interested, with personal feelings and takes responsibility for the patient. The other without any intrinsic motivation, hence instrumental motivation is only interested in the use of anamnestic and laboratory data to enhance its research scientifically or financially, and could care less about the patient or the case itself (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). Epistemological status It is very important to know that there is an association between the label case study and exploratory case study. “It usually precedes a final study, which can, in itself, be a case study, but it can also have a different research design (Boos, 1992). Exploratory case studies aid in the understanding of the phenomenon structure, which will eventually help in the development of hypotheses, models, or theories. An exploratory study mirrors a pilot study, where there is no specified advance in terms of the research design and data collection methods. There is a difference in a descriptive case study and an exploratory study because of the utilization of a reference theory or model in the process of data collection and case description that characterizes a descriptive case study. In many ways, the descriptive case study is also characterized by its approach to testing how a case may be described if it is performed at a different angle or looked at from a different perspective. There is relevance between this type of case study and many Formative Scenario Analyses (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). Exploratory case study is also useful in situations where cause-and-effect relationship is the theme. According to conventional wisdom in theory testing, a single case can only falsify a theory. It should also be understood that theory testing could be achieved through a case, regardless of the use of the case, be it for quantitative data sampling (see Petermann, 1989), or, in a replication logic, “if the research team investigates “whether similar cause events-within each case-produce these positive outcomes” (Yoon & Hwang, 1995, p. 12). It should be pointed out that the testing of theory is done qualitatively, citing traditional hypothesis testing, before the formulation of case analysis, which means there should be specifications for the cause-impact chain (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). Purpose A case study is applicable as a method of research, teaching, or action/application. In terms of instructions, disciplines such as business law, and medical schools employ the use of case studies. There are often changes in the traditional educational approach into discussion pedagogy when a case is encountered. Hence, a case study can be looked as a variation on the Socratic method, which is an alternative acronym for the proactive interaction that occurs between teachers and students (Ronstadt, 1993). The unfortunate factor when teaching through the use of case studies (see Barnes et al., 1994), is that there is lack of respect as a principle for the primacy of data and of situation analysis. This is attributed to the fact that there is limited access to data when case are prepared and written, so the teaching of a case study is primarily based on a virtual process of case analysis (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). Format There are various basic formats of case studies (Ronstadt, 1993, pp. 17-18). The two at the forefront of teaching cases are normally provided in written form. • Highly structured cases: The problem is accurately stated in an orderly manner, with the relevant facts of the case expressed in a written and concise way. The logic is almost like a mathematical textbook problem. There is always the existence of the best solution, with the expectation to treat the case with familiar methods. • Short vignettes: The case covers only a few pages, normally structured, with some irrelevant information. The best solution is not always presented as a wrong or right answer, but presented in a way that the case is a prototype or a demonstration of a key concept. • Unstructured cases: In situations where the cases are complex, it is often difficult to identify the best solution. Nonetheless, there is always the existence of a preferred practice or theory. There is a necessity to structure the case and propose solutions about the information of the situational context if the case is in writing. “Real cases, per se, are of limited problem scope. As an example, a patient that is suffering from a backache can be applied as a medical case. There may be many contributing factors to the backache, but the range is minimal in terms of rational solutions or explanations. At inception, the phenomenon of the backache is diffuse and unstructured, the experienced physician will attempt to structure the case through questioning the patient regarding behavioral and physical cause. • Groundbreaking cases: This form of case presents the study team with a new terrain. This is totally a new situation, with little, or no existing knowledge gained through structured research. It is the responsibility of the case team to provide structure to the case including the formulation of a perspective or theoretical framework (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). Attributes of the Qualitative and Quantitative Paradigms There is an ongoing disagreement between