Back to 526 syllabus

Back to 526 Project

General directions for three types of project

CONDUCTING AND WRITING UP A CASE STUDY

Case studies are in-depth looks at a person or small group of people around a particular question. As with any other form of scholarly writing, you are asking and answering a question on the basis of data. In a case study you present data (information about the case) that bears on your question, and argue for a particular interpretation of that data (the "answer"), keeping in mind contradictory as well as supporting evidence.

Background reading. Start your project by reading sources relevant to your research question. Begin with readings from the class syllabus, then branch out to other sources (we have useful electronic data bases in the library to help you find these sources.)

Formulate your question. What do you want to learn from this case study? Given what you have read in the literature, what do you expect to find out?

Collecting data. Data may be retrospective (if you have detailed knowledge of a particular case that you can analyze) or collected specifically for this project. This is a very good point at which to talk to me about your plans.

Analysis. Using theories and concepts from the course, figure out what is going on in your case. Writing it up.

What is this a case of? This should form the basis for your paper. You will essentially make an argument for this person (or group) as a case of _____, using data, theory, and your own thinking. Many case studies have "a case of ____" in their titles--this is a good way to alert your reader to the nature of your interpretation, right away.

Introduction and literature review. Discussion of recent, relevant literature. Sets the stage for your question(s), explains its (their) roots. Shows how present project fits in with and extends previous work. Puts this case in the context of (a) major theoretical framework(s). For course projects, make clear ties to the content of the course.

Description of the case and analysis. Clearly present relevant data about the case, and make an argument for a particular interpretation (the results of your analysis, above.) Remember that part of making an argument is dealing with alternative explanations. (Tell why it isn't a case of y, as well as telling why it is a case of x.)

Significance. What have we learned from this case, and why is it important? What does it add to what we already know about socialization? Are there any potential applications of this new knowledge (especially to your own current/future job)? What questions does this case raise for future research to address?


PREPARING A CRITICAL LITERATURE REVIEW

The major task in conducting a critical literature review is no different from any other form of scholarly writing: posing and answering a question or questions. In the case of a literature review, your question takes the form of "what is our current state of knowledge about X?" OR "can the theories in field X inform our thinking/practice in field Y?" Your answer will be a position--you will make an argument for the conclusions your drew based on your analysis of the literature.  This is focus of the review.

NB: You will find both articles that support and articles that contradict your initial ideas. Your task is NOT to first take a position, then search the literature in support of your a priori conclusion. Instead, try to remain open to the possibilities, coming to your final position at the end of your research .

Suggested steps in writing a critical review:

A.  The question

  1. Begin with a preliminary question, based on your course readings and experience with learners or particular research interests. NOTE: Sometimes the most interesting questions lie in the borderlands between the course topic and your area of interest. In this case, your paper will be an argument for applying theories from the course to research and theory in your interest area.
  2. Locate major review and theoretical pieces related to your question. Begin with the course bibliography and the reference lists for individual readings, then consult electronic indexes like PSYCHLIT and ERIC (it's usually best stick to journals and books rather than conference papers).
  3. After reading some reviews and theoretical pieces to get a preliminary sense of what is and isn't out there and the major theoretical frameworks, refine your question into a manageable but interesting form.
B.  Critical reading
  1. Locate recent and relevant studies related to your question. It is quite possible that no one has studied your precise question. You must then look at empirical research you believe to be closely related to your question, either substantively or methodologically.
  2. Read these studies. You should then have a fairly good sense of what's going on in this small area of research, what the major theory or theories are that guide the research, and what some of the remaining problems or questions are. This "sense of the field" will form the core of your paper (but see above regarding "borderlands" papers and their arguments.).
C.  Organization and preparing to write
  1. Begin by writing down, in plain English, the argument you want to make, based on your literature review.You should have a main point and two or three major subpoints. Group your studies in relation to these points. (You might not use all of the studies you read!)
  2. Within each group of studies, is there one which is typical or illustrative? Are others so closely related that they add only minor information about this point? Plan to discuss the most important or illustrative studies in the most detail, relegating others to brief mentions.
  3. Discussion of major articles should be critical, focusing on the most important aspects of the study for your purpose. (Remember that your task in reviewing the literature is to ask and answer a question.)
  4. In your critical discussion of a study, point out important weaknesses as well as reporting findings. Remember that no single study is all-inclusive: all have important limitations. (Look again at the review chapters or articles you found for examples of how to write a review.)
  5. What next? The final section of your paper should lay out suggestions for future research and/or implications for the field. These should grow directly from your critical review.
D.  Writing the paper
  1. Introduction. Here you pose the question, giving your reader a sense of the purpose and structure of the paper. This is a good place to foreshadow your major argument.
  2. Theoretical framework. This is the beginning of the answer to your question. Provide a context for the reader by outlining the theories you found to be most central to your question and/or most influential in the research you will review. You do NOT need to include ALL of the theories you have read about.
  3. Critical review of important studies. This is the most important part of the answer to your question. What do we know? What does it mean? What's wrong with what we know (or think we know?)
  4. Implications. Now that you've answered the question, what next? (See "What next?" above.)

* empirical reseach means that the researchers collected new data, either qualitative or quantitative. Back to directions.

WRITING A RESEARCH PROPOSAL

This is a standard outline for a quantitative proposal. Qualitative proposals will be a bit different in that the "instruments" and "procedures" sections will replaced by a detailed description of the kinds of data you plan to collect, and how this will be done.

I.  INTRODUCTION (What is the problem and how does it arise from the existing literature?)

    A.  Statement of problem/research question. Includes significance information (why should we care?)

    B.  Review of the literature.

    Discussion of recent, relevant literature. Sets the stage for your questions and hypotheses, explains their roots (where did you get that hypothesis, mister?). Shows how present project fits in with and extends previous work. Puts your proposed work in the context of (a) major theoretical framework(s). (This is where you make your clearest ties to the content of the course.) For a general discussion of how to write a literature review, see previous section.

    C.  Research questions; hypotheses (for quantitative) and/or objectives (for qualitative). Both are probably necessary for mixed methods studies.

II.  METHOD (How will you collect your data?)
A.  Subjects.  Description of population and sample. If sample not randomly drawn from population, justify and address generalizability concerns. Description of how subjects were obtained (e.g., volunteers, parental permission, etc.) Small-sample studies should explain and justify selection methods.

B.  Instruments.  How will you measure or collect data on your variables/constructs? Description of instruments (e.e., tests, questionnaires, observational techniques, interview schedules, etc.) and justification for their use to collect data on constructs of interest. Reliability and validity.

C.  Procedures.  Describe exactly what you and your subjects will do during data collection. Include tasks, directions to subjects, time line, etc.

III.  ANALYSIS (What will you do with your data in order to answer your research questions?)  Description of how you will analyze your data (what comparsions you will make, what statistical or qualitative analytical procedures you will use, how you will identify themes in interview data, identify events in observational data, etc.) in general terms. How will this analysis of your data help you answer your question?

IV.  SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY (Why should we let you do this study or give you money for it? Why should we care?)

A.  Potential implications for theory.

How does the new information you will have obtained change the way we look at this problem? What new questions might arise? How might this study help us do a better job of conceptualizing this problem? How might the results of this study add to or improve our methods of studying this problem?

C.  Potential implications for practice.

Could the new information help us understand or improve some aspect of education, formal or informal? If so, how and why?
 

Back to top