case study for phd

• Section 2: Home
• Developing the Quantitative Research Design
• Qualitative Descriptive Design
• Design and Development Research (DDR) For Instructional Design
• Qualitative Narrative Inquiry Research
• Action Research Resource
• Case Study Design in an Applied Doctorate

Qualitative Research Designs

Case study design, using case study design in the applied doctoral experience (ade), applicability of case study design to applied problem of practice, case study design references.

• SAGE Research Methods
• Research Examples (SAGE) This link opens in a new window
• Dataset Examples (SAGE) This link opens in a new window
• IRB Resource Center This link opens in a new window

The field of qualitative research there are a number of research designs (also referred to as “traditions” or “genres”), including case study, phenomenology, narrative inquiry, action research, ethnography, grounded theory, as well as a number of critical genres including Feminist theory, indigenous research, critical race theory and cultural studies. The choice of research design is directly tied to and must be aligned with your research problem and purpose. As Bloomberg & Volpe (2019) explain:

Choice of research design is directly tied to research problem and purpose. As the researcher, you actively create the link among problem, purpose, and design through a process of reflecting on problem and purpose, focusing on researchable questions, and considering how to best address these questions. Thinking along these lines affords a research study methodological congruence (p. 38).

Case study is an in-depth exploration from multiple perspectives of a bounded social phenomenon, be this a social system such as a program, event, institution, organization, or community (Stake, 1995, 2005; Yin, 2018). Case study is employed across disciplines, including education, health care, social work, sociology, and organizational studies. The purpose is to generate understanding and deep insights to inform professional practice, policy development, and community or social action (Bloomberg 2018).

Yin (2018) and Stake (1995, 2005), two of the key proponents of case study methodology, use different terms to describe case studies. Yin categorizes case studies as exploratory or descriptive . The former is used to explore those situations in which the intervention being evaluated has no clear single set of outcomes. The latter is used to describe an intervention or phenomenon and the real-life context in which it occurred. Stake identifies case studies as intrinsic or instrumental , and he proposes that a primary distinction in designing case studies is between single and multiple (or collective) case study designs. A single case study may be an instrumental case study (research focuses on an issue or concern in one bounded case) or an intrinsic case study (the focus is on the case itself because the case presents a unique situation). A longitudinal case study design is chosen when the researcher seeks to examine the same single case at two or more different points in time or to capture trends over time. A multiple case study design is used when a researcher seeks to determine the prevalence or frequency of a particular phenomenon. This approach is useful when cases are used for purposes of a cross-case analysis in order to compare, contrast, and synthesize perspectives regarding the same issue. The focus is on the analysis of diverse cases to determine how these confirm the findings within or between cases, or call the findings into question.

Case study affords significant interaction with research participants, providing an in-depth picture of the phenomenon (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019). Research is extensive, drawing on multiple methods of data collection, and involves multiple data sources. Triangulation is critical in attempting to obtain an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon under study and adds rigor, breadth, and depth to the study and provides corroborative evidence of the data obtained. Analysis of data can be holistic or embedded—that is, dealing with the whole or parts of the case (Yin, 2018). With multiple cases the typical analytic strategy is to provide detailed description of themes within each case (within-case analysis), followed by thematic analysis across cases (cross-case analysis), providing insights regarding how individual cases are comparable along important dimensions. Research culminates in the production of a detailed description of a setting and its participants, accompanied by an analysis of the data for themes or patterns (Stake, 1995, 2005; Yin, 2018). In addition to thick, rich description, the researcher’s interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations contribute to the reader’s overall understanding of the case study.

Analysis of findings should show that the researcher has attended to all the data, should address the most significant aspects of the case, and should demonstrate familiarity with the prevailing thinking and discourse about the topic. The goal of case study design (as with all qualitative designs) is not generalizability but rather transferability —that is, how (if at all) and in what ways understanding and knowledge can be applied in similar contexts and settings. The qualitative researcher attempts to address the issue of transferability by way of thick, rich description that will provide the basis for a case or cases to have relevance and potential application across a broader context.

Qualitative research methods ask the questions of "what" and "how" a phenomenon is understood in a real-life context (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019). In the education field, qualitative research methods uncover educational experiences and practices because qualitative research allows the researcher to reveal new knowledge and understanding. Moreover, qualitative descriptive case studies describe, analyze and interpret events that explain the reasoning behind specific phenomena (Bloomberg, 2018). As such, case study design can be the foundation for a rigorous study within the Applied Doctoral Experience (ADE).

Case study design is an appropriate research design to consider when conceptualizing and conducting a dissertation research study that is based on an applied problem of practice with inherent real-life educational implications. Case study researchers study current, real-life cases that are in progress so that they can gather accurate information that is current. This fits well with the ADE program, as students are typically exploring a problem of practice. Because of the flexibility of the methods used, a descriptive design provides the researcher with the opportunity to choose data collection methods that are best suited to a practice-based research purpose, and can include individual interviews, focus groups, observation, surveys, and critical incident questionnaires. Methods are triangulated to contribute to the study’s trustworthiness. In selecting the set of data collection methods, it is important that the researcher carefully consider the alignment between research questions and the type of data that is needed to address these. Each data source is one piece of the “puzzle,” that contributes to the researcher’s holistic understanding of a phenomenon. The various strands of data are woven together holistically to promote a deeper understanding of the case and its application to an educationally-based problem of practice.

Research studies within the Applied Doctoral Experience (ADE) will be practical in nature and focus on problems and issues that inform educational practice.  Many of the types of studies that fall within the ADE framework are exploratory, and align with case study design. Case study design fits very well with applied problems related to educational practice, as the following set of examples illustrate:

Elementary Bilingual Education Teachers’ Self-Efficacy in Teaching English Language Learners: A Qualitative Case Study

The problem to be addressed in the proposed study is that some elementary bilingual education teachers’ beliefs about their lack of preparedness to teach the English language may negatively impact the language proficiency skills of Hispanic ELLs (Ernst-Slavit & Wenger, 2016; Fuchs et al., 2018; Hoque, 2016). The purpose of the proposed qualitative descriptive case study was to explore the perspectives and experiences of elementary bilingual education teachers regarding their perceived lack of preparedness to teach the English language and how this may impact the language proficiency of Hispanic ELLs.

Exploring Minority Teachers Experiences Pertaining to their Value in Education: A Single Case Study of Teachers in New York City

The problem is that minority K-12 teachers are underrepresented in the United States, with research indicating that school leaders and teachers in schools that are populated mainly by black students, staffed mostly by white teachers who may be unprepared to deal with biases and stereotypes that are ingrained in schools (Egalite, Kisida, & Winters, 2015; Milligan & Howley, 2015). The purpose of this qualitative exploratory single case study was to develop a clearer understanding of minority teachers’ experiences concerning the under-representation of minority K-12 teachers in urban school districts in the United States since there are so few of them.

Exploring the Impact of an Urban Teacher Residency Program on Teachers’ Cultural Intelligence: A Qualitative Case Study

The problem to be addressed by this case study is that teacher candidates often report being unprepared and ill-equipped to effectively educate culturally diverse students (Skepple, 2015; Beutel, 2018). The purpose of this study was to explore and gain an in-depth understanding of the perceived impact of an urban teacher residency program in urban Iowa on teachers’ cultural competence using the cultural intelligence (CQ) framework (Earley & Ang, 2003).

Qualitative Case Study that Explores Self-Efficacy and Mentorship on Women in Academic Administrative Leadership Roles

The problem was that female school-level administrators might be less likely to experience mentorship, thereby potentially decreasing their self-efficacy (Bing & Smith, 2019; Brown, 2020; Grant, 2021). The purpose of this case study was to determine to what extent female school-level administrators in the United States who had a mentor have a sense of self-efficacy and to examine the relationship between mentorship and self-efficacy.

Suburban Teacher and Administrator Perceptions of Culturally Responsive Teaching to Promote Connectedness in Students of Color: A Qualitative Case Study

The problem to be addressed in this study is the racial discrimination experienced by students of color in suburban schools and the resulting negative school experience (Jara & Bloomsbury, 2020; Jones, 2019; Kohli et al., 2017; Wandix-White, 2020). The purpose of this case study is to explore how culturally responsive practices can counteract systemic racism and discrimination in suburban schools thereby meeting the needs of students of color by creating positive learning experiences. 

As you can see, all of these studies were well suited to qualitative case study design. In each of these studies, the applied research problem and research purpose were clearly grounded in educational practice as well as directly aligned with qualitative case study methodology. In the Applied Doctoral Experience (ADE), you will be focused on addressing or resolving an educationally relevant research problem of practice. As such, your case study, with clear boundaries, will be one that centers on a real-life authentic problem in your field of practice that you believe is in need of resolution or improvement, and that the outcome thereof will be educationally valuable.

Bloomberg, L. D. (2018). Case study method. In B. B. Frey (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of educational research, measurement, and evaluation (pp. 237–239). SAGE. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/nu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmethods.sagepub.com%2FReference%2Fthe-sage-encyclopedia-of-educational-research-measurement-and-evaluation%2Fi4294.xml

Bloomberg, L. D. & Volpe, M. (2019). Completing your qualitative dissertation: A road map from beginning to end . (4th Ed.). SAGE.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE.

Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443–466). SAGE.

Yin, R. (2018). Case study research and applications: Designs and methods. SAGE.

• << Previous: Action Research Resource
• Next: SAGE Research Methods >>
• Last Updated: Jul 28, 2023 8:05 AM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/c.php?g=1013605

© Copyright 2024 National University. All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy | Consumer Information

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods

What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods

Published on May 8, 2019 by Shona McCombes . Revised on November 20, 2023.

A case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organization, or phenomenon. Case studies are commonly used in social, educational, clinical, and business research.

A case study research design usually involves qualitative methods , but quantitative methods are sometimes also used. Case studies are good for describing , comparing, evaluating and understanding different aspects of a research problem .

Table of contents

When to do a case study, step 1: select a case, step 2: build a theoretical framework, step 3: collect your data, step 4: describe and analyze the case, other interesting articles.

A case study is an appropriate research design when you want to gain concrete, contextual, in-depth knowledge about a specific real-world subject. It allows you to explore the key characteristics, meanings, and implications of the case.

Case studies are often a good choice in a thesis or dissertation . They keep your project focused and manageable when you don’t have the time or resources to do large-scale research.

You might use just one complex case study where you explore a single subject in depth, or conduct multiple case studies to compare and illuminate different aspects of your research problem.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Once you have developed your problem statement and research questions , you should be ready to choose the specific case that you want to focus on. A good case study should have the potential to:

• Provide new or unexpected insights into the subject
• Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories
• Propose practical courses of action to resolve a problem
• Open up new directions for future research

TipIf your research is more practical in nature and aims to simultaneously investigate an issue as you solve it, consider conducting action research instead.