quantitative and qualitative methods in evaluation research, and in this spectrum lies the case study approach, which is the main focus of this paper, with enormous emphasis on the differences between the two methods and which one is perceived to be superior. In quantitative context, the techniques involve randomized experiments, quasi-experiments, paper and pencil “objective” tests, multivariate statistical analyses, sample surveys, and other methods that share the same characteristics. At the opposite end are qualitative methods, and these include ethnography, case studies, in-depth interviews, and participant observation (Cook & Reichardt, 1979). The following are some of the perceptions of these authors in demonstrating their preferences in the two methods. Campbell and Stanley (1966) and Riecken et al. (1974) have been noted as strong advocates for quantitative research, with less concern for evaluation research. There is a belief in their theory that the only way that value can be added to an existing phenomenon is through quantitative research, as a way to challenge conventional wisdom. On the other hand, Weiss and Rein (1972), Parlett and Hamilton (1976), and Guba (1978) are all in favor of qualitative method as the best alternative, particularly Weiss and Rein (1972: 243) as clearly stated in their many research strategies with the bold assertion that “qualitative research is far superior to experimental design in evaluating brand-aim programs”. The table below describes the noted attributes of both the qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluation research. Table 2. Attributes of the Qualitative and Quantitative Paradigms Qualitative Paradigm Quantitative Paradigm Advocates the use of qualitative Advocate the use of methods. quantitative methods. Phenomonologism and verstehen; Logical-positivism; “seeks “ concerned with understanding human the facts or causes of social behavior from the actor’s own frame phenomena with little regard of preference. for the subjective states of individuals. Naturalistic and uncontrolled Obtrusive and controlled observation. measurement. Subjective. Objective. Close to the data; the “insider” Removed from the data; the perspective. “outsider” perspective. Grounded, discovery-oriented, Ungrounded, verification-exploratory, expansionist, oriented, confirmatory, descriptive, and inductive. reductionist, inferential, and hypothetico-deductive. Process-oriented. Outcome-oriented. Valid; “real,” “rich,” Reliable; “hard,” and “deep” data. and replicable data. Ungeneralizable; single Generalizable; multiple case case studies. Studies. Holistic. Particularistic. Assumes a dynamic reality. Assumes a stable reality. Source: “Qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluation research,” by D. T. Cook & S. C. Reichardt, 1979, p. 10. Writing a Case Study The term case study is often implied as an embodiment of the collection of data and how such data is analyzed. The form of data being alluded to involves non-structure and the how the data is qualitatively analyzed. The ultimate goal in this instance is to identify the elements that makes a case unique as opposed to using such experience to make generalizations, which often means it has to be narrative in nature (Gomm & Hammersley & Foster, 2000). There is no literature suggesting an established format for reporting a case study research as presented by Merriam (1988). However, there are certain elements in the structure that will provide a general framework in the overall presentation of a case study. These elements include theory generation, case or cases descriptions, and the last is more of an analytical framework that provides a comparison between cross-case or inter-site study (Creswell, 1998). In an embedded case study, the beginning and the end must have relative substance in its real-world context. In the transitional analysis however, the case will be affected by opposing perspective of inquiries or by several subunits, which could be dealt with through the use of a systems approach, in order to allow a scientific treatment of complex cases that will also be embraced by the quantitative research community. With the acknowledgment that a qualitative analysis is a vital part of a case analysis at a real- world level, there is a need to limit the existing gap between quantitative and qualitative approaches when identifying and solving complex problems through the use of a case study methodology. To maintain a scientifically sound, effective, and efficient study of cases, the following apply: 1. Case representation and modeling methods to characterize the case and analyze its current problems and its development. 