Different Types of Case Study ·························································

Cases may be considered for their uniqueness or their commonality, but also for intrinsic or instrumental purposes (Stake, 1995). A particular case study may provide the means to accomplish understandings about something or someone in particular. Case studies can also be differentiated as to whether they are primarily descriptive, interpretive, or evaluative (Merriam, 1988). Other terms to differentiate types of case study pervade the literature (see, for example, Bogdan & Biklen, 2003; Yin, 2003). Essentially, the descriptive case study presents a detailed account of the phenomenon being studied. Descriptive case studies are commonly used to form a database for comparative studies and for developing theory. The interpretive case study contains rich or thick descriptions and is used to develop categories based on common concepts or to support and/or challenge theories. Data are gathered for the purpose of interpreting or theorizing about the phenomenon. Evaluative case studies incorporate more than description; they go further and include explanations and judgements. The pilot case study is part of the final preparation of the data collection process. The main criteria for selection of the pilot case study may be convenience, access, and geographic proximity (Yin, 2003). The participants in the pilot case study may be particularly amenable to the project aims and also accessible. The study is formative and helps in the trialling and development of questions and may also provide some conceptual clarification for the research design (Yin, 2003). The researcher may follow a pilot study with multiple-case studies.

3.4.2 Multiple-Case Studies

Multiple-case studies or collective case studies (Stake, 1995) take a variety of forms. A collective case study may be designed with a greater concern for representativeness; the purpose for collecting data from multiple sites may be to show generalizability or diversity. It may also be to compare and contrast particular characteristics or features. When working with multiple cases, most researchers do

not work across sites at the same time. This reduces the risk of confusion between or among sites. The first case study can also provide a focus to help refine the focus for subsequent cases. Multiple-case studies are based on the logic of replication not sampling (Yin, 2003). The researcher may also find that the case proves to be deviant, so considerations have to be made as to whether to include the case. In some instances a focus on the negative case may be a key purpose for the case selection (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). Another approach is to extend the research and consider a longitudinal study.

3.4.3 Longitudinal Studies

Case study often includes a longitudinal element. The researcher may remain a participant of a community for a sustained period of time or revisit a setting and re- interview participants over a lengthy period. Similar research tools may be used or adapted upon each revisit. So, how long is a ‘lengthy period’? The question arises as to when a study is described as longitudinal. Flick (2006) describes studies as longitudinal when you “analyze an interesting process or state again at later times of the data collection” (p. 143). The strength of the longitudinal study is being able to monitor and document changes of view or action through repeated data collection phases. These repeated phases may strengthen the base for generalizing to a population.

3.4.4 Generalizability

Generalizability is a standard aim of quantitative research. However, according to Stake (2005), although no attempt is made to generalize from case study beyond the single case, the case helps to establish the limits of generalizabilty. The question of generalizability is raised when findings of a particular study are considered to apply beyond the participants and setting. However, most case study researchers do not delude themselves that it is possible to make generalizations from a case (Bryman, 2004; Silverman, 2006). Reporting the findings from one or more cases does not necessarily imply a true representativeness for the population as a whole. From the findings, interpretations can be made that could be applied to, or inform people in similar settings or situations. It is the quality of the theoretical inferences that is of

value, understanding the contextual conditions of the new setting, and how these differ from the setting of the original study in which the knowledge was produced. Bassey (1999) introduced the term ‘fuzzy generalization’ borrowing the adjective fuzzy from ‘fuzzy logic’ (Fourali, 1997), the principle that everything is a matter of degree. Fuzzy logic, Fourali argued, is appropriate for many educational situations and allows educators to express views in more flexible ways. Bassey (1999) defined his term, ‘fuzzy generalizations’ as “general statements with built-in uncertainty” (p. 52). Unlike scientific generalizations which have no exceptions, the fuzzy generalization can be helpful in educational case study in that what has happened in one place may happen in another. Through replication another researcher may discover new material that could lead to amendments of the fuzzy generalization. However, it is only when the fuzzy generalization is read in conjunction with the research report that it can have any credence. There are many other aspects and roles associated with the process that the researcher must consider.