Unlike quantitative or experimental research , a strong case study does not require a random or representative sample. In fact, case studies often deliberately focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the research problem.

Example of an outlying case studyIn the 1960s the town of Roseto, Pennsylvania was discovered to have extremely low rates of heart disease compared to the US average. It became an important case study for understanding previously neglected causes of heart disease.

However, you can also choose a more common or representative case to exemplify a particular category, experience or phenomenon.

Example of a representative case studyIn the 1920s, two sociologists used Muncie, Indiana as a case study of a typical American city that supposedly exemplified the changing culture of the US at the time.

While case studies focus more on concrete details than general theories, they should usually have some connection with theory in the field. This way the case study is not just an isolated description, but is integrated into existing knowledge about the topic. It might aim to:

• Exemplify a theory by showing how it explains the case under investigation
• Expand on a theory by uncovering new concepts and ideas that need to be incorporated
• Challenge a theory by exploring an outlier case that doesn’t fit with established assumptions

To ensure that your analysis of the case has a solid academic grounding, you should conduct a literature review of sources related to the topic and develop a theoretical framework . This means identifying key concepts and theories to guide your analysis and interpretation.

There are many different research methods you can use to collect data on your subject. Case studies tend to focus on qualitative data using methods such as interviews , observations , and analysis of primary and secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles, photographs, official records). Sometimes a case study will also collect quantitative data.

Example of a mixed methods case studyFor a case study of a wind farm development in a rural area, you could collect quantitative data on employment rates and business revenue, collect qualitative data on local people’s perceptions and experiences, and analyze local and national media coverage of the development.

The aim is to gain as thorough an understanding as possible of the case and its context.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

In writing up the case study, you need to bring together all the relevant aspects to give as complete a picture as possible of the subject.

How you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard scientific paper or thesis , with separate sections or chapters for the methods , results and discussion .

Others are written in a more narrative style, aiming to explore the case from various angles and analyze its meanings and implications (for example, by using textual analysis or discourse analysis ).

In all cases, though, make sure to give contextual details about the case, connect it back to the literature and theory, and discuss how it fits into wider patterns or debates.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Normal distribution
• Degrees of freedom
• Null hypothesis
• Discourse analysis
• Control groups
• Mixed methods research
• Non-probability sampling
• Quantitative research
• Ecological validity

Research bias

• Rosenthal effect
• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Selection bias
• Negativity bias
• Status quo bias

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, November 20). What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods. Scribbr. Retrieved September 16, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/case-study/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, primary vs. secondary sources | difference & examples, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is action research | definition & examples, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

A case study research paper examines a person, place, event, condition, phenomenon, or other type of subject of analysis in order to extrapolate  key themes and results that help predict future trends, illuminate previously hidden issues that can be applied to practice, and/or provide a means for understanding an important research problem with greater clarity. A case study research paper usually examines a single subject of analysis, but case study papers can also be designed as a comparative investigation that shows relationships between two or more subjects. The methods used to study a case can rest within a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method investigative paradigm.

Case Studies. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010 ; “What is a Case Study?” In Swanborn, Peter G. Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London: SAGE, 2010.

How to Approach Writing a Case Study Research Paper

General information about how to choose a topic to investigate can be found under the " Choosing a Research Problem " tab in the Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper writing guide. Review this page because it may help you identify a subject of analysis that can be investigated using a case study design.

However, identifying a case to investigate involves more than choosing the research problem . A case study encompasses a problem contextualized around the application of in-depth analysis, interpretation, and discussion, often resulting in specific recommendations for action or for improving existing conditions. As Seawright and Gerring note, practical considerations such as time and access to information can influence case selection, but these issues should not be the sole factors used in describing the methodological justification for identifying a particular case to study. Given this, selecting a case includes considering the following:

• The case represents an unusual or atypical example of a research problem that requires more in-depth analysis? Cases often represent a topic that rests on the fringes of prior investigations because the case may provide new ways of understanding the research problem. For example, if the research problem is to identify strategies to improve policies that support girl's access to secondary education in predominantly Muslim nations, you could consider using Azerbaijan as a case study rather than selecting a more obvious nation in the Middle East. Doing so may reveal important new insights into recommending how governments in other predominantly Muslim nations can formulate policies that support improved access to education for girls.
• The case provides important insight or illuminate a previously hidden problem? In-depth analysis of a case can be based on the hypothesis that the case study will reveal trends or issues that have not been exposed in prior research or will reveal new and important implications for practice. For example, anecdotal evidence may suggest drug use among homeless veterans is related to their patterns of travel throughout the day. Assuming prior studies have not looked at individual travel choices as a way to study access to illicit drug use, a case study that observes a homeless veteran could reveal how issues of personal mobility choices facilitate regular access to illicit drugs. Note that it is important to conduct a thorough literature review to ensure that your assumption about the need to reveal new insights or previously hidden problems is valid and evidence-based.
• The case challenges and offers a counter-point to prevailing assumptions? Over time, research on any given topic can fall into a trap of developing assumptions based on outdated studies that are still applied to new or changing conditions or the idea that something should simply be accepted as "common sense," even though the issue has not been thoroughly tested in current practice. A case study analysis may offer an opportunity to gather evidence that challenges prevailing assumptions about a research problem and provide a new set of recommendations applied to practice that have not been tested previously. For example, perhaps there has been a long practice among scholars to apply a particular theory in explaining the relationship between two subjects of analysis. Your case could challenge this assumption by applying an innovative theoretical framework [perhaps borrowed from another discipline] to explore whether this approach offers new ways of understanding the research problem. Taking a contrarian stance is one of the most important ways that new knowledge and understanding develops from existing literature.
• The case provides an opportunity to pursue action leading to the resolution of a problem? Another way to think about choosing a case to study is to consider how the results from investigating a particular case may result in findings that reveal ways in which to resolve an existing or emerging problem. For example, studying the case of an unforeseen incident, such as a fatal accident at a railroad crossing, can reveal hidden issues that could be applied to preventative measures that contribute to reducing the chance of accidents in the future. In this example, a case study investigating the accident could lead to a better understanding of where to strategically locate additional signals at other railroad crossings so as to better warn drivers of an approaching train, particularly when visibility is hindered by heavy rain, fog, or at night.
• The case offers a new direction in future research? A case study can be used as a tool for an exploratory investigation that highlights the need for further research about the problem. A case can be used when there are few studies that help predict an outcome or that establish a clear understanding about how best to proceed in addressing a problem. For example, after conducting a thorough literature review [very important!], you discover that little research exists showing the ways in which women contribute to promoting water conservation in rural communities of east central Africa. A case study of how women contribute to saving water in a rural village of Uganda can lay the foundation for understanding the need for more thorough research that documents how women in their roles as cooks and family caregivers think about water as a valuable resource within their community. This example of a case study could also point to the need for scholars to build new theoretical frameworks around the topic [e.g., applying feminist theories of work and family to the issue of water conservation].

Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. “Building Theories from Case Study Research.” Academy of Management Review 14 (October 1989): 532-550; Emmel, Nick. Sampling and Choosing Cases in Qualitative Research: A Realist Approach . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2013; Gerring, John. “What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?” American Political Science Review 98 (May 2004): 341-354; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Seawright, Jason and John Gerring. "Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research." Political Research Quarterly 61 (June 2008): 294-308.

Structure and Writing Style

The purpose of a paper in the social sciences designed around a case study is to thoroughly investigate a subject of analysis in order to reveal a new understanding about the research problem and, in so doing, contributing new knowledge to what is already known from previous studies. In applied social sciences disciplines [e.g., education, social work, public administration, etc.], case studies may also be used to reveal best practices, highlight key programs, or investigate interesting aspects of professional work.

In general, the structure of a case study research paper is not all that different from a standard college-level research paper. However, there are subtle differences you should be aware of. Here are the key elements to organizing and writing a case study research paper.

I.  Introduction

As with any research paper, your introduction should serve as a roadmap for your readers to ascertain the scope and purpose of your study . The introduction to a case study research paper, however, should not only describe the research problem and its significance, but you should also succinctly describe why the case is being used and how it relates to addressing the problem. The two elements should be linked. With this in mind, a good introduction answers these four questions:

• What is being studied? Describe the research problem and describe the subject of analysis [the case] you have chosen to address the problem. Explain how they are linked and what elements of the case will help to expand knowledge and understanding about the problem.
• Why is this topic important to investigate? Describe the significance of the research problem and state why a case study design and the subject of analysis that the paper is designed around is appropriate in addressing the problem.
• What did we know about this topic before I did this study? Provide background that helps lead the reader into the more in-depth literature review to follow. If applicable, summarize prior case study research applied to the research problem and why it fails to adequately address the problem. Describe why your case will be useful. If no prior case studies have been used to address the research problem, explain why you have selected this subject of analysis.
• How will this study advance new knowledge or new ways of understanding? Explain why your case study will be suitable in helping to expand knowledge and understanding about the research problem.

Each of these questions should be addressed in no more than a few paragraphs. Exceptions to this can be when you are addressing a complex research problem or subject of analysis that requires more in-depth background information.

II.  Literature Review

The literature review for a case study research paper is generally structured the same as it is for any college-level research paper. The difference, however, is that the literature review is focused on providing background information and  enabling historical interpretation of the subject of analysis in relation to the research problem the case is intended to address . This includes synthesizing studies that help to:

• Place relevant works in the context of their contribution to understanding the case study being investigated . This would involve summarizing studies that have used a similar subject of analysis to investigate the research problem. If there is literature using the same or a very similar case to study, you need to explain why duplicating past research is important [e.g., conditions have changed; prior studies were conducted long ago, etc.].
• Describe the relationship each work has to the others under consideration that informs the reader why this case is applicable . Your literature review should include a description of any works that support using the case to investigate the research problem and the underlying research questions.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research using the case study . If applicable, review any research that has examined the research problem using a different research design. Explain how your use of a case study design may reveal new knowledge or a new perspective or that can redirect research in an important new direction.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies . This refers to synthesizing any literature that points to unresolved issues of concern about the research problem and describing how the subject of analysis that forms the case study can help resolve these existing contradictions.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research . Your review should examine any literature that lays a foundation for understanding why your case study design and the subject of analysis around which you have designed your study may reveal a new way of approaching the research problem or offer a perspective that points to the need for additional research.
• Expose any gaps that exist in the literature that the case study could help to fill . Summarize any literature that not only shows how your subject of analysis contributes to understanding the research problem, but how your case contributes to a new way of understanding the problem that prior research has failed to do.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important!] . Collectively, your literature review should always place your case study within the larger domain of prior research about the problem. The overarching purpose of reviewing pertinent literature in a case study paper is to demonstrate that you have thoroughly identified and synthesized prior studies in relation to explaining the relevance of the case in addressing the research problem.

