Methodology-case study

The following section will outline the justification for and implementation of the selected research method, the case study. There is no firm consensus on the exact nature of the case study (Stake, 1995), but in general it is a method that, as the name suggests, studies in depth a single case or, in some instances, cases. The case study is not unique to educational research; the problem-based learning model above often makes use of case studies from medicine, engineering, law, or other relevant subjects. The case study may take either a qualitative or quantitative approach, and this is often determined by the nature of the case. In instances where the case is an individual, it is more likely data will be qualitative in nature, where a case study of a nation or even large network (such as a school district) might well include more quantitative components. The essential characteristic in my view, which led to its selection here, is the richness of the narrative that arises from the in-depth study of the individual case. The specific methods by which this narrative is collected, analysed, and presented will be laid out below.

2.5.1. Relation to research question

Before beginning the description of the research methods, it is worth revisiting the research questions:

1) How do students learn while engaged in project-based learning in secondary science? 2) What effects do different aspects of project learning have on the learning taking place? In the first instance, it is my intent to map out how changes to the knowledge, skills, or

elaborated upon further on in this thesis. The second question may in fact be considered a subset of the first question. Domin (2007) found that “students felt more cognitively engaged” (p. 146) when they were working in a more open-ended, problem-based environment, and perceived that their cognitive development differed based on the learning style. What my study aims to achieve is to identify in greater detail how different aspects lead to different types of learning, or at least in the view of the student.

The first question is very clearly a “how” question (Thomas, 2016 & Yin, 2014), seeking to develop an in-depth understanding of the learning process (Creswell, 2013)-an understanding of understanding, in a way. The second is in many ways also a “how” question, though there is an added dimension requiring an attempt at matching different aspects of the PBL project with types of learning. The intent is not to make a judgement of PBL in comparison to other methods; if it were, a comparative research design might be more appropriate (Thomas, 2016). The aim is not to definitively prove causality, nor is this research hoping to provide a generalisable answer to the question “does learning occur during a PBL unit”, because one of the assumptions being made is that some form of learning will occur at some point during the unit. The purpose of this research is to study in-depth the nature of this development through the use of PBL strategies and thus the case study methodology is most appropriate (Thomas, 2016, & Yin, 2014).

2.5.2. Relation to the research paradigm

While the research questions were primarily the reason that a case study method was chosen, it is also important that there be compatibility with the research paradigm as well. The case study is one research method in line with the constructivist stance. The case study provides an in-depth look at a particular case (or cases) and is concerned with, in this instance, the way students learn in a particular setting. It does not make the assertion that any student in any school would learn in the same way or even at all. Sweeping generalisations are as foreign to the case study as they are to the constructivist stance. This is also in line with the identified

ontological perspective. The subtle realism described by Hammersley (1992) above allows that “there can be multiple, non-contradictory and valid descriptions and explanations of the same phenomenon”, which could apply not only to student testimony relating to their experiences in their projects, but also provides support for the interpretivist philosophy of the research.

Certain assumptions of mine will certainly have an impact, regardless of my intent to separate myself from them. Interpretivism suggests that, as the researcher, it is impossible to completely separate myself from the research and its findings (Ritchie & Lewis, 2003), and this will mean that my findings, no matter how faithful to the data, will differ from the findings of another researcher. This is not incompatible with rigorous case study design, so long as the design acknowledges and accounts for this at each stage of the research process. Indeed, because the case study requires diverse sources of data, these assumptions and interpretations can be checked against a range of student-generated data for accuracy and validity, with the final product being a comprehensive image of the students’ learning and the process by which it occurs.

2.5.3 Defining the case

A well-defined case study must first of all be the study of a well-defined case or, in this instance, cases. This begins by deciding upon and justifying the selection criteria for the cases. Thomas (2016) suggests three types of case: key case, outlier case, and local knowledge case. Each of these points to a particular rationale for the selection of a particular case. In the instance of a key case, it is most appropriate to select for study a case that is exemplary in some way. Thomas cites Hurricane Katrina as an example. While similar in many ways to other hurricanes, its size and impact make it of particular interest to researchers. The outlier case will take this a bit further, and be selected by the very virtue that it is not like other cases, and deviates

significantly from the norm in some way. This type of case will most likely deviate in one particular area, but may share many other characteristics with otherwise similar cases. The final type of case described by Thomas (2016) is the local knowledge case, where the case is selected because it is already well-known to the researcher, and access to the case is likely more readily available.

Part of defining the case is in determining criteria for inclusion within the case (where a case has multiple subjects13_{) or as the case (in single participant/entity studies) . I selected for}

my cases three students each engaged in one of a series of projects based around one or more of

13 _{For example, a case study concerning mortality rates in Finnish infants would need to ensure that any participants}

the natural sciences. These students were involved in two different projects; two were in a Computer Science based project, and the third was in a Water Monitoring project. The participants were selected based on interest in participation, and the project allocation was a combination of student academic interest and availability. Given that I am not a current teacher, parent, or student currently in a secondary school, these cases were not those of local knowledge. The issue of outlier cases is more complex, however. Certainly in order to be able to investigate changes to knowledge and skills in PBL units, the selected programme, as part of the research context, must have units developed to be based on meaningful and authentic projects. While PBL is growing in popularity in both the US (Ellison & Freedberg, 2015) and the UK (Abrams, 2017), it is by no means the prevalent teaching model in schools. A school or programme that chooses to base the curriculum on PBL may therefore indeed be seen as unique in terms of pedagogy, meaning the research context at least must be considered an outlier. Within the context of the school, however, the cases were chosen to be representative of the context. There is a risk that there existed a form of selection bias, as students willing to invest the time in such a project may have been more naturally inclined towards the sciences in particular, or in academic pursuits in general. Each of the cases can be seen as a key case then, but with the understanding that they may deviate from the general student population in some ways, beyond the extent to which any student is a unique learner.

In selecting the appropriate population from which to solicit volunteers, additional concerns arose. While the larger context of the school may be limited by the relative rarity of such a programme, it might be expected that, within the school, more options are available. Within the school context, different projects were going on simultaneously, and different year groups had very different levels of autonomy in their projects. For this reason, students in Year 10 were not offered a chance to participate14, as projects will typically be more guided, as suggested by pre-pilot discussions with the school site. Students in Years 11 and 13 were not going to be as readily available for follow-up interviews if needed, and stopped project work earlier to prepare for their examinations. Choosing to work with Year 12 solved both problems, and early work suggests this age group was quite open to participating in research.

14 _{One year 10 project was observed, and a student by the pseudonym Hart gave a few interviews relating to his}

While ideally the students selected would represent a range of abilities and interests, an investigation of this nature was always going to be dependent on the willingness of the

participants. While initially over a dozen showed interest, less than half that number returned all the consent forms or replied to indicate continued interest15. This left a much smaller pool of candidates from which to select participants, though by accident rather than design, those that did indicate continued availability had a range of interests and were enrolled in a variety of courses (two in A Levels, one in BTEC). More detail about each of the participants can be found in the introduction to their individual chapters. The school selected, as is common amongst UTC’s across the country, has a male to female ratio that is much larger than the national average for this age group (Long & Bolton, 2017), so it is surprising that more female students than males showed interest. In the end, one male and two female students agreed to participate in the research.