2. Case evaluation methods to select one alternative that we prefer over the others, taking into consideration everything we definitely know about the case, what we consider uncertain, and what we want to risk for the case. 3. Case development and transition methods for creating alternatives 4. Case study team methods for enhancing personal experience related to the case and solution-finding performance Specific methods are presented as the fifth category for the analysis and the assessment of cases related to the authors specific knowledge and professional background (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). In the overall rhetorical structure of attracting the reader into the case, the following components are identified as the appropriate genealogy of achieving the desired goal. At inception, the author of the case study should strategically prepare a stage that will attract the reader, and at the same time create an atmosphere that will engage the reader, with the goal of allowing the reader to be part of the experience in terms of relating to the time and place of the study (Stake, 1995). There is an expectation that the process is conducted in a manner that the intended audience is well communicated with sufficient information to enhance their understanding regarding applicable environment (Gomm & Hammersley & Foster, 2000). Next is the presentation of issues, purpose, and the method used by the researcher in carrying out the study. This will enable the reader to understand the origin of the study, and also explore the background of the writer as it relates to the case. Once that is established, the researcher has to fully describe the context of the case to fully reflect the reader’s internal perception as being part of the study. This is all in the attempt to fully engage the reader in the overall process. This is immediately followed by the presentation of issues, and a few key issues that will communicate the complexity of the case to the reader. The next phase is to further investigate the issues surrounding the study, and at the same time introduce confirmed and disconfirmed evidence. Next, the writer presents assertions and the summary of his or her understanding of the case regarding initial naturalistic generalizations, conclusions from personal experience, including conceptual challenges. Finally, the writer presents a strategically attractive conclusion, with a noted communication revealing the case as one’s person account of a complex case. It should be noted that there are other comparable models as identified by Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) substantive case report. Their report touched on the need for the explication of the problem, explicit explanation in terms of context or setting, in addition to the processes observed in that context, the components of the study, and the ultimate outcome and goal of the study. Methods of knowledge integration In relation to skepticism, this is believed to increase when the arrangement of knowledge integration in case studies are not transparent. The integration of data and knowledge from many sources is a requirement when involved in case studies. These are conducted to foster improvement in action, in addition to the enhancement of better decision making. “Thus, integrative evaluation-an evaluation that integrates viewpoints from such diverse discipline as ecology, economics, and sociology-is a crucial component of case studies.” Relative to the complexities embedded in many cases, there are frequent studies conducted by teams, and especially when it involves embedded case studies (Yin, 1989, 1994), with the application of multiple methods of data arrangement. In the past, there were very few proposed methods that dealt with the organization of the integration and the synthesis of data and of knowledge as presented by multiple sources, which includes, for example, participants in a case study (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). Embedded case studies for complex, contextualized problems For many decades, case studies have been utilized in the field of teaching and research in many disciplines. Despite all the strides that have been made through case study methodology, there still exist an inherent skepticism in the approach, and especially when it involves research methodology. It is a known fact that the phrase “case study” is still regarded in many disciplines as bad research for studies without design, but when looked at objectively, it has been revealed that the use of case studies in individual disciplines happens to be highly dependent on the type of problem treated and how it relates to that discipline. The value of the case study approach is dependent on the complexity and the context of the research object. Hence, the case study approach is becoming more and more acceptable and respected in many disciplines. Case study is often the method of approach in cases that involve field research where the biographic, authentic, and historic dynamics and perspectives of real social or natural systems are of consideration. With the knowledge integration approach, it is appropriate to utilize the embedded case design to aid the organization of different types of knowledge, such as different stakeholder or disciplinary perspectives (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). As written by Gummerson (2002), “Qualitative methodology and case studies provide powerful tools for research in management and business subjects, including general management, leadership, marketing, organization, corporate strategy, accounting, and more. However, qualitative methods are used only to a limited degree. Universities and business schools often oppose their use and classify them as second-rate. Case studies are extensively used as tools in education, but they are usually considered as not good enough for research purposes” (p. 1). Data gathering There is no known established standard as to when the collection of data should begin. It normally begins when the