III.  Method

In this section, you explain why you selected a particular case [i.e., subject of analysis] and the strategy you used to identify and ultimately decide that your case was appropriate in addressing the research problem. The way you describe the methods used varies depending on the type of subject of analysis that constitutes your case study.

If your subject of analysis is an incident or event . In the social and behavioral sciences, the event or incident that represents the case to be studied is usually bounded by time and place, with a clear beginning and end and with an identifiable location or position relative to its surroundings. The subject of analysis can be a rare or critical event or it can focus on a typical or regular event. The purpose of studying a rare event is to illuminate new ways of thinking about the broader research problem or to test a hypothesis. Critical incident case studies must describe the method by which you identified the event and explain the process by which you determined the validity of this case to inform broader perspectives about the research problem or to reveal new findings. However, the event does not have to be a rare or uniquely significant to support new thinking about the research problem or to challenge an existing hypothesis. For example, Walo, Bull, and Breen conducted a case study to identify and evaluate the direct and indirect economic benefits and costs of a local sports event in the City of Lismore, New South Wales, Australia. The purpose of their study was to provide new insights from measuring the impact of a typical local sports event that prior studies could not measure well because they focused on large "mega-events." Whether the event is rare or not, the methods section should include an explanation of the following characteristics of the event: a) when did it take place; b) what were the underlying circumstances leading to the event; and, c) what were the consequences of the event in relation to the research problem.

If your subject of analysis is a person. Explain why you selected this particular individual to be studied and describe what experiences they have had that provide an opportunity to advance new understandings about the research problem. Mention any background about this person which might help the reader understand the significance of their experiences that make them worthy of study. This includes describing the relationships this person has had with other people, institutions, and/or events that support using them as the subject for a case study research paper. It is particularly important to differentiate the person as the subject of analysis from others and to succinctly explain how the person relates to examining the research problem [e.g., why is one politician in a particular local election used to show an increase in voter turnout from any other candidate running in the election]. Note that these issues apply to a specific group of people used as a case study unit of analysis [e.g., a classroom of students].

If your subject of analysis is a place. In general, a case study that investigates a place suggests a subject of analysis that is unique or special in some way and that this uniqueness can be used to build new understanding or knowledge about the research problem. A case study of a place must not only describe its various attributes relevant to the research problem [e.g., physical, social, historical, cultural, economic, political], but you must state the method by which you determined that this place will illuminate new understandings about the research problem. It is also important to articulate why a particular place as the case for study is being used if similar places also exist [i.e., if you are studying patterns of homeless encampments of veterans in open spaces, explain why you are studying Echo Park in Los Angeles rather than Griffith Park?]. If applicable, describe what type of human activity involving this place makes it a good choice to study [e.g., prior research suggests Echo Park has more homeless veterans].

If your subject of analysis is a phenomenon. A phenomenon refers to a fact, occurrence, or circumstance that can be studied or observed but with the cause or explanation to be in question. In this sense, a phenomenon that forms your subject of analysis can encompass anything that can be observed or presumed to exist but is not fully understood. In the social and behavioral sciences, the case usually focuses on human interaction within a complex physical, social, economic, cultural, or political system. For example, the phenomenon could be the observation that many vehicles used by ISIS fighters are small trucks with English language advertisements on them. The research problem could be that ISIS fighters are difficult to combat because they are highly mobile. The research questions could be how and by what means are these vehicles used by ISIS being supplied to the militants and how might supply lines to these vehicles be cut off? How might knowing the suppliers of these trucks reveal larger networks of collaborators and financial support? A case study of a phenomenon most often encompasses an in-depth analysis of a cause and effect that is grounded in an interactive relationship between people and their environment in some way.

NOTE:   The choice of the case or set of cases to study cannot appear random. Evidence that supports the method by which you identified and chose your subject of analysis should clearly support investigation of the research problem and linked to key findings from your literature review. Be sure to cite any studies that helped you determine that the case you chose was appropriate for examining the problem.

IV.  Discussion

The main elements of your discussion section are generally the same as any research paper, but centered around interpreting and drawing conclusions about the key findings from your analysis of the case study. Note that a general social sciences research paper may contain a separate section to report findings. However, in a paper designed around a case study, it is common to combine a description of the results with the discussion about their implications. The objectives of your discussion section should include the following:

Reiterate the Research Problem/State the Major Findings Briefly reiterate the research problem you are investigating and explain why the subject of analysis around which you designed the case study were used. You should then describe the findings revealed from your study of the case using direct, declarative, and succinct proclamation of the study results. Highlight any findings that were unexpected or especially profound.

Explain the Meaning of the Findings and Why They are Important Systematically explain the meaning of your case study findings and why you believe they are important. Begin this part of the section by repeating what you consider to be your most important or surprising finding first, then systematically review each finding. Be sure to thoroughly extrapolate what your analysis of the case can tell the reader about situations or conditions beyond the actual case that was studied while, at the same time, being careful not to misconstrue or conflate a finding that undermines the external validity of your conclusions.

Relate the Findings to Similar Studies No study in the social sciences is so novel or possesses such a restricted focus that it has absolutely no relation to previously published research. The discussion section should relate your case study results to those found in other studies, particularly if questions raised from prior studies served as the motivation for choosing your subject of analysis. This is important because comparing and contrasting the findings of other studies helps support the overall importance of your results and it highlights how and in what ways your case study design and the subject of analysis differs from prior research about the topic.

Consider Alternative Explanations of the Findings Remember that the purpose of social science research is to discover and not to prove. When writing the discussion section, you should carefully consider all possible explanations revealed by the case study results, rather than just those that fit your hypothesis or prior assumptions and biases. Be alert to what the in-depth analysis of the case may reveal about the research problem, including offering a contrarian perspective to what scholars have stated in prior research if that is how the findings can be interpreted from your case.

Acknowledge the Study's Limitations You can state the study's limitations in the conclusion section of your paper but describing the limitations of your subject of analysis in the discussion section provides an opportunity to identify the limitations and explain why they are not significant. This part of the discussion section should also note any unanswered questions or issues your case study could not address. More detailed information about how to document any limitations to your research can be found here .

Suggest Areas for Further Research Although your case study may offer important insights about the research problem, there are likely additional questions related to the problem that remain unanswered or findings that unexpectedly revealed themselves as a result of your in-depth analysis of the case. Be sure that the recommendations for further research are linked to the research problem and that you explain why your recommendations are valid in other contexts and based on the original assumptions of your study.

V.  Conclusion

As with any research paper, you should summarize your conclusion in clear, simple language; emphasize how the findings from your case study differs from or supports prior research and why. Do not simply reiterate the discussion section. Provide a synthesis of key findings presented in the paper to show how these converge to address the research problem. If you haven't already done so in the discussion section, be sure to document the limitations of your case study and any need for further research.

The function of your paper's conclusion is to: 1) reiterate the main argument supported by the findings from your case study; 2) state clearly the context, background, and necessity of pursuing the research problem using a case study design in relation to an issue, controversy, or a gap found from reviewing the literature; and, 3) provide a place to persuasively and succinctly restate the significance of your research problem, given that the reader has now been presented with in-depth information about the topic.

Consider the following points to help ensure your conclusion is appropriate:

• If the argument or purpose of your paper is complex, you may need to summarize these points for your reader.
• If prior to your conclusion, you have not yet explained the significance of your findings or if you are proceeding inductively, use the conclusion of your paper to describe your main points and explain their significance.
• Move from a detailed to a general level of consideration of the case study's findings that returns the topic to the context provided by the introduction or within a new context that emerges from your case study findings.

Note that, depending on the discipline you are writing in or the preferences of your professor, the concluding paragraph may contain your final reflections on the evidence presented as it applies to practice or on the essay's central research problem. However, the nature of being introspective about the subject of analysis you have investigated will depend on whether you are explicitly asked to express your observations in this way.

Problems to Avoid

Overgeneralization One of the goals of a case study is to lay a foundation for understanding broader trends and issues applied to similar circumstances. However, be careful when drawing conclusions from your case study. They must be evidence-based and grounded in the results of the study; otherwise, it is merely speculation. Looking at a prior example, it would be incorrect to state that a factor in improving girls access to education in Azerbaijan and the policy implications this may have for improving access in other Muslim nations is due to girls access to social media if there is no documentary evidence from your case study to indicate this. There may be anecdotal evidence that retention rates were better for girls who were engaged with social media, but this observation would only point to the need for further research and would not be a definitive finding if this was not a part of your original research agenda.

Failure to Document Limitations No case is going to reveal all that needs to be understood about a research problem. Therefore, just as you have to clearly state the limitations of a general research study , you must describe the specific limitations inherent in the subject of analysis. For example, the case of studying how women conceptualize the need for water conservation in a village in Uganda could have limited application in other cultural contexts or in areas where fresh water from rivers or lakes is plentiful and, therefore, conservation is understood more in terms of managing access rather than preserving access to a scarce resource.

Failure to Extrapolate All Possible Implications Just as you don't want to over-generalize from your case study findings, you also have to be thorough in the consideration of all possible outcomes or recommendations derived from your findings. If you do not, your reader may question the validity of your analysis, particularly if you failed to document an obvious outcome from your case study research. For example, in the case of studying the accident at the railroad crossing to evaluate where and what types of warning signals should be located, you failed to take into consideration speed limit signage as well as warning signals. When designing your case study, be sure you have thoroughly addressed all aspects of the problem and do not leave gaps in your analysis that leave the reader questioning the results.

Case Studies. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Gerring, John. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices . New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007; Merriam, Sharan B. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education . Rev. ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1998; Miller, Lisa L. “The Use of Case Studies in Law and Social Science Research.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 14 (2018): TBD; Mills, Albert J., Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Putney, LeAnn Grogan. "Case Study." In Encyclopedia of Research Design , Neil J. Salkind, editor. (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010), pp. 116-120; Simons, Helen. Case Study Research in Practice . London: SAGE Publications, 2009;  Kratochwill,  Thomas R. and Joel R. Levin, editors. Single-Case Research Design and Analysis: New Development for Psychology and Education .  Hilldsale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992; Swanborn, Peter G. Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London : SAGE, 2010; Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods . 6th edition. Los Angeles, CA, SAGE Publications, 2014; Walo, Maree, Adrian Bull, and Helen Breen. “Achieving Economic Benefits at Local Events: A Case Study of a Local Sports Event.” Festival Management and Event Tourism 4 (1996): 95-106.

