According to Yin (2009), the strength of the case study method is its ability to examine, in-depth, a case within its real-life context. Yin (2003) prescribes the use of a case study approach when how and why questions need to be answered in a context where the behaviour of those involved cannot be manipulated and where the context of the phenomena are very important to the study.
Yin (2003) suggests that placing boundaries on a case study can prevent it from becoming too broad. Stake (2005, p. 445) agrees stating “the more the object of study is a specific, unique, bounded system, the greater the usefulness of the epistemological rationales”. For this reason, I adopted a multiple case study of the group as a whole over the period the students were in Australia followed by four students focusing on their personal experiences of adapting to study in Australia. How this selection of four students for case studies was made will be discussed below in the Methods section. Yin (2003) describes multiple case studies as more robust and reliable when seeking to explain phenomena within the same context.
Another key strength of the case study method involves using multiple sources and techniques in the data gathering process (Yin, 2009). This ensures the case is explored through multiple lenses allowing manifold features of the phenomena to be revealed and understood (Baxter & Jack, 2008). Accepting that knowledge is socially constructed, Stake discusses triangulation in terms of “diversity of perception, even the multiple realities within which people live” (Stake, 2005, p. 455). He suggests that readers perceive a case study according to their own life experience and assumptions, and this is compounded by the selective reporting of the case study, reflecting the researcher’s perception of the case being studied. Through using multiple sources and techniques in the data gathering process, case study researchers “assist readers in the construction of knowledge” (Stake, 2005, p. 455). Stake (2005, p. 447) suggests case researchers should portray and gather data on:
1. The nature of the case, particularly its activity and functioning; 2. Its historical background;
3. Its physical setting;
4. Other contexts, such as economic, political, legal, and aesthetic; 5. Other cases through which this case is recognized; and
6. Those informants through whom the case can be known.
This gathering of a wide array of data seeks the particular in a case, rather than attempting to generalise the case alongside other similar cases. Stake calls this an ‘intrinsic case study ‘ where the study is undertaken to gain a better understanding of this particular case. In ‘all its ordinariness’ (Stake, 2005, p. 445) this case itself is of interest. My use of a case study approach for the second part of this research aims to explore how the students coped with learning in a different culture and why they chose the strategies they did to adapt to their new learning environment.
3.4.3 Semi-structured, open-ended interviews and focus group
In this research I present data taken from the focus group and semi-structured interviews of four students which represent their views on the cultural differences they identified, and I also comment on (interpret) their representation based on what I have observed. I distinguish these two representations by labelling my comments as ‘author’s comments’. Yin (2010, p. 12) describes the use of open-ended interviews “to reveal how case study participants construct reality and think about situations”. In my semi-structured open-ended interviews the students’ construction of reality provides important insights into their coping mechanisms to deal with cultural difference. My interpretation of how I witnessed their coping mechanisms adds depth from the perspective of their learning progression. The separation of student perspective and teacher perspective is made clear in my writing through the use of the label ‘author’s
comments’.
Whilst the students were under my tutelage I had many opportunities for direct observation of their coping mechanisms within the learning environment, both with each other and when interacting with guest presenters. This direct observation over time provided the opportunity for me to be sceptical about reactions and mannerisms produced in different contexts and
situations, and to test them against rival explanations (Yin, 2010). These observations were recorded in my journal at the end of each day of teaching.
3.4.5 Informal group discussions
During the course of our learning together there were many occasions when the line between formal learning and informal group discussion was blurred. This is part of the Socratic method of learning. Using probing questions to promote deep thinking from the students often led to observations from them about the differences in ways of doing things in TL and Australia. These informal group discussions were insightful and often produced moments of transformational learning about each other’s cultures. These observations were also recorded in my journal at the end of each day of teaching.
3.4.6 Visual expressions of learning
The students produced many artefacts during their learning experience such as mind maps, photos, journal entries and drawings. In addition, those students who produced more detailed final assessment project reports gave insights into their cultural heritage and how this heritage assisted them to come to an understanding of their own learning style. These artefacts were extremely valuable in identifying the progression of their learning journey. With the students’ permission I took photos of artefacts developed within the classroom and stored these on my computer for use in this research. I also gained permission to refer to two students’ final research reports at my discretion.
Yin (2010) discusses three methods of presenting the observational evidence: one where the author tries to remain neutral and factual, another where the presentation of the evidence represents the view of the one or more of the participants and a third method which represents the author’s deliberate interpretation of what has been observed. According to Yin a
representation of two of these methods is acceptable provided there is clarification of which method is in use. I use evidence as it represents the view of one or more of the participants and I add my interpretation of what I have observed and what has been represented in the artefacts of the students.
3.5
CONCLUSION
In this chapter I have presented the process I undertook to assist me in clarifying my position as a researcher. I used four questions to assist me to present my positioning clearly to the reader. What do I believe underpins my knowledge of life? Where did I gain this belief? How does this belief influence the way I react to situations and people? What assumptions have I accumulated from my life experiences which may affect my reflexivity to social interaction? These questions were helpful in choosing my methods, as I discovered that I wanted to speak from my heart, to demonstrate the way I use intuition in my professional work as well as in my personal life. Both Hall’s work on high and low context cultures, and Hofstede’s models of collectivism/
individualism and power distance, informed my imperative to undertake a hermeneutic phenomenological study. I like Heidegger’s concept of co-constitutionality in hermeneutic phenomenology, which focuses on seeking out the meanings of individual experiences and how these meanings influence the choices we make. Within this hermeneutic phenomenological study, my two-part (teacher and students), dual method (autoethnography and case study) conceptual framework is appropriate, where the meanings arrived at by the researcher are a merging of the meanings articulated by both participant and researcher within the focus of the inquiry (Koch, 1995). Having described and justified my choice of methods to present the different sets of data to give balance to the development of the teacher-student relationship, in the following chapter I move on to building the profile of the students. Providing balance in knowing the participants in this research is an important aspect of the rigour and reliability of this research process.
CHAPTER 4: STUDENT PROFILES
4.1
INTRODUCTION
In accordance with Stake (2005, p. 447) suggesting researchers should portray and gather data on the nature of a case study, its historical background, physical setting and economic, political, legal and aesthetic contexts, as well as those informants through whom the case can be known, this chapter will portray a student profile of each member of the group.