ABSTRACT
Case study research offers a range of accounts for in-depth research in fields of higher education, in the sense of identifying relevant issues for promoting sustainable development and creating knowledge within and between different groups (Wals et al. 2013), in and outside higher education institutions. This chapter about case study research is aimed at contributing to increase the reliability and credibility of case study research and to establish it as a methodology with high potential for analysing social situations. In a first step we have to be distinctive about the terms ‘case’, ‘case study’ and ‘case study research’. In literature on environmental education and education for sustainable development the terms ‘case’ and ‘case study’ are quite commonly used (e.g. Karim et al. 2013; Togo and Lotz-Sisitka 2013; Evans et al. 2012; Svanström et al. 2012; James and Card 2012; Chapman 2011; Sanusi and Khelghat-Doost 2008; Baumgartner and Zabin 2008;Van Petegem et al. 2007; Newman 2005; Fisher 2003; Castillo et al. 2002). Not all authors do clearly differentiate between ‘case’ and ‘case study’ and related intentions and procedures.‘Case’ is often used as a synonym for ‘example’without claiming any research intentions. According to O’Leary (2010) a case is ‘a bounded system, or a particular instance or entity that can be defined by identifiable boundaries’ (O’Leary 2010: 174). ‘Case study’ is prevalently used whenever a confined system, a specific situation or a process is analysed and the findings are presented in a comprehensive way. The intention of such a process is the description of the case as closely as possible to give readers a picture and an understanding of the situation in question. O’Leary defines case study as ‘a method of studying elements of the social through comprehensive description and analysis of a single situation or case, e.g. a detailed study of an individual, setting, group, episode, or event’ (O’Leary 2010: 174). Yet another purpose of a case study is its use as an educational or training method (Posch
and Scholz 2006; Scholz et al. 2006; Stauffacher et al. 2006; Posch and Steiner 2006; Muhar et al. 2006; Kreber 2001). Those case studies are arranged to stimulate students by authentic complexity to engage them in investigating a social situation from various perspectives and come to conclusions. Case studies in educational contexts can vary in their structure and
method as either open ended inquiry or else offering students prepared information inviting them to work out thoroughly founded solutions. A case study can refer to single or multiple cases. As a most important aspect O’Leary (2010)
argues that case study ‘allows for the building of holistic understandings through prolonged engagement and the development of rapport and trust within a clearly defined and highly relevant context’ (O’Leary 2010: 174). In similar ways other authors stress that a case study explores the complexity of a situation in its real life context from multiple perspectives (Stake 1995; Simons 2009; Yin 2013; Thomas 2011). Most authors do not explicitly distinguish between case study and case study research, but point out the difference between illustrative, atheoretical, configurative-idiographic, story-telling, descriptive case studies on one hand, and theory-guided case studies like theory testing, theory seeking, heuristic, explanatory case studies on the other hand (see Thomas 2011;Yin 2013). Analysing the considerably diverse criteria in existing typologies Thomas (2011) suggests founding decisions throughout a case study research on three criteria: purpose (intrinsic, instrumental, evaluative or exploratory), approach (illustrative/descriptive, theory-testing or theory-building) and process (single studies or multiple studies). In order to avoid the ‘looseness of the case study as a form of inquiry’ he claims that a case study is not only about a subject (a practical, historical unity as a case) but also about an object, that is an analytical or theoretical frame which the case ‘illuminates and explicates’ (Thomas 2011: 513), linked with the question ‘what is this a case of ’ (Thomas 2011: 515). Emphasising the importance of the theoretical part in the research process, we argue for a distinction between ‘case study’ as a more illustrative piece of work and ‘case study research’, as a study embedded in a theoretical reflection, distinctively advocating for a high quality in explicit research approaches (see also Corcoran et al. 2004). Hence, authors who do not associate distinct research principles with their case study may not be blamed for shortcomings in research aspects if they have never intended to follow a clear-cut research strategy. It may be criticised that case study approach has developed in a somewhat arbitrary
conglomerate of methodical procedures and qualities. The purpose of this chapter follows an alternative strategy: It points out distinct quality aspects which distinguish case study research from case studies. Researchers deciding for case study research as a methodology have to do it consciously and well founded on ontological, epistemological and methodical grounds (Dillon and Reid 2004). If case study research is to be recognised as quality research and if related research outcomes are to be acknowledged as reliable knowledge, case study research has to be documented as research process with high quality standards (Yin 2013; Arthur et al. 2012; Morrison et al. 2011; Gerring 2006; Hancock and Algozzine 2006; Tavers 2001). As with any other research it has to provide traceable research procedures like documenting framing discourses, transparent data collection, analysis and documentation, inter-subjective validation and interpretation. Before turning to those epistemological and methodical aspects of case study research, we
will examine possible purposes that researchers in the field of higher education for sustainable development may pursue with case study research (for discussion on a wider range of purposes of case studies see Thomas 2011).