Writing Tip

At Least Five Misconceptions about Case Study Research

Social science case studies are often perceived as limited in their ability to create new knowledge because they are not randomly selected and findings cannot be generalized to larger populations. Flyvbjerg examines five misunderstandings about case study research and systematically "corrects" each one. To quote, these are:

Misunderstanding 1 :  General, theoretical [context-independent] knowledge is more valuable than concrete, practical [context-dependent] knowledge. Misunderstanding 2 :  One cannot generalize on the basis of an individual case; therefore, the case study cannot contribute to scientific development. Misunderstanding 3 :  The case study is most useful for generating hypotheses; that is, in the first stage of a total research process, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building. Misunderstanding 4 :  The case study contains a bias toward verification, that is, a tendency to confirm the researcher’s preconceived notions. Misunderstanding 5 :  It is often difficult to summarize and develop general propositions and theories on the basis of specific case studies [p. 221].

While writing your paper, think introspectively about how you addressed these misconceptions because to do so can help you strengthen the validity and reliability of your research by clarifying issues of case selection, the testing and challenging of existing assumptions, the interpretation of key findings, and the summation of case outcomes. Think of a case study research paper as a complete, in-depth narrative about the specific properties and key characteristics of your subject of analysis applied to the research problem.

Flyvbjerg, Bent. “Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12 (April 2006): 219-245.

• << Previous: Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Next: Writing a Field Report >>
• Last Updated: Jun 3, 2024 9:44 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods

Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods

Published on 5 May 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 30 January 2023.

A case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organisation, or phenomenon. Case studies are commonly used in social, educational, clinical, and business research.

A case study research design usually involves qualitative methods , but quantitative methods are sometimes also used. Case studies are good for describing , comparing, evaluating, and understanding different aspects of a research problem .

Table of contents

When to do a case study, step 1: select a case, step 2: build a theoretical framework, step 3: collect your data, step 4: describe and analyse the case.

A case study is an appropriate research design when you want to gain concrete, contextual, in-depth knowledge about a specific real-world subject. It allows you to explore the key characteristics, meanings, and implications of the case.

Case studies are often a good choice in a thesis or dissertation . They keep your project focused and manageable when you don’t have the time or resources to do large-scale research.

You might use just one complex case study where you explore a single subject in depth, or conduct multiple case studies to compare and illuminate different aspects of your research problem.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Once you have developed your problem statement and research questions , you should be ready to choose the specific case that you want to focus on. A good case study should have the potential to:

• Provide new or unexpected insights into the subject
• Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories
• Propose practical courses of action to resolve a problem
• Open up new directions for future research

Unlike quantitative or experimental research, a strong case study does not require a random or representative sample. In fact, case studies often deliberately focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the research problem.

If you find yourself aiming to simultaneously investigate and solve an issue, consider conducting action research . As its name suggests, action research conducts research and takes action at the same time, and is highly iterative and flexible. 

However, you can also choose a more common or representative case to exemplify a particular category, experience, or phenomenon.

While case studies focus more on concrete details than general theories, they should usually have some connection with theory in the field. This way the case study is not just an isolated description, but is integrated into existing knowledge about the topic. It might aim to:

• Exemplify a theory by showing how it explains the case under investigation
• Expand on a theory by uncovering new concepts and ideas that need to be incorporated
• Challenge a theory by exploring an outlier case that doesn’t fit with established assumptions

To ensure that your analysis of the case has a solid academic grounding, you should conduct a literature review of sources related to the topic and develop a theoretical framework . This means identifying key concepts and theories to guide your analysis and interpretation.

There are many different research methods you can use to collect data on your subject. Case studies tend to focus on qualitative data using methods such as interviews, observations, and analysis of primary and secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles, photographs, official records). Sometimes a case study will also collect quantitative data .

The aim is to gain as thorough an understanding as possible of the case and its context.

In writing up the case study, you need to bring together all the relevant aspects to give as complete a picture as possible of the subject.

How you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard scientific paper or thesis, with separate sections or chapters for the methods , results , and discussion .

Others are written in a more narrative style, aiming to explore the case from various angles and analyse its meanings and implications (for example, by using textual analysis or discourse analysis ).

In all cases, though, make sure to give contextual details about the case, connect it back to the literature and theory, and discuss how it fits into wider patterns or debates.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, January 30). Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods. Scribbr. Retrieved 16 September 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/case-studies/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, correlational research | guide, design & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples, descriptive research design | definition, methods & examples.

• Open access
• Published: 27 June 2011

The case study approach

• Sarah Crowe 1 ,
• Kathrin Cresswell 2 ,
• Ann Robertson 2 ,
• Guro Huby 3 ,
• Anthony Avery 1 &
• Aziz Sheikh 2  

BMC Medical Research Methodology volume  11 , Article number:  100 ( 2011 ) Cite this article

797k Accesses

1115 Citations

42 Altmetric

Metrics details

The case study approach allows in-depth, multi-faceted explorations of complex issues in their real-life settings. The value of the case study approach is well recognised in the fields of business, law and policy, but somewhat less so in health services research. Based on our experiences of conducting several health-related case studies, we reflect on the different types of case study design, the specific research questions this approach can help answer, the data sources that tend to be used, and the particular advantages and disadvantages of employing this methodological approach. The paper concludes with key pointers to aid those designing and appraising proposals for conducting case study research, and a checklist to help readers assess the quality of case study reports.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The case study approach is particularly useful to employ when there is a need to obtain an in-depth appreciation of an issue, event or phenomenon of interest, in its natural real-life context. Our aim in writing this piece is to provide insights into when to consider employing this approach and an overview of key methodological considerations in relation to the design, planning, analysis, interpretation and reporting of case studies.

The illustrative 'grand round', 'case report' and 'case series' have a long tradition in clinical practice and research. Presenting detailed critiques, typically of one or more patients, aims to provide insights into aspects of the clinical case and, in doing so, illustrate broader lessons that may be learnt. In research, the conceptually-related case study approach can be used, for example, to describe in detail a patient's episode of care, explore professional attitudes to and experiences of a new policy initiative or service development or more generally to 'investigate contemporary phenomena within its real-life context' [ 1 ]. Based on our experiences of conducting a range of case studies, we reflect on when to consider using this approach, discuss the key steps involved and illustrate, with examples, some of the practical challenges of attaining an in-depth understanding of a 'case' as an integrated whole. In keeping with previously published work, we acknowledge the importance of theory to underpin the design, selection, conduct and interpretation of case studies[ 2 ]. In so doing, we make passing reference to the different epistemological approaches used in case study research by key theoreticians and methodologists in this field of enquiry.

This paper is structured around the following main questions: What is a case study? What are case studies used for? How are case studies conducted? What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided? We draw in particular on four of our own recently published examples of case studies (see Tables 1 , 2 , 3 and 4 ) and those of others to illustrate our discussion[ 3 – 7 ].

What is a case study?

A case study is a research approach that is used to generate an in-depth, multi-faceted understanding of a complex issue in its real-life context. It is an established research design that is used extensively in a wide variety of disciplines, particularly in the social sciences. A case study can be defined in a variety of ways (Table 5 ), the central tenet being the need to explore an event or phenomenon in depth and in its natural context. It is for this reason sometimes referred to as a "naturalistic" design; this is in contrast to an "experimental" design (such as a randomised controlled trial) in which the investigator seeks to exert control over and manipulate the variable(s) of interest.

Stake's work has been particularly influential in defining the case study approach to scientific enquiry. He has helpfully characterised three main types of case study: intrinsic , instrumental and collective [ 8 ]. An intrinsic case study is typically undertaken to learn about a unique phenomenon. The researcher should define the uniqueness of the phenomenon, which distinguishes it from all others. In contrast, the instrumental case study uses a particular case (some of which may be better than others) to gain a broader appreciation of an issue or phenomenon. The collective case study involves studying multiple cases simultaneously or sequentially in an attempt to generate a still broader appreciation of a particular issue.

These are however not necessarily mutually exclusive categories. In the first of our examples (Table 1 ), we undertook an intrinsic case study to investigate the issue of recruitment of minority ethnic people into the specific context of asthma research studies, but it developed into a instrumental case study through seeking to understand the issue of recruitment of these marginalised populations more generally, generating a number of the findings that are potentially transferable to other disease contexts[ 3 ]. In contrast, the other three examples (see Tables 2 , 3 and 4 ) employed collective case study designs to study the introduction of workforce reconfiguration in primary care, the implementation of electronic health records into hospitals, and to understand the ways in which healthcare students learn about patient safety considerations[ 4 – 6 ]. Although our study focusing on the introduction of General Practitioners with Specialist Interests (Table 2 ) was explicitly collective in design (four contrasting primary care organisations were studied), is was also instrumental in that this particular professional group was studied as an exemplar of the more general phenomenon of workforce redesign[ 4 ].

What are case studies used for?

According to Yin, case studies can be used to explain, describe or explore events or phenomena in the everyday contexts in which they occur[ 1 ]. These can, for example, help to understand and explain causal links and pathways resulting from a new policy initiative or service development (see Tables 2 and 3 , for example)[ 1 ]. In contrast to experimental designs, which seek to test a specific hypothesis through deliberately manipulating the environment (like, for example, in a randomised controlled trial giving a new drug to randomly selected individuals and then comparing outcomes with controls),[ 9 ] the case study approach lends itself well to capturing information on more explanatory ' how ', 'what' and ' why ' questions, such as ' how is the intervention being implemented and received on the ground?'. The case study approach can offer additional insights into what gaps exist in its delivery or why one implementation strategy might be chosen over another. This in turn can help develop or refine theory, as shown in our study of the teaching of patient safety in undergraduate curricula (Table 4 )[ 6 , 10 ]. Key questions to consider when selecting the most appropriate study design are whether it is desirable or indeed possible to undertake a formal experimental investigation in which individuals and/or organisations are allocated to an intervention or control arm? Or whether the wish is to obtain a more naturalistic understanding of an issue? The former is ideally studied using a controlled experimental design, whereas the latter is more appropriately studied using a case study design.

Case studies may be approached in different ways depending on the epistemological standpoint of the researcher, that is, whether they take a critical (questioning one's own and others' assumptions), interpretivist (trying to understand individual and shared social meanings) or positivist approach (orientating towards the criteria of natural sciences, such as focusing on generalisability considerations) (Table 6 ). Whilst such a schema can be conceptually helpful, it may be appropriate to draw on more than one approach in any case study, particularly in the context of conducting health services research. Doolin has, for example, noted that in the context of undertaking interpretative case studies, researchers can usefully draw on a critical, reflective perspective which seeks to take into account the wider social and political environment that has shaped the case[ 11 ].

How are case studies conducted?

Here, we focus on the main stages of research activity when planning and undertaking a case study; the crucial stages are: defining the case; selecting the case(s); collecting and analysing the data; interpreting data; and reporting the findings.

