http://comm-org.wisc.edu/papers2004/tinkler/3.
htm
Tinkler (2004)
Case studies can be particularly useful for studying a process, program or individual in an in-
depth, holistic way that allows for deep understanding (Merriam, 1998). As Merriam points out,
A case study design is employed to gain an in-depth understanding of the
situation and meaning for those involved. The interest is in process rather
than outcomes, in context rather than a specific variable, in discovery
rather than confirmation (p. 19).
There are some differences in how researchers define case study. Some researchers think of case
study as the object to be studied (Stake, 2000), while others define case study as a process of
investigation (Creswell, 2002). Creswell defines case study as "an in-depth exploration of a
bounded system (e.g., an activity, event, process, or individuals) based on extensive data
collection" (p. 485). Creswell recommends case study as a methodology if the problem to be
studied "relates to developing an in-depth understanding of a 'case' or bounded system" (p. 496)
and if the purpose is to understand "an event, activity, process, or one or more individuals" (p.
496). Patton (1990) suggests that case studies are valuable in creating deep understanding of
particular people, problems or situations in comprehensive ways.
This study is particularly suitable for a case study design because it is a bounded system, it is
contextual, and it is a study of process (Merriam, 1998). Like Creswell (2002), Stake (2000)
defines case study as the study of a "bounded system" (p. 436). According to Creswell (2002),
"'Bounded' means that the case is separated out for research in terms of time, place, or some
physical boundaries" (p. 485). In other words, it is possible to create limits around the object to be
studied (Merriam, 1998). A case study can focus on a variety of different things. A case could be
an individual, a group, a school, a community (Merriam, 1998), or a case could also include "a
program, events, or activities" (Creswell, 2002, p. 485). The bounded systems in my contrasting
case studies are my collaboration with the Coalition for Schools[2] in a western city and my
collaboration with community members in a small, rural, mountain community to carry out
community-based research. The boundaries of these two cases are determined by the people and
groups that I collaborate with in the CBR process.
I chose a case study design because it involves "detailed, in-depth data collection involving
multiple sources of information rich in context" (Creswell, 1998, p. 61). Context is a key
factor. According to Merriam (1998), in focusing on a particular phenomenon in a case study, it is
impossible to separate the phenomenon from its context. However, in this study, it is important
that the context is understood as part of the process. As Yin (2003) says, "you would use the case
study method because you deliberately wanted to cover contextual conditions-believing that they
might be highly pertinent to your phenomenon of study" (p. 13). Thus, using a case study
approach allows for the possibility of gaining significant knowledge about the process of
conducting community-based research in particular contexts. According to Sanders (1981),
"Case studies help us to understand processes of events, projects, and programs and to discover
context characteristics that will shed light on an issue or object" (p. 44).
The two case studies each took place over an extended period of time. The first CBR project
lasted nine months, and the second CBR project lasted eight months. I worked with my
collaborative partners to define research problems and questions, develop research designs, collect
data, and analyze data. However, this study does not focus on the data that I collected as part of
that CBR work. Instead, this study focuses on the process of the collaborative experience. Since
the study focuses primarily on the procedures of conducting community-based research, the study
is considered a process study. According to Patton (1990), when carrying out a process study, the
"focus is on how something happens rather than on the outcomes or results obtained" (p.94). And,
as Merriam (1998) points out, "Case study is a particularly suitable design if you are interested in
process" (p.33). Therefore, case study was chosen since it allows for detailed monitoring of the
collaborative process (Merriam, 1998).
Types of Case Studies
Stake (2000) delineates three types of case studies: intrinsic, instrumental, and collective. Intrinsic
case studies focus on a case that is unusual and is of particular interest to the researcher (Creswell,
1998; Stake, 2000). The intent is not to build theory (Stake, 2000). An instrumental case study is
pursued in order to provide insight about a particular issue that may be generalizable (Creswell,
2002). The primary purpose of an instrumental case study is to help advance understanding
(Stake, 2000). The collective case study encompasses more than one case "in order to investigate
a phenomenon, population, or general condition" (Stake, 2000, p. 437). Since the purpose is to
help advance understanding, a collective case study is a grouping of instrumental case studies
(Stake, 2000). Using a collective case study approach can allow for the possibility of stronger
interpretation and "perhaps better theorizing" (Stake, 2000, p. 437).
Though Stake (2000) uses the terminology "collective case study," this approach is known by
other names such as, multiple case studies, cross-case studies, comparative case studies, and
contrasting cases (Merriam, 1998; Yin, 2003). With multiple case studies, data are analyzed for
insights both within each case and across cases (Merriam, 1998). Yin (2003) points out that
multiple cases may be chosen to try to replicate insights that you find within individuals cases or
to represent contrasting situations. Regardless of whether the purpose is replication or contrast,
multiple case studies are "considered more compelling, and the overall study is therefore regarded
as more robust" (Yin, 2003, p. 46).
