Case Studies
Definition: A case study is essentially the telling of someone’s story in an evidence-based way. It can be the story of an individual, an organization, a department, an institution, or any other definable entity or unit. A case is a unit of analyses. The story identifies how that unit is typical and unique compared to similar units. Often associated with sociology, case study involves in-depth analysis and emphasizes understanding the case or unit in its real-life context.
How To: Data can be collected in multiple ways including individual and group interviews, document analysis, review of artifacts, and participant observation. Multiple data sources can be used to remove the bias of relying upon only one perspective. The purpose of case study is not only to describe the given unit to the outside world, but also to provide new insights and illumination to unit members which can be uniquely obtained through external observation and study. The researcher tries to identify both insiders’ and outsiders’ perspectives (both the biography and autobiography) of the unit. Data are analyzed for common themes; the written report provides both the author’s interpretation and the evidence upon which the author based his or her analysis so the reader can authenticate the interpretation. A cluster of case studies of individuals can be useful in a more generalizable sense if common themes emerge.
Application to Liberal Arts: Useful when exploring an unresearched or underresearched area. Because data collection may occur primarily through interviews, the interview protocol or agenda can be developed so the goals of a liberal arts education (higher order thinking, critical analysis, etc.) can be specifically explored.
What it does not measure: Case study is somewhat limited in its application between units because the analysis is unit specific.
Benefits: Case studies provide rich, detailed data. While they can be limited in breadth, this is generally balanced by their fullness of depth.
General challenges: Case studies are more labor intensive than evaluating existing data.
Integration with other research/assessment: Case studies can be used as a starting point for further research. They can be used to discover emergent themes that result from the case, which can serve as a foundation for subsequent research.
Literature sources:
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yin, R. (1994). Case study design and method. (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Focus Groups
Definition: Focus groups are semi-structured interviews with up to 10 participants. The most common application of focus groups is in marketing research.
How To: Focus group interviews can vary in their degree of structure. Most involve some number of predetermined open-ended questions. The group environment allows participants to respond to the comments of others by affirming, contradicting, or building on what has been said. Interviews are usually recorded with transcripts later analyzed for common themes. The same skills are needed as with individual interviewing, with the additional challenge of managing the group dynamics. For example, dominant individuals can overwhelm other participants or stifle divergent perspectives. Questions should be open-ended, giving participants the opportunity to provide concrete examples and stories in a natural, organic manner.
Application to Liberal Arts: As with case studies, the focus group protocol or agenda can be developed so the goals of a liberal arts education (higher order thinking, critical analysis, etc.) can be specifically explored.
What it does not measure: Focus groups are generally not effective as a means of gathering individual-level or factual data (e.g., courses taken vs. perceptions, reflections and opinions, or asking one student questions while the other participants patiently wait). With the group structure, some respondents may be hesitant to share personal or sensitive information or be as self-reflective as in individual interviews (i.e., not as useful for autopsy exit interviews). Some subjects may be hesitant to share their true opinion if it is different from the rest of the group.
Benefits: Focus groups offer substantial data with minimal expense. Multiple respondents are interviewed in less time than would be required for individual interviews. The group dynamics, while challenging to manage, are also a strength as participants’ reflections are stimulated by other group members.
General challenges: The method is labor intensive in comparison to the analysis of existing data, particularly if conversation is transcribed and formally coded.
Integration with other research/assessment: Focus groups are a very useful method to pretest a survey or questionnaire or to generate initial data. They are also useful as a strategy to confirm or triangulate data gathered through individual interviews or other sources.
Longitudinal Case Studies
Definition: A longitudinal case study tells the ongoing story of an individual or unit. It can use the same methodology and process of a case study but examines a unit or cohort of students to observe changes over a longer period of time. While a standard case study represents a snapshot or a given unit’s story at a particular point in time, the goal of a longitudinal case study is to observe and document change.
How To: Typically the research follows a cohort of students over a period of time with interviews or observations conducted at regular intervals to document students’ experiences, perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors. Usually employing interviews, student work or other documents, or observation, the researcher follows the cohort of students over several years at the institution and even beyond.
Application to Liberal Arts: Documenting changes in student beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors can lead to a broader understanding of the process of developing higher order skills such as reflective judgment and intellectual inquiry. For example, a study could interview students near the beginning, middle, and end of their college careers, combine this data with a measure of moral development, and find whether those students who were involved in a cross-cultural experience showed higher levels of moral reasoning. In a similar manner, a campus could use structured interviews tailored to assess levels of intellectual or moral development to classify students on one of various developmental scales in their first and final years as one means of measuring growth during college. Additional interview data may reveal insight into the types of college experiences which contributed to that growth (versus maturation that would occur regardless).
What it does not measure: If the research does not start out measuring a particular outcome or goal, it cannot subsequently attempt to measure that outcome in later administrations of the survey.
Benefits: Longitudinal case studies enable the researcher to observe progression toward goals or change over time. This is particularly helpful if used as a measure of whether a group or entity is effectively implementing the goals or changes they have set out for the organization.
General challenges: Any time one collects longitudinal data there exists the challenge of tracking and retaining all students as willing participants in the study. Additionally, the instrument used initially cannot be changed significantly in subsequent interviews or else the data may not be comparable. Therefore, there is little ability to correct for mistakes if the initial instrument is not satisfactory.