Defining the case

Carefully formulated research question(s), informed by the existing literature and a prior appreciation of the theoretical issues and setting(s), are all important in appropriately and succinctly defining the case[ 8 , 12 ]. Crucially, each case should have a pre-defined boundary which clarifies the nature and time period covered by the case study (i.e. its scope, beginning and end), the relevant social group, organisation or geographical area of interest to the investigator, the types of evidence to be collected, and the priorities for data collection and analysis (see Table 7 )[ 1 ]. A theory driven approach to defining the case may help generate knowledge that is potentially transferable to a range of clinical contexts and behaviours; using theory is also likely to result in a more informed appreciation of, for example, how and why interventions have succeeded or failed[ 13 ].

For example, in our evaluation of the introduction of electronic health records in English hospitals (Table 3 ), we defined our cases as the NHS Trusts that were receiving the new technology[ 5 ]. Our focus was on how the technology was being implemented. However, if the primary research interest had been on the social and organisational dimensions of implementation, we might have defined our case differently as a grouping of healthcare professionals (e.g. doctors and/or nurses). The precise beginning and end of the case may however prove difficult to define. Pursuing this same example, when does the process of implementation and adoption of an electronic health record system really begin or end? Such judgements will inevitably be influenced by a range of factors, including the research question, theory of interest, the scope and richness of the gathered data and the resources available to the research team.

Selecting the case(s)

The decision on how to select the case(s) to study is a very important one that merits some reflection. In an intrinsic case study, the case is selected on its own merits[ 8 ]. The case is selected not because it is representative of other cases, but because of its uniqueness, which is of genuine interest to the researchers. This was, for example, the case in our study of the recruitment of minority ethnic participants into asthma research (Table 1 ) as our earlier work had demonstrated the marginalisation of minority ethnic people with asthma, despite evidence of disproportionate asthma morbidity[ 14 , 15 ]. In another example of an intrinsic case study, Hellstrom et al.[ 16 ] studied an elderly married couple living with dementia to explore how dementia had impacted on their understanding of home, their everyday life and their relationships.

For an instrumental case study, selecting a "typical" case can work well[ 8 ]. In contrast to the intrinsic case study, the particular case which is chosen is of less importance than selecting a case that allows the researcher to investigate an issue or phenomenon. For example, in order to gain an understanding of doctors' responses to health policy initiatives, Som undertook an instrumental case study interviewing clinicians who had a range of responsibilities for clinical governance in one NHS acute hospital trust[ 17 ]. Sampling a "deviant" or "atypical" case may however prove even more informative, potentially enabling the researcher to identify causal processes, generate hypotheses and develop theory.

In collective or multiple case studies, a number of cases are carefully selected. This offers the advantage of allowing comparisons to be made across several cases and/or replication. Choosing a "typical" case may enable the findings to be generalised to theory (i.e. analytical generalisation) or to test theory by replicating the findings in a second or even a third case (i.e. replication logic)[ 1 ]. Yin suggests two or three literal replications (i.e. predicting similar results) if the theory is straightforward and five or more if the theory is more subtle. However, critics might argue that selecting 'cases' in this way is insufficiently reflexive and ill-suited to the complexities of contemporary healthcare organisations.

The selected case study site(s) should allow the research team access to the group of individuals, the organisation, the processes or whatever else constitutes the chosen unit of analysis for the study. Access is therefore a central consideration; the researcher needs to come to know the case study site(s) well and to work cooperatively with them. Selected cases need to be not only interesting but also hospitable to the inquiry [ 8 ] if they are to be informative and answer the research question(s). Case study sites may also be pre-selected for the researcher, with decisions being influenced by key stakeholders. For example, our selection of case study sites in the evaluation of the implementation and adoption of electronic health record systems (see Table 3 ) was heavily influenced by NHS Connecting for Health, the government agency that was responsible for overseeing the National Programme for Information Technology (NPfIT)[ 5 ]. This prominent stakeholder had already selected the NHS sites (through a competitive bidding process) to be early adopters of the electronic health record systems and had negotiated contracts that detailed the deployment timelines.

It is also important to consider in advance the likely burden and risks associated with participation for those who (or the site(s) which) comprise the case study. Of particular importance is the obligation for the researcher to think through the ethical implications of the study (e.g. the risk of inadvertently breaching anonymity or confidentiality) and to ensure that potential participants/participating sites are provided with sufficient information to make an informed choice about joining the study. The outcome of providing this information might be that the emotive burden associated with participation, or the organisational disruption associated with supporting the fieldwork, is considered so high that the individuals or sites decide against participation.

In our example of evaluating implementations of electronic health record systems, given the restricted number of early adopter sites available to us, we sought purposively to select a diverse range of implementation cases among those that were available[ 5 ]. We chose a mixture of teaching, non-teaching and Foundation Trust hospitals, and examples of each of the three electronic health record systems procured centrally by the NPfIT. At one recruited site, it quickly became apparent that access was problematic because of competing demands on that organisation. Recognising the importance of full access and co-operative working for generating rich data, the research team decided not to pursue work at that site and instead to focus on other recruited sites.

Collecting the data

In order to develop a thorough understanding of the case, the case study approach usually involves the collection of multiple sources of evidence, using a range of quantitative (e.g. questionnaires, audits and analysis of routinely collected healthcare data) and more commonly qualitative techniques (e.g. interviews, focus groups and observations). The use of multiple sources of data (data triangulation) has been advocated as a way of increasing the internal validity of a study (i.e. the extent to which the method is appropriate to answer the research question)[ 8 , 18 – 21 ]. An underlying assumption is that data collected in different ways should lead to similar conclusions, and approaching the same issue from different angles can help develop a holistic picture of the phenomenon (Table 2 )[ 4 ].

Brazier and colleagues used a mixed-methods case study approach to investigate the impact of a cancer care programme[ 22 ]. Here, quantitative measures were collected with questionnaires before, and five months after, the start of the intervention which did not yield any statistically significant results. Qualitative interviews with patients however helped provide an insight into potentially beneficial process-related aspects of the programme, such as greater, perceived patient involvement in care. The authors reported how this case study approach provided a number of contextual factors likely to influence the effectiveness of the intervention and which were not likely to have been obtained from quantitative methods alone.

In collective or multiple case studies, data collection needs to be flexible enough to allow a detailed description of each individual case to be developed (e.g. the nature of different cancer care programmes), before considering the emerging similarities and differences in cross-case comparisons (e.g. to explore why one programme is more effective than another). It is important that data sources from different cases are, where possible, broadly comparable for this purpose even though they may vary in nature and depth.

Analysing, interpreting and reporting case studies

Making sense and offering a coherent interpretation of the typically disparate sources of data (whether qualitative alone or together with quantitative) is far from straightforward. Repeated reviewing and sorting of the voluminous and detail-rich data are integral to the process of analysis. In collective case studies, it is helpful to analyse data relating to the individual component cases first, before making comparisons across cases. Attention needs to be paid to variations within each case and, where relevant, the relationship between different causes, effects and outcomes[ 23 ]. Data will need to be organised and coded to allow the key issues, both derived from the literature and emerging from the dataset, to be easily retrieved at a later stage. An initial coding frame can help capture these issues and can be applied systematically to the whole dataset with the aid of a qualitative data analysis software package.

The Framework approach is a practical approach, comprising of five stages (familiarisation; identifying a thematic framework; indexing; charting; mapping and interpretation) , to managing and analysing large datasets particularly if time is limited, as was the case in our study of recruitment of South Asians into asthma research (Table 1 )[ 3 , 24 ]. Theoretical frameworks may also play an important role in integrating different sources of data and examining emerging themes. For example, we drew on a socio-technical framework to help explain the connections between different elements - technology; people; and the organisational settings within which they worked - in our study of the introduction of electronic health record systems (Table 3 )[ 5 ]. Our study of patient safety in undergraduate curricula drew on an evaluation-based approach to design and analysis, which emphasised the importance of the academic, organisational and practice contexts through which students learn (Table 4 )[ 6 ].

Case study findings can have implications both for theory development and theory testing. They may establish, strengthen or weaken historical explanations of a case and, in certain circumstances, allow theoretical (as opposed to statistical) generalisation beyond the particular cases studied[ 12 ]. These theoretical lenses should not, however, constitute a strait-jacket and the cases should not be "forced to fit" the particular theoretical framework that is being employed.

When reporting findings, it is important to provide the reader with enough contextual information to understand the processes that were followed and how the conclusions were reached. In a collective case study, researchers may choose to present the findings from individual cases separately before amalgamating across cases. Care must be taken to ensure the anonymity of both case sites and individual participants (if agreed in advance) by allocating appropriate codes or withholding descriptors. In the example given in Table 3 , we decided against providing detailed information on the NHS sites and individual participants in order to avoid the risk of inadvertent disclosure of identities[ 5 , 25 ].

What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided?

The case study approach is, as with all research, not without its limitations. When investigating the formal and informal ways undergraduate students learn about patient safety (Table 4 ), for example, we rapidly accumulated a large quantity of data. The volume of data, together with the time restrictions in place, impacted on the depth of analysis that was possible within the available resources. This highlights a more general point of the importance of avoiding the temptation to collect as much data as possible; adequate time also needs to be set aside for data analysis and interpretation of what are often highly complex datasets.

Case study research has sometimes been criticised for lacking scientific rigour and providing little basis for generalisation (i.e. producing findings that may be transferable to other settings)[ 1 ]. There are several ways to address these concerns, including: the use of theoretical sampling (i.e. drawing on a particular conceptual framework); respondent validation (i.e. participants checking emerging findings and the researcher's interpretation, and providing an opinion as to whether they feel these are accurate); and transparency throughout the research process (see Table 8 )[ 8 , 18 – 21 , 23 , 26 ]. Transparency can be achieved by describing in detail the steps involved in case selection, data collection, the reasons for the particular methods chosen, and the researcher's background and level of involvement (i.e. being explicit about how the researcher has influenced data collection and interpretation). Seeking potential, alternative explanations, and being explicit about how interpretations and conclusions were reached, help readers to judge the trustworthiness of the case study report. Stake provides a critique checklist for a case study report (Table 9 )[ 8 ].

Conclusions

The case study approach allows, amongst other things, critical events, interventions, policy developments and programme-based service reforms to be studied in detail in a real-life context. It should therefore be considered when an experimental design is either inappropriate to answer the research questions posed or impossible to undertake. Considering the frequency with which implementations of innovations are now taking place in healthcare settings and how well the case study approach lends itself to in-depth, complex health service research, we believe this approach should be more widely considered by researchers. Though inherently challenging, the research case study can, if carefully conceptualised and thoughtfully undertaken and reported, yield powerful insights into many important aspects of health and healthcare delivery.