researcher makes the commitment to do the study. A huge amount of the initial data should be of value, with no organizational process, but present enough information that will allow the researcher to be acquainted with the case. Eventually, most of the data collected will be refined or replaced, with substantial portion of the initial data left intact (Stake, 1995). Qualitative study takes advantage of factors that sometimes may be overlooked or considered minimal to get acquainted with things. This covers a broad spectrum, but only a limited amount of observations are actually recorded. Every researcher has some amount of responsibility and often privileged to focus on certain things of value, and at the same time draw conclusion from those experiences that will serve a purpose to society at large. Experience is one of the most important factors that a researcher must possess. In addition to experience of objective and literal thinking is the understanding of identifying relevant sources of data, and applying every humanly possible vibes in making sure that the interpretation is of usefulness, which in many ways requires sensitivity and skepticism. This methodology of knowledge requires a lot of time and hard work and is normally faced with critical observation and examination from colleagues and mentors. It is sometimes beneficial to create a data-gathering form with enough space to record observations and also focus on relevant issues. Table 3. Issue-Based Observation Form for Case Studies in Science Education Observer: School: Date: Time to: Teacher M F Age 25 35 50 65 Grade Time of write-ups: same day Tchr Experience Direct instr. L—H # Students: Subject Θ = Archipolis Comments on science education issues Synopsis of lesson, activities: 1ٯ response to budget cuts 2ٯ locus of authority 3ٯ teacher prep 4ٯ hands-on-matls Description of room Pedagogic orientation Teacher aim Reference made to: learning place L—H textbook L—H didactic L—H sci method O—M science place L—H stdzd testing L—H heuristic L—H technology O—M compet’n place L—H prob solving L—H philetic L—H ethics, relig O—M Source: “The art of case study research,” by E. R. Stake, 1995, p. 50. The table describes a sample of an on-site observer created by the CIRCE team working on case studies in science education (Stake & Easley, 1979). You will observe that the form has sufficient space to cover qualitative and quantitative information, a narrative account, and one on one commentary issues. The research question determines each information and interpretation categories. Organizing the data gathering Stake (1995), observed that time is always a factor that is not sufficient. The best avenue would probably be the preparation of some attitude scales or tentative assertions in relation to the response of focus groups, but the reality is that much attention to this could be time costly, hence affecting other aspects of the case study. However, it is always important to anticipate unforeseen issues, and then strategize the best application for such incident. There is a need for thorough thinking, most likely a data-gathering plan that will focus more on the important issues rather than the less important ones, such as the write-ups of observation, with emphasis on a pre-determined sequence as rooted in the research questions. The following are the absolute essentials of a data-gathering plan: definition of case, list of research questions, identification of helpers, expenses, and intended reporting. There are other variables in the process that will require preallocation of time, one example will be the association with the case actors and the ability to identify relevant stories in the newspapers, which in every aspect is a reminder, and a relevant nuisance, especially if the researcher is ultimately going to be facing a review panel, such as a doctoral committee or funding competition, it is then an absolute necessity that data-gathering be the main focus of the process (Stake, 1995). Stake (1995), claims that the following can be used as a guideline when drafting one’s own plan, edited and augmented. This will include some important steps that the researcher needs to be aware of, and some nuisances and challenges that will present itself. Anticipation • Revision or the discovery of anticipated factors at the inception of the case study. • Take into consideration the questions, hypotheses, or issues raised initially. • Study existing case study literature, both methodological and exemplary. • Look into the possibility of the use of a model through one or multiple examination of existing studies. • Identify the case in terms of prescription, selection to represent, or just a matter of convenience. • Establish boundaries as matters present themselves. • Be prepared for key problems, events, attributes, spaces, persons, and vital signs. • Know your audiences for the preliminary and final reporting. • Formulate initial plan of action, which will include role definition of observance on site. First visit • Make arrangements for preliminary access, plan of action negotiation, and regular access. • Prepare a written agreement regarding the obligations of the observers and host. • Refine access in terms of rules with involved parties. • Communicate all events relating to any relevant cost. • Establish procedures for confidentiality of data, sources, and