Integration with other research/assessment: Because this is a labor intensive and time consuming approach, it can be most effective when used in concert with other approaches that provide more of a "snapshot" view of the unit (such as with a singular case study or focus group).
Participant Observation
Definition: Participant observation is a method of data collection that involves watching and studying a particular culture or social group in order to describe, explain, and interpret the meaning of its actions. It is the method of choice for researchers following the ethnographic tradition and is most often identified with anthropology. Participant observation can be conducted as either an outside observer or as a participant who watches and investigates while functioning as a quasi member of the group.
How To: Participant observation can vary from structured to unstructured. It involves the recording of observations or field notes describing participants in a particular situation, environment, or culture. Data analysis includes description, analysis, and interpretation of relationships and events, often focused on language usage, values, and traditions. The product is most often a descriptive narrative report. Whether the researcher/observer is an outsider looking in or an insider reflecting on personal experiences depends to a certain degree on the objectives of the research, the preferences of the researcher, and various factors related to the group itself and its environment.
Application to Liberal Arts: Participant observation and related ethnographic methods are particularly useful to measure campus culture, environmental factors, and student response to environmental factors. It can also be used to assess students’ cultural interactions and their ability to understand the perspectives of others, through observation of student or classroom discussions. A possible application is trained outside observers recording students’ and teachers’ classroom behavior on a preset checklist every two minutes. This observation provides a measure of classroom-based learning activity. In a related application, a researcher could observe students in a library group work area and analyze the use of argumentation, critical thinking, and consideration of diverse perspectives in a collaborative learning context.
What it does not measure: Participation observation usually does not emphasize quantification.
Benefits: Observation of naturally occurring behavior is ideal for developing an understanding of how individuals respond to, interact with, and make use of various institutional resources. For the individuals being observed, their opinions and perceptions are their reality. Understanding those perceptions can not only give participants cause for self-reflection, but can also provide the researcher with insight and perspective he or she may not otherwise gain. This information can then be used to improve teaching, program content and delivery, and student services.
General challenges: Participant observation is a time consuming data collection method. Researchers must also be aware of bias and how this influences decisions related to data recording, interpretation, and reporting.
Integration with other research/assessment: In general, this approach is made stronger if used in conjunction with other methods to enable comparison and contrast to participants' views, and to provide both confirming and refuting evidence to support and challenge researcher interpretations and assertions.
Literature sources:
Schwartzman, H. B. (1993). Ethnography in organizations. Qualitative Research Methods Series, 27. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Grounded Theory
Definition: Grounded theory uses interviews or other data to construct a new theory to explain a particular experience or event. The product of grounded theory is a premise built from recurring themes in the data. In contrast to the testing of theory in many research methods, grounded theory begins without a theory—rather the theory emerges from the data.
How To: Interviews with multiple participants are analyzed for recurring themes. Coding categories or themes are discovered or emerge from the data in a post hoc manner rather than the data being analyzed according to a priori hypotheses.
Application to Liberal Arts: Grounded theory is a broad-based approach to developing a fuller understanding of any number of social phenomena or other human experiences. As such, a grounded theory research design can incorporate queries aimed at providing insight into student perceptions and experiences as they relate to various liberal arts outcomes.
What it does not measure: Grounded theory by definition is not useful to test the validity of a preexisting theory or the application of a particular theory-based intervention for effectiveness.
Benefits: For those who prefer a quantitative approach, grounded theory is useful for working toward the development of a quantitative study. If the grounded theory is designed properly, an instrument can be developed to test that theory. In the long run, grounded theory is the qualitative approach that may best suit those who prefer quantitative data.
General challenges: Grounded theory can be time consuming. To appropriately construct a theory, extensive interviews should be conducted until "saturation" is reached. At this point additional interviews contribute little new information or insight that can be used to illuminate or more fully understand the phenomena in question.
Integration with other research/assessment: Grounded theory is most useful in an understudied area where new conceptualizations are needed. After developing a grounded theory, a quantitative and/or qualitative test of the theory often follows.
Literature sources:
Glaser, B.G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine Publication Company. (This is the original text which articulated grounded theory. It presents grounded theory in its original conception, prior to the ideological split between Glaser and Strauss.)
Heath, H. & Cowley, S. (February, 2004). Developing a grounded theory approach: A comparison of Glaser and Strauss. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 41 (2), 141-151. (Nursing research uses grounded theory extensively and produces some clear, concise articles about the use of this method. This article is an overview of the differences in the Glaser and Strauss approaches since their original inception of grounded theory.)
McCann, T.V. & Clark, E. (2003). Grounded theory in nursing research: Part 1--Methodology. Nurse Researcher, 11 (2), p. 7-19.
McCann, T.V. & Clark, E. (2003). Grounded theory in nursing research: Part 2--Critique. Nurse Researcher, 11 (2), p. 19-29.
McCann, T.V. & Clark, E. (2003). Grounded theory in nursing research: Part 3--Application. Nurse Researcher, 11 (2), p. 29-40.
(The three articles listed above provide good background on grounded theory in three concise parts: methodology, critique, and application. For someone who wants to use grounded theory for the first time, these articles provide a good brief introduction and understanding.)
Next Section:
Written Documents/Students Work