Yin RK: Case study research, design and method. 2009, London: Sage Publications Ltd., 4

Google Scholar  

Keen J, Packwood T: Qualitative research; case study evaluation. BMJ. 1995, 311: 444-446.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Sheikh A, Halani L, Bhopal R, Netuveli G, Partridge M, Car J, et al: Facilitating the Recruitment of Minority Ethnic People into Research: Qualitative Case Study of South Asians and Asthma. PLoS Med. 2009, 6 (10): 1-11.

Article   Google Scholar  

Pinnock H, Huby G, Powell A, Kielmann T, Price D, Williams S, et al: The process of planning, development and implementation of a General Practitioner with a Special Interest service in Primary Care Organisations in England and Wales: a comparative prospective case study. Report for the National Co-ordinating Centre for NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R&D (NCCSDO). 2008, [ http://www.sdo.nihr.ac.uk/files/project/99-final-report.pdf ]

Robertson A, Cresswell K, Takian A, Petrakaki D, Crowe S, Cornford T, et al: Prospective evaluation of the implementation and adoption of NHS Connecting for Health's national electronic health record in secondary care in England: interim findings. BMJ. 2010, 41: c4564-

Pearson P, Steven A, Howe A, Sheikh A, Ashcroft D, Smith P, the Patient Safety Education Study Group: Learning about patient safety: organisational context and culture in the education of healthcare professionals. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2010, 15: 4-10. 10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009052.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

van Harten WH, Casparie TF, Fisscher OA: The evaluation of the introduction of a quality management system: a process-oriented case study in a large rehabilitation hospital. Health Policy. 2002, 60 (1): 17-37. 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00187-7.

Stake RE: The art of case study research. 1995, London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Sheikh A, Smeeth L, Ashcroft R: Randomised controlled trials in primary care: scope and application. Br J Gen Pract. 2002, 52 (482): 746-51.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

King G, Keohane R, Verba S: Designing Social Inquiry. 1996, Princeton: Princeton University Press

Doolin B: Information technology as disciplinary technology: being critical in interpretative research on information systems. Journal of Information Technology. 1998, 13: 301-311. 10.1057/jit.1998.8.

George AL, Bennett A: Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. 2005, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Eccles M, the Improved Clinical Effectiveness through Behavioural Research Group (ICEBeRG): Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions. Implementation Science. 2006, 1: 1-8. 10.1186/1748-5908-1-1.

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Netuveli G, Hurwitz B, Levy M, Fletcher M, Barnes G, Durham SR, Sheikh A: Ethnic variations in UK asthma frequency, morbidity, and health-service use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2005, 365 (9456): 312-7.

Sheikh A, Panesar SS, Lasserson T, Netuveli G: Recruitment of ethnic minorities to asthma studies. Thorax. 2004, 59 (7): 634-

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hellström I, Nolan M, Lundh U: 'We do things together': A case study of 'couplehood' in dementia. Dementia. 2005, 4: 7-22. 10.1177/1471301205049188.

Som CV: Nothing seems to have changed, nothing seems to be changing and perhaps nothing will change in the NHS: doctors' response to clinical governance. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2005, 18: 463-477. 10.1108/09513550510608903.

Lincoln Y, Guba E: Naturalistic inquiry. 1985, Newbury Park: Sage Publications

Barbour RS: Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?. BMJ. 2001, 322: 1115-1117. 10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115.

Mays N, Pope C: Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. 2000, 320: 50-52. 10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50.

Mason J: Qualitative researching. 2002, London: Sage

Brazier A, Cooke K, Moravan V: Using Mixed Methods for Evaluating an Integrative Approach to Cancer Care: A Case Study. Integr Cancer Ther. 2008, 7: 5-17. 10.1177/1534735407313395.

Miles MB, Huberman M: Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. 1994, CA: Sage Publications Inc., 2

Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N: Analysing qualitative data. Qualitative research in health care. BMJ. 2000, 320: 114-116. 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114.

Cresswell KM, Worth A, Sheikh A: Actor-Network Theory and its role in understanding the implementation of information technology developments in healthcare. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010, 10 (1): 67-10.1186/1472-6947-10-67.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Malterud K: Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001, 358: 483-488. 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Yin R: Case study research: design and methods. 1994, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing, 2

Yin R: Enhancing the quality of case studies in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999, 34: 1209-1224.

Green J, Thorogood N: Qualitative methods for health research. 2009, Los Angeles: Sage, 2

Howcroft D, Trauth E: Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research, Theory and Application. 2005, Cheltenham, UK: Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar

Book   Google Scholar  

Blakie N: Approaches to Social Enquiry. 1993, Cambridge: Polity Press

Doolin B: Power and resistance in the implementation of a medical management information system. Info Systems J. 2004, 14: 343-362. 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2004.00176.x.

Bloomfield BP, Best A: Management consultants: systems development, power and the translation of problems. Sociological Review. 1992, 40: 533-560.

Shanks G, Parr A: Positivist, single case study research in information systems: A critical analysis. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems. 2003, Naples

Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/11/100/prepub

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the participants and colleagues who contributed to the individual case studies that we have drawn on. This work received no direct funding, but it has been informed by projects funded by Asthma UK, the NHS Service Delivery Organisation, NHS Connecting for Health Evaluation Programme, and Patient Safety Research Portfolio. We would also like to thank the expert reviewers for their insightful and constructive feedback. Our thanks are also due to Dr. Allison Worth who commented on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Primary Care, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Sarah Crowe & Anthony Avery

Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Kathrin Cresswell, Ann Robertson & Aziz Sheikh

School of Health in Social Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Crowe .

Additional information

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

AS conceived this article. SC, KC and AR wrote this paper with GH, AA and AS all commenting on various drafts. SC and AS are guarantors.

Rights and permissions

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A. et al. The case study approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 11 , 100 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Download citation

Received : 29 November 2010

Accepted : 27 June 2011

Published : 27 June 2011

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Case Study Approach
• Electronic Health Record System
• Case Study Design
• Case Study Site
• Case Study Report

BMC Medical Research Methodology

ISSN: 1471-2288

• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Privacy Policy

Home » Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Table of Contents

A case study is a research method that involves an in-depth examination and analysis of a particular phenomenon or case, such as an individual, organization, community, event, or situation.

It is a qualitative research approach that aims to provide a detailed and comprehensive understanding of the case being studied. Case studies typically involve multiple sources of data, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts, which are analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, and grounded theory. The findings of a case study are often used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Types of Case Study

Types and Methods of Case Study are as follows:

Single-Case Study

A single-case study is an in-depth analysis of a single case. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand a specific phenomenon in detail.

For Example , A researcher might conduct a single-case study on a particular individual to understand their experiences with a particular health condition or a specific organization to explore their management practices. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a single-case study are often used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Multiple-Case Study

A multiple-case study involves the analysis of several cases that are similar in nature. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to identify similarities and differences between the cases.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a multiple-case study on several companies to explore the factors that contribute to their success or failure. The researcher collects data from each case, compares and contrasts the findings, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as comparative analysis or pattern-matching. The findings of a multiple-case study can be used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Exploratory Case Study

An exploratory case study is used to explore a new or understudied phenomenon. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to generate hypotheses or theories about the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an exploratory case study on a new technology to understand its potential impact on society. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as grounded theory or content analysis. The findings of an exploratory case study can be used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Descriptive Case Study

A descriptive case study is used to describe a particular phenomenon in detail. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to provide a comprehensive account of the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a descriptive case study on a particular community to understand its social and economic characteristics. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a descriptive case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Instrumental Case Study

An instrumental case study is used to understand a particular phenomenon that is instrumental in achieving a particular goal. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand the role of the phenomenon in achieving the goal.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an instrumental case study on a particular policy to understand its impact on achieving a particular goal, such as reducing poverty. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of an instrumental case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Case Study Data Collection Methods

Here are some common data collection methods for case studies:

Interviews involve asking questions to individuals who have knowledge or experience relevant to the case study. Interviews can be structured (where the same questions are asked to all participants) or unstructured (where the interviewer follows up on the responses with further questions). Interviews can be conducted in person, over the phone, or through video conferencing.

Observations

Observations involve watching and recording the behavior and activities of individuals or groups relevant to the case study. Observations can be participant (where the researcher actively participates in the activities) or non-participant (where the researcher observes from a distance). Observations can be recorded using notes, audio or video recordings, or photographs.

Documents can be used as a source of information for case studies. Documents can include reports, memos, emails, letters, and other written materials related to the case study. Documents can be collected from the case study participants or from public sources.

Surveys involve asking a set of questions to a sample of individuals relevant to the case study. Surveys can be administered in person, over the phone, through mail or email, or online. Surveys can be used to gather information on attitudes, opinions, or behaviors related to the case study.

Artifacts are physical objects relevant to the case study. Artifacts can include tools, equipment, products, or other objects that provide insights into the case study phenomenon.

How to conduct Case Study Research

Conducting a case study research involves several steps that need to be followed to ensure the quality and rigor of the study. Here are the steps to conduct case study research:

• Define the research questions: The first step in conducting a case study research is to define the research questions. The research questions should be specific, measurable, and relevant to the case study phenomenon under investigation.
• Select the case: The next step is to select the case or cases to be studied. The case should be relevant to the research questions and should provide rich and diverse data that can be used to answer the research questions.
• Collect data: Data can be collected using various methods, such as interviews, observations, documents, surveys, and artifacts. The data collection method should be selected based on the research questions and the nature of the case study phenomenon.
• Analyze the data: The data collected from the case study should be analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, or grounded theory. The analysis should be guided by the research questions and should aim to provide insights and conclusions relevant to the research questions.
• Draw conclusions: The conclusions drawn from the case study should be based on the data analysis and should be relevant to the research questions. The conclusions should be supported by evidence and should be clearly stated.
• Validate the findings: The findings of the case study should be validated by reviewing the data and the analysis with participants or other experts in the field. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Write the report: The final step is to write the report of the case study research. The report should provide a clear description of the case study phenomenon, the research questions, the data collection methods, the data analysis, the findings, and the conclusions. The report should be written in a clear and concise manner and should follow the guidelines for academic writing.

Examples of Case Study

Here are some examples of case study research:

• The Hawthorne Studies : Conducted between 1924 and 1932, the Hawthorne Studies were a series of case studies conducted by Elton Mayo and his colleagues to examine the impact of work environment on employee productivity. The studies were conducted at the Hawthorne Works plant of the Western Electric Company in Chicago and included interviews, observations, and experiments.
• The Stanford Prison Experiment: Conducted in 1971, the Stanford Prison Experiment was a case study conducted by Philip Zimbardo to examine the psychological effects of power and authority. The study involved simulating a prison environment and assigning participants to the role of guards or prisoners. The study was controversial due to the ethical issues it raised.
• The Challenger Disaster: The Challenger Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion in 1986. The study included interviews, observations, and analysis of data to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.
• The Enron Scandal: The Enron Scandal was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Enron Corporation’s bankruptcy in 2001. The study included interviews, analysis of financial data, and review of documents to identify the accounting practices, corporate culture, and ethical issues that led to the company’s downfall.
• The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster : The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the nuclear accident that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan in 2011. The study included interviews, analysis of data, and review of documents to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.