reports. • Discuss the process for draft review in order to validate observations, and descriptions. • Discuss the process for publicity during and after the study. • Identify all relevant information and services. • Continuous plan of action revision, observer’s role, case boundaries, and other issues as needed. Further preparation of observation • Use other alternative sites for try-outs, and identify preliminary observations of activities. • Resource allocation to alternative spaces, persons, methods, issues, phases, and so on. • Informants and sources of specific data identification. • Establish standardized procedures. • Memorialize record-keeping system, files, tapes; coding system; and storage protection. • Establish priorities for problem solving, attributes, events, audiences, and so on. Further development of conceptualization • Look into issues or other theoretical structure that will aid the collection of data. • Understand the audience goals and expectations. • Prepare the format in terms of the final report and the communication of the findings. • Understand the perceptions of the audience. • Prioritize focus to different points of view, and conceptualizations. Gather data, validate data • Observe, interview, debrief informants, collect logs, use surveys, and so on. • Memorialize record of inquiry arrangements and activities. • Select vignettes, special testimonies, and illustrations. • Put into classification raw data and the start your interpretation. • Continuous redefinition of issues, case boundaries, arrangement renegotiation with hosts as need be. • Collect additional data for the validation of key observations. Analysis of data • Raw data review considering alternative interpretations. • Identify data trends. • Identify the relationship between program arrangements, activities, and outcomes. • Draw conclusion, organize them according to issues, and then organize your final report. • Collect new data, review data, intentionally instigate disagreements. Providing audience opportunity for understanding • Describe the activity setting to the audience. • Present the report as a story, with no end. • Help the reader understand the relevance of situations. • Talk to people. • Address the issues relating to different perceptions. Data recording, field issues, and storage In relation to observing and interviewing, forms used for the collection of data require the use of protocol, a prepared form that will be used to record the information gathered from the observation or interview. Interview protocols provide an avenue for the interviewer to take instant notes as the interviewee responds to prepared questionnaires. This also enhances the researcher’s thought process in formulating headings, the information needed to start the interview, concluding ideas, information on how the interview should be concluded, and how to express appreciation towards the interviewee. Table 4. is a sample of an interview protocol used in the case study of a gunman reported by Asmussen and Creswell (1985). Table 4. Sample Interview Protocol Interview Protocol Project: University Reaction to a Terrorist Incident Time of interview: Date: Place: Interviewer: Interviewee: Position of interviewee: Questions: 1. What has been your role in the incident? 2. What has happened since the event that you have been involved in? 3. What has been the impact on the University of this Incident? 4. What larger ramifications, if any, exist from the incident? 5. To whom should we talk to find out more about campus reaction to the incident? (Thank individuals for participating in this interview. Assure him or her of confidentiality of responses and potential future interviews.) Table 5 is an observational protocol recommended to be used for information recording during an observation. As described in the protocol, there is a header regarding information about the observational session, this also includes descriptive notes regarding the activities, and the visual representation of the physical setting. You will also notice notes about the process, reflection on activities, and a summarized conclusion of activities for future development. There is also a divider on the page to separate descriptive notes from reflective notes. Also included is a visual representation of the setting and addition useful information provided through a header (Creswell, 1998). Regardless of the protocol being used, observational or interview, the most important component is information recording, or as explained by Lofland and Lofland (1995), “logging data” (p. 66). Information is recorded through a numbers of processes such as observational fieldnotes, interview write-ups, mapping, census taking, photographing, sound recording, and the collection and document organizing. It should be pointed out that there is also an informal process in the form of initial “jottings” (Emerson & Fretz & Shaw, 1995), daily logs or summaries, and descriptive summaries (An example of fieldnotes is provided in Sanjek, 1990). Other qualitative research methods such as biographies and ethnographies use these forms of information recording (Creswell, 1998). Table 5. Sample observational protocol Length of Activity: 90 Minutes Descriptive Notes Reflective Notes General: What are the experiences of graduate students as they learn qualitative research in the classroom? See Classroom layout and comments about Overhead with flaps: I wonder if the physical setting at the bottom of this page. back of the room was able to read it. Approximately 5:17 p.m., Dr. Creswell Overhead projector not plugged in at enters the lifted room, introduces Dr. Wolcott the beginning of the class: I wonder Class members seem relieved. if this was a distraction (when it took . extra time to plug it in). Dr. Creswell gives brief background, Lateness of the arrival of Drs. concentrating on his international Creswell and Wolcott: Students experiences; features a comment about the seemed a bit anxious. Maybe it had educational ethnography The man in the to do with the change in starting Principal’s office. time to 5 p.m. (some may have had 6:30 classes or appointments to get to). Dr. Wolcott begins by telling the class he Drs. Creswell and Wolcott seems to now writes out educational ethnography and have a good rapport between them, highlights this primary occupation by judging from many short exchanges mentioning two books: Transferring that they had. Qualitative Data and The Art of Fieldwork. While Dr. Wolcott begins his presentation by Chalkboard apologizing for his weary voice (due to talking Screen all day, apparently), Dr. Creswell leaves the Chair classroom to retrieve the guest’s overhead transparencies. speakers desk Seemed to be three parts to the activity: (1) the speaker’s challenge to the class of detecting pure Ethnographical methodologies, (2) the speaker’s overhead Presentation of the “tree” that portrays various projector strategies and substrategies for qualitative research In education, and (3) the relaxed “elder statesman” \ --------------------------------------------------- fielding class questions, primarily about students’ \ --------------------------------------------------- potential research projects and prior studies Dr. \ --------------------------------------------------- Wolcott had written. \ --------------------------------------------------- \ --------- Seats for participants----------------- The first question was “How do you look at qualitative \ ---------------------------------------------------- research? Followed by “How does ethnography fit in? \ --------------------------------------------------- seats SKETCH OF CLASSROOM Field Issues In any qualitative study, there are inherent field issues associated with data collection. Some of these issues require that the research make adjustments to data collection once in the field (Creswell, 1998). Table 6 gives a breakdown of some of the issues by topic. These issues include span access/site problems to observations, interviews, document research, journals, video materials, and general ethical issues. Specifically, case study issues stem from the time commitment and details of interviewing. It should be noted that a primary source of information gathering is the use of journals, and with this, there is a question of what instructions to be given to participants, and will all participants be willing and comfortable with the process? An example is the inclusion of children, who are known to be verbal, but may not have the desired writing skills, this issue also applies to some adults. An extension of this problem is legibility. With videotape recording, there is an issue of what the sound level should be, location of the camera, and the decision for whether the recording should be close-up or distant (Creswell, 1998). Another issue that is universal to all qualitative inquiry is ethical issues that may arise during field data collection, data analysis, and the final report. As pointed out by Glesne and Peshkin (1992), the criteria of the American Anthropological Association reflect appropriate standards. The anonymity of the participants have to be protected, which could be done by the use of aliases, the participants have to be a representation of the whole population, they have to know that a study is being conducted, the purpose of the study has to be properly conveyed, and a full disclosure of the nature of the study (Creswell, 1998). Table 6. Field Issues in Qualitative Study Access/site questions: • Difficulty in making initial contact with person in the field • Building trust or credibility at the field site (feeling like intruder) • Gaining access to the site and individuals • Getting people to respond to requests for information • Deciding whether to collect information in the natural site • Determining whether one can understand a setting when one is close to it Observations: • Determining whether fieldnotes are credible • Writing down “jottings” • Incorporating “quotes” into fieldnotes • Assuming an observer role and how to change roles • Learning how to best collect information from early field visit in case studies • Learning how to “funnel” from broad observations to narrow ones Interviews: • Saying “little” during interview • Having tapes that will work in the transcribing machine • Scheduling a time for all to participate in a group interview • Matching the “level” of questions to the ability of informants • Realizing the costliness and lengthy process of transcribing data • Using an appropriate level of questioning at the beginning of the interview • Interruptions during an interview • Difficulty scheduling an interview • Having confidence in interviewing skills • Having difficulty taking notes while interviewing • Conducting interview with two or more individuals • Encouraging all participants to talk in a group interview • Asking appropriate questions • Learning to listen rather than talking in interviews • Handling emotional outburst • Addressing participants who do not want to be audio taped • Finding a transcriptionist and the right type of equipment in a case study and grounded theory project • Moving from ice-breakers to questions in interview • Addressing when interviewees stray from the interview questions • Giving the interview questions to participants before the interview • Working with the logistics of the tape-recording equipment • “Bracketing” personal bias • Focusing the questions to ask in a group interview Document research: • Having difficulty locating materials • Having difficulty obtaining permission to use materials • Questioning the value of materials Journals: • Having people write complete journal entries • Having difficulty reading handwritten journals • Having informants express the difficulty of journalizing • Having informants express questions about how one might journal Video materials: • Having disturbing room sounds • Having problems videotaping in a small room • Having difficulties focusing and positioning the camera Ethical issues: • Protecting the anonymity of the informants • Disclosing (or not) the purpose of the research • Deciding whether (or how) to use information “shared off the record” in an interview in a case study • Determining whether the researcher should share personal experiences Source: “Qualitative inquiry and research design. Choosing among five traditions,” by J.W. Creswell, 1998, p. 131. Storing Data There is no much mention of data storage in qualitative research in books and articles. The method of storage is normally associated with the type of information collected, which also differs depending on the type of inquiry being explored. As a suggestion, and particularly in a biographical life history, it would be appropriate for the researcher to develop a filing system for the “wad of handwritten notes or a tape” (Plummer, 1983, p. 98). With regards to large data research, computer program such as folio VIEWS allows the researcher to properly organize, sort, and make subsets of text data. It also provides the researcher with the capability to retrieve a number of word combinations, phrases, coded segments, memos, or other material (Weitzman & Miles, 1995). Other suggestions include the development of backup copies for computer files, high quality tapes for audio- recording, master list for every information gathered, encryption of the names of participants, the use of ASCII files for easy upload into qualitative computer programs, and the development of a data collection matrix for easy location and information identification for a study (Creswell, 1998). The case study method in social inquiry There is an overwhelming belief that a case study is the most useful method when studying human affairs. It is believed to immediately capture the interest of the audience, but lacks the basis for generalization (Gomm & Hammersley & Foster, 2000). Experience – There is an expectation to have a target audience when presenting an inquiry, with the aim of enhancing the understanding of those readers, not just presenting the current state, but more of allowing such audience to experience the message being communicated by approximating the words and illustrations in the report in a naturalistic sense (Gomm & Hammersley & Foster, 2000). As claimed by Wilhelm Dilthey (1910), in Gomm & Hammersley & Foster, “More objective and scientific studies did not do the best job of acquainting man with himself: Only from his actions, his fixed utterances, his effects upon others, can man learn about himself; thus he learns to know himself only by the round-about way of understanding. What we once were, how we developed and became what we are, we learn from the way in which we acted, the plans which we once adopted, the way in which we made ourselves felt in our vocation, from old dead letters, from judgments on which were spoken long ago. …we understand ourselves and others only when we transfer our own lived experience into every kind of expression of our own and other people’s lives” (p. 20). Knowledge – In reference to the epistemology of social inquiry, a distinction is made between propositional and tacit knowledge. Propositional knowledge in one sense is encompassed by both reason and gossip characterized by observations of objects and events, while tacit knowledge, also characterized by observations of objects and events, is obtained from the experiences gained from the two components. This in form is how we recognize faces, comprehend metaphors, and thus the ability to understand ourselves. This ordinary understanding as believed by many is the multiple fractions that eventually become a lager shell of our world in the context of how we understand things around us (Gomm & Hammersley & Foster, 2000). Generalizations – There seems to be a similarity in the quest for laws that detail the order of disciplines both in the scientific world and the humanist scholar, this also extends to every aspect of our daily experiences. Experience permeates naturalistic generalizations, which happens to be a derivative of tacit knowledge of how things are, why they are, how people feel about them, and the end result of those things as perceived by individuals. There are other generalizations, such as. Rationalistic, propositional, and law-like, they also enhance the understanding of a particular situation, and in some cases could be a backlash. In the case of a backlash, a law that is perceived to be bad could foster misunderstandings, which could be a direct result of an enactment that is not representational of experiences. The one factor that the case study method has been criticized for is the inability to make generalizations from a report, as opposed to that of survey research. Some Proponents of case study in responding to the claim agree that the purpose is not to draw scientific generalizations, but the report to be utilized as a learning experience for users. Generalizations that are perceived to be good provide a framework for a general understanding of how things are, hence, it provides simplicity to a possible complicated issue or issues (Gomm & Hammersley & Foster, 2000). Cases – As mentioned previously, the ultimate goal of a social inquiry is to shed some light on an individual or an enterprise, but the unfortunate thing is the misconception in part, of how a single case could be viewed in terms of cases, because of the inherent view of the term as it deals with a member of a target population. This then becomes a problem since a singe person cannot be used to approximate an entire population, hence, it is a poor basis to be utilized in terms of generalization. In reality, the experience is the need to have a case that could mirror another case, as opposed to using a single case to approximate an entire population. By searching for similarities embedded in a case to explain another leads to the establishment for the basis for a naturalistic generalization (Gomm & Hammersley & Foster, 2000). Summary and Conclusion Creswell (1998) in the presentation of the dimensions for comparing the five research traditions in qualitative research used focus, discipline origin, data collection, data analysis, and narrative form in expressing his analysis. The focus of a case study is the development of a thorough examination of a single case or a number of cases. It was identified that the discipline originated from political science, sociology, evaluation, urban studies, and other social sciences. Data is collected from a number of sources, but not limited to documents, archival records, interviews, observations, and physical artifacts. In analyzing data, case study utilizes description, themes, and assertions. The final product is a thorough study of a case or cases. A university, department, a railway company, a city, and even a child can all qualify as a case individually. “A case is considered from a specified perspective and with a special interest. It is unique, and among others (Stake, 1995, p. 2), and always related to something general.” Because of its relationship to scientific and practical interest, cases are empirical units, theoretical constructs (Ragin, 1992), and the ability to be evaluated. They are both tied in education and research for purposes of demonstration and learning (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). There is no literature suggesting an established format for reporting a case study research as presented by Merriam (1988). However, there are certain elements in the structure that will provide a general framework in the overall presentation of a case study. These elements include theory generation, case or cases descriptions, and the last is more of an analytical framework that provides a comparison between cross-case or inter-site study (Creswell, 1998). References Barnes et. al., (as cited in Scholz & Tietje, 2002) Boos (as cited in Scholz & Tietje, 2002) Campbell & Stanley (as cited in Cook & Reichardt, 1979) Cook, D. T., & Reichardt, S. C. (1979). Qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluation research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Emerson & Fretz (as cited in Scholz & Tietje, 2002) Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Gibbons (as cited in Scholz & Tietje) Gomm, R., & Hammersley, M., & Foster, P. (2000). Case study method: Key issues, key texts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Guba (as cited in Cook & Reichardt, 1979) Gummesson, E. (2002). Qualitative methods in management research (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Hamel, J., & Dufour, S., & Fortin, D. (1993). Case study methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Lofland & Lofland (as cited in Cresweel, 1998) Parlett & Hamilton (as cited in Cook & Reichardt, 1979) Petermann (as cited in Scholz & Tietje, 2002) Plummer (as cited in Creswell, 1998) Ragin (as cited in Scholz & Tietje, 2002) Riecken et al., (as cited in Cook & Reichardt, 1979) Ronstadt (as cited in Scholz & Tietje, 2002) Sanjek (as cited in Creswell, 1998) Scholz, W. R., & Tietje, O. (2002). Embedded case study methods: Integrating quantitative and qualitative knowledge. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Stake, E. R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Weiss & Rein (as cited in Cook & Reichardt, 1979) Weitzman & Miles (as cited in Creswell, 1998) Yin (as cited in Stake, 1995) Yoon (as cited in Scholz & Tietje, 2002) Zonabard (as cited in Hamel & Dufour & Fortin, 1993)