Application of Case Study

Case studies have a wide range of applications across various fields and industries. Here are some examples:

Business and Management

Case studies are widely used in business and management to examine real-life situations and develop problem-solving skills. Case studies can help students and professionals to develop a deep understanding of business concepts, theories, and best practices.

Case studies are used in healthcare to examine patient care, treatment options, and outcomes. Case studies can help healthcare professionals to develop critical thinking skills, diagnose complex medical conditions, and develop effective treatment plans.

Case studies are used in education to examine teaching and learning practices. Case studies can help educators to develop effective teaching strategies, evaluate student progress, and identify areas for improvement.

Social Sciences

Case studies are widely used in social sciences to examine human behavior, social phenomena, and cultural practices. Case studies can help researchers to develop theories, test hypotheses, and gain insights into complex social issues.

Law and Ethics

Case studies are used in law and ethics to examine legal and ethical dilemmas. Case studies can help lawyers, policymakers, and ethical professionals to develop critical thinking skills, analyze complex cases, and make informed decisions.

Purpose of Case Study

The purpose of a case study is to provide a detailed analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. A case study is a qualitative research method that involves the in-depth exploration and analysis of a particular case, which can be an individual, group, organization, event, or community.

The primary purpose of a case study is to generate a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the case, including its history, context, and dynamics. Case studies can help researchers to identify and examine the underlying factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and detailed understanding of the case, which can inform future research, practice, or policy.

Case studies can also serve other purposes, including:

• Illustrating a theory or concept: Case studies can be used to illustrate and explain theoretical concepts and frameworks, providing concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Developing hypotheses: Case studies can help to generate hypotheses about the causal relationships between different factors and outcomes, which can be tested through further research.
• Providing insight into complex issues: Case studies can provide insights into complex and multifaceted issues, which may be difficult to understand through other research methods.
• Informing practice or policy: Case studies can be used to inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.

Advantages of Case Study Research

There are several advantages of case study research, including:

• In-depth exploration: Case study research allows for a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. This can provide a comprehensive understanding of the case and its dynamics, which may not be possible through other research methods.
• Rich data: Case study research can generate rich and detailed data, including qualitative data such as interviews, observations, and documents. This can provide a nuanced understanding of the case and its complexity.
• Holistic perspective: Case study research allows for a holistic perspective of the case, taking into account the various factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the case.
• Theory development: Case study research can help to develop and refine theories and concepts by providing empirical evidence and concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Practical application: Case study research can inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.
• Contextualization: Case study research takes into account the specific context in which the case is situated, which can help to understand how the case is influenced by the social, cultural, and historical factors of its environment.

Limitations of Case Study Research

There are several limitations of case study research, including:

• Limited generalizability : Case studies are typically focused on a single case or a small number of cases, which limits the generalizability of the findings. The unique characteristics of the case may not be applicable to other contexts or populations, which may limit the external validity of the research.
• Biased sampling: Case studies may rely on purposive or convenience sampling, which can introduce bias into the sample selection process. This may limit the representativeness of the sample and the generalizability of the findings.
• Subjectivity: Case studies rely on the interpretation of the researcher, which can introduce subjectivity into the analysis. The researcher’s own biases, assumptions, and perspectives may influence the findings, which may limit the objectivity of the research.
• Limited control: Case studies are typically conducted in naturalistic settings, which limits the control that the researcher has over the environment and the variables being studied. This may limit the ability to establish causal relationships between variables.
• Time-consuming: Case studies can be time-consuming to conduct, as they typically involve a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific case. This may limit the feasibility of conducting multiple case studies or conducting case studies in a timely manner.
• Resource-intensive: Case studies may require significant resources, including time, funding, and expertise. This may limit the ability of researchers to conduct case studies in resource-constrained settings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Descriptive Research Design – Types, Methods and...

Observational Research – Methods and Guide

Transformative Design – Methods, Types, Guide

Quantitative Research – Methods, Types and...

Mixed Methods Research – Types & Analysis

Ethnographic Research -Types, Methods and Guide

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

How to Write a Case Study | Examples & Methods

What is a case study?

A case study is a research approach that provides an in-depth examination of a particular phenomenon, event, organization, or individual. It involves analyzing and interpreting data to provide a comprehensive understanding of the subject under investigation. 

Case studies can be used in various disciplines, including business, social sciences, medicine ( clinical case report ), engineering, and education. The aim of a case study is to provide an in-depth exploration of a specific subject, often with the goal of generating new insights into the phenomena being studied.

When to write a case study

Case studies are often written to present the findings of an empirical investigation or to illustrate a particular point or theory. They are useful when researchers want to gain an in-depth understanding of a specific phenomenon or when they are interested in exploring new areas of inquiry. 

Case studies are also useful when the subject of the research is rare or when the research question is complex and requires an in-depth examination. A case study can be a good fit for a thesis or dissertation as well.

Case study examples

Below are some examples of case studies with their research questions:

These examples demonstrate the diversity of research questions and case studies that can be explored. From studying small businesses in Ghana to the ethical issues in supply chains, case studies can be used to explore a wide range of phenomena.

Outlying cases vs. representative cases

An outlying case stud y refers to a case that is unusual or deviates significantly from the norm. An example of an outlying case study could be a small, family-run bed and breakfast that was able to survive and even thrive during the COVID-19 pandemic, while other larger hotels struggled to stay afloat.

On the other hand, a representative case study refers to a case that is typical of the phenomenon being studied. An example of a representative case study could be a hotel chain that operates in multiple locations that faced significant challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as reduced demand for hotel rooms, increased safety and health protocols, and supply chain disruptions. The hotel chain case could be representative of the broader hospitality industry during the pandemic, and thus provides an insight into the typical challenges that businesses in the industry faced.

Steps for Writing a Case Study

As with any academic paper, writing a case study requires careful preparation and research before a single word of the document is ever written. Follow these basic steps to ensure that you don’t miss any crucial details when composing your case study.

Step 1: Select a case to analyze

After you have developed your statement of the problem and research question , the first step in writing a case study is to select a case that is representative of the phenomenon being investigated or that provides an outlier. For example, if a researcher wants to explore the impact of COVID-19 on the hospitality industry, they could select a representative case, such as a hotel chain that operates in multiple locations, or an outlying case, such as a small bed and breakfast that was able to pivot their business model to survive during the pandemic. Selecting the appropriate case is critical in ensuring the research question is adequately explored.

Step 2: Create a theoretical framework

Theoretical frameworks are used to guide the analysis and interpretation of data in a case study. The framework should provide a clear explanation of the key concepts, variables, and relationships that are relevant to the research question. The theoretical framework can be drawn from existing literature, or the researcher can develop their own framework based on the data collected. The theoretical framework should be developed early in the research process to guide the data collection and analysis.

To give your case analysis a strong theoretical grounding, be sure to include a literature review of references and sources relating to your topic and develop a clear theoretical framework. Your case study does not simply stand on its own but interacts with other studies related to your topic. Your case study can do one of the following: 

• Demonstrate a theory by showing how it explains the case being investigated
• Broaden a theory by identifying additional concepts and ideas that can be incorporated to strengthen it
• Confront a theory via an outlier case that does not conform to established conclusions or assumptions

Step 3: Collect data for your case study

Data collection can involve a variety of research methods , including interviews, surveys, observations, and document analyses, and it can include both primary and secondary sources . It is essential to ensure that the data collected is relevant to the research question and that it is collected in a systematic and ethical manner. Data collection methods should be chosen based on the research question and the availability of data. It is essential to plan data collection carefully to ensure that the data collected is of high quality

Step 4: Describe the case and analyze the details

The final step is to describe the case in detail and analyze the data collected. This involves identifying patterns and themes that emerge from the data and drawing conclusions that are relevant to the research question. It is essential to ensure that the analysis is supported by the data and that any limitations or alternative explanations are acknowledged.

The manner in which you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard academic paper, with separate sections or chapters for the methods section , results section , and discussion section , while others are structured more like a standalone literature review.

Regardless of the topic you choose to pursue, writing a case study requires a systematic and rigorous approach to data collection and analysis. By following the steps outlined above and using examples from existing literature, researchers can create a comprehensive and insightful case study that contributes to the understanding of a particular phenomenon.

Preparing Your Case Study for Publication

After completing the draft of your case study, be sure to revise and edit your work for any mistakes, including grammatical errors , punctuation errors , spelling mistakes, and awkward sentence structure . Ensure that your case study is well-structured and that your arguments are well-supported with language that follows the conventions of academic writing .  To ensure your work is polished for style and free of errors, get English editing services from Wordvice, including our paper editing services and manuscript editing services . Let our academic subject experts enhance the style and flow of your academic work so you can submit your case study with confidence.

Masters Compare - Find your perfect masters course.

• Studying a Postgraduate degree

How to use a case study in your masters dissertation

Share this article.

• Facebook Sharer
• Twitter Sharer
• LinkedIn Sharer

Explore other topics

• Funding a Postgraduate course
• Living as a Postgraduate student
• Popular masters degree subjects
• Student Wellbeing
• Finding a PhD or Masters Course

Think Postgrad

Frequently asked questions.

Yes, in fact a case study is a very good option in your dissertation. There are multiple ways to implement a case study in your thesis. For instance, one main study which is in depth and complex or you could feature multiple case studies.

Case studies are a way to research a particular field, group, people and situation. The topic of research is studied deeply and thoroughly in order to solve a problem or uncover information. Case studies are a type of qualitative research.

If you are ready to find a masters course check out Masters Compare.

Prof Martyn Denscombe, author of “ The Good Research Guide, 6th edition ”, gives expert advice on how to use a case study in your masters dissertation. 

There are two main examples for how to use a case study in your masters dissertation, namely quantitative and qualitative case studies.

First, a case study provides a platform that allows you to study a situation in depth and produce the level of academic inquiry that is expected in a master’s degree. In the context of any master’s programme the dissertation operates as something of a showcase for a student’s abilities.

It can easily make the difference between getting a merit and a distinction in the final award of degree. It is important, therefore, to base the work on an approach that allows things to be explored in sufficient depth and detail to warrant a good grade.

Second, case studies can be useful in a practical sense. It is possible to complete a case study in a relatively short period of intense study and so it is the kind of research that is feasible in terms of the kind of time constraints that face master’s students as they enter the final stages of their programme of study.

Added to which a case study can also be a rather convenient form of research, avoiding the time and costs of travel to multiple research sites. The use of case studies, then, would appear to be an attractive proposition. But it is not an approach that should be used naively without consideration of its limitations or potential pitfalls.

To be a good case study the research needs to consider certain key issues. If they are not addressed it will considerably lower the value of the master’s degree. For instance, a good case study needs to:

• Be crystal clear about the purpose for which the research is being conducted
• Justify the selection of the particular case being studied
• Describe how the chosen case compares with others of its type
• Explain the basis on which any generalizations can be made from the findings

This is where The Good Research Guide, 6th edition becomes so valuable. It not only identifies the key points that need to be addressed in order to conduct a competent questionnaire survey.

It gets right to the heart of the matter with plenty of practical guidance on how to deal with issues. Using plain language, this bestselling book covers a range of alternative strategies and methods for conducting small-scale social research projects. It outlines some of the main ways in which the data can be analysed.

Read Prof Martyn Denscombe’s advice on using a questionnaire survey for your postgraduate dissertation

• Advertisers
• Cookie Policy
• Terms and Conditions

Sorry! You need to sign up

Sign up to Postgraduate Studentships

Sign up to compare masters

Opportunity added!

Thanks for making your selection. Click below to view your list.

Course Added

Thanks for making your selection. Click below to view your comparisons.

Think Postgrad Ltd 2008-2024 Website By Parachute

About Stanford GSB

• The Leadership
• Dean’s Updates
• School News & History
• Commencement
• Business, Government & Society
• Centers & Institutes
• Center for Entrepreneurial Studies
• Center for Social Innovation
• Stanford Seed

About the Experience

• Learning at Stanford GSB
• Experiential Learning
• Guest Speakers
• Entrepreneurship
• Social Innovation
• Communication
• Life at Stanford GSB
• Collaborative Environment
• Activities & Organizations
• Student Services
• Housing Options
• International Students

Full-Time Degree Programs

• Why Stanford MBA
• Academic Experience
• Financial Aid
• Why Stanford MSx
• Research Fellows Program
• See All Programs

Non-Degree & Certificate Programs

• Executive Education
• Stanford Executive Program
• Programs for Organizations
• The Difference
• Online Programs
• Stanford LEAD
• Seed Transformation Program
• Aspire Program
• Seed Spark Program
• Faculty Profiles
• Academic Areas
• Awards & Honors
• Conferences

Faculty Research

• Publications
• Working Papers
• Case Studies

Research Hub

• Research Labs & Initiatives
• Business Library
• Data, Analytics & Research Computing
• Behavioral Lab

Research Labs

• Cities, Housing & Society Lab
• Golub Capital Social Impact Lab

Research Initiatives

• Corporate Governance Research Initiative
• Corporations and Society Initiative
• Policy and Innovation Initiative
• Rapid Decarbonization Initiative
• Stanford Latino Entrepreneurship Initiative
• Value Chain Innovation Initiative
• Venture Capital Initiative
• Career & Success
• Climate & Sustainability
• Corporate Governance
• Culture & Society
• Finance & Investing
• Government & Politics
• Leadership & Management
• Markets and Trade
• Operations & Logistics
• Opportunity & Access
• Technology & AI
• Opinion & Analysis
• Email Newsletter

Welcome, Alumni

• Communities
• Digital Communities & Tools
• Regional Chapters
• Women’s Programs
• Identity Chapters
• Find Your Reunion
• Career Resources
• Job Search Resources
• Career & Life Transitions
• Programs & Webinars
• Career Video Library
• Alumni Education
• Research Resources
• Volunteering
• Alumni News
• Class Notes
• Alumni Voices
• Contact Alumni Relations
• Upcoming Events

Admission Events & Information Sessions

• MBA Program
• MSx Program
• PhD Program
• Alumni Events
• All Other Events
• Databases & Datasets
• Research Guides
• Consultations
• Research Workshops
• Career Research
• Research Data Services
• Course Reserves
• Course Research Guides
• Material Loan Periods
• Fines & Other Charges
• Document Delivery
• Interlibrary Loan
• Equipment Checkout
• Print & Scan
• MBA & MSx Students
• PhD Students
• Other Stanford Students
• Faculty Assistants
• Research Assistants
• Stanford GSB Alumni
• Telling Our Story
• Staff Directory
• Research Support
• Stanford GSB Archive

Explore case studies from Stanford GSB and from other institutions.

Stanford GSB Case Studies

Other Case Studies

• See the Current DEI Report
• Supporting Data
• Research & Insights
• Share Your Thoughts
• Search Fund Primer
• Teaching & Curriculum
• Affiliated Faculty
• Faculty Advisors
• Louis W. Foster Resource Center
• Defining Social Innovation
• Impact Compass
• Global Health Innovation Insights
• Faculty Affiliates
• Student Awards & Certificates
• Changemakers
• Dean Jonathan Levin
• Dean Garth Saloner
• Dean Robert Joss
• Dean Michael Spence
• Dean Robert Jaedicke
• Dean Rene McPherson
• Dean Arjay Miller
• Dean Ernest Arbuckle
• Dean Jacob Hugh Jackson
• Dean Willard Hotchkiss
• Faculty in Memoriam
• Stanford GSB Firsts
• Annual Alumni Dinner
• Class of 2024 Candidates
• Certificate & Award Recipients
• Dean’s Remarks
• Keynote Address
• Teaching Approach
• Analysis and Measurement of Impact
• The Corporate Entrepreneur: Startup in a Grown-Up Enterprise
• Data-Driven Impact
• Designing Experiments for Impact
• Digital Marketing
• The Founder’s Right Hand
• Marketing for Measurable Change
• Product Management
• Public Policy Lab: Financial Challenges Facing US Cities
• Public Policy Lab: Homelessness in California
• Lab Features
• Curricular Integration
• View From The Top
• Formation of New Ventures
• Managing Growing Enterprises
• Startup Garage
• Explore Beyond the Classroom
• Stanford Venture Studio
• Summer Program
• Workshops & Events
• The Five Lenses of Entrepreneurship
• Leadership Labs
• Executive Challenge
• Arbuckle Leadership Fellows Program
• Selection Process
• Training Schedule
• Time Commitment
• Learning Expectations
• Post-Training Opportunities
• Who Should Apply
• Introductory T-Groups
• Leadership for Society Program
• Certificate
• 2024 Awardees
• 2023 Awardees
• 2022 Awardees
• 2021 Awardees
• 2020 Awardees
• 2019 Awardees
• 2018 Awardees
• Social Management Immersion Fund
• Stanford Impact Founder Fellowships
• Stanford Impact Leader Prizes
• Social Entrepreneurship
• Stanford GSB Impact Fund
• Economic Development
• Energy & Environment
• Stanford GSB Residences
• Environmental Leadership
• Stanford GSB Artwork
• A Closer Look
• California & the Bay Area
• Voices of Stanford GSB
• Business & Beneficial Technology
• Business & Sustainability
• Business & Free Markets
• Business, Government, and Society Forum
• Get Involved
• Second Year
• Global Experiences
• JD/MBA Joint Degree
• MA Education/MBA Joint Degree
• MD/MBA Dual Degree
• MPP/MBA Joint Degree
• MS Computer Science/MBA Joint Degree
• MS Electrical Engineering/MBA Joint Degree
• MS Environment and Resources (E-IPER)/MBA Joint Degree
• Academic Calendar
• Clubs & Activities
• LGBTQ+ Students
• Military Veterans
• Minorities & People of Color
• Partners & Families
• Students with Disabilities
• Student Support
• Residential Life
• Student Voices
• MBA Alumni Voices
• A Week in the Life
• Career Support
• Employment Outcomes
• Cost of Attendance
• Knight-Hennessy Scholars Program
• Yellow Ribbon Program
• BOLD Fellows Fund
• Application Process
• Loan Forgiveness
• Contact the Financial Aid Office
• Evaluation Criteria
• GMAT & GRE
• English Language Proficiency
• Personal Information, Activities & Awards
• Professional Experience
• Letters of Recommendation
• Optional Short Answer Questions
• Application Fee
• Reapplication
• Deferred Enrollment
• Joint & Dual Degrees
• Entering Class Profile
• Event Schedule
• Ambassadors
• New & Noteworthy
• Ask a Question
• See Why Stanford MSx
• Is MSx Right for You?
• MSx Stories
• Leadership Development
• How You Will Learn
• Admission Events
• Personal Information
• GMAT, GRE & EA
• English Proficiency Tests
• Career Change
• Career Advancement
• Career Support and Resources
• Daycare, Schools & Camps
• U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents
• Requirements
• Requirements: Behavioral
• Requirements: Quantitative
• Requirements: Macro
• Requirements: Micro
• Annual Evaluations
• Field Examination
• Research Activities
• Research Papers
• Dissertation
• Oral Examination
• Current Students
• Education & CV
• International Applicants
• Statement of Purpose
• Reapplicants
• Application Fee Waiver
• Deadline & Decisions
• Job Market Candidates
• Academic Placements
• Stay in Touch
• Faculty Mentors
• Current Fellows
• Standard Track
• Fellowship & Benefits
• Group Enrollment
• Program Formats
• Developing a Program
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Strategic Transformation
• Program Experience
• Contact Client Services
• Campus Experience
• Live Online Experience
• Silicon Valley & Bay Area
• Digital Credentials
• Faculty Spotlights
• Participant Spotlights
• Eligibility
• International Participants
• Stanford Ignite
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Operations, Information & Technology
• Organizational Behavior
• Political Economy
• Classical Liberalism
• The Eddie Lunch
• Accounting Summer Camp
• California Econometrics Conference
• California Quantitative Marketing PhD Conference
• California School Conference
• China India Insights Conference
• Homo economicus, Evolving
• Political Economics (2023–24)
• Scaling Geologic Storage of CO2 (2023–24)
• A Resilient Pacific: Building Connections, Envisioning Solutions
• Adaptation and Innovation
• Changing Climate
• Civil Society
• Climate Impact Summit
• Climate Science
• Corporate Carbon Disclosures
• Earth’s Seafloor
• Environmental Justice
• Operations and Information Technology
• Organizations
• Sustainability Reporting and Control
• Taking the Pulse of the Planet
• Urban Infrastructure
• Watershed Restoration
• Junior Faculty Workshop on Financial Regulation and Banking
• Ken Singleton Celebration
• Marketing Camp
• Quantitative Marketing PhD Alumni Conference
• Presentations
• Theory and Inference in Accounting Research
• Stanford Closer Look Series
• Quick Guides
• Core Concepts
• Journal Articles
• Glossary of Terms
• Faculty & Staff
• Subscribe to Corporate Governance Emails
• Researchers & Students
• Research Approach
• Charitable Giving
• Financial Health
• Government Services
• Workers & Careers
• Short Course
• Adaptive & Iterative Experimentation
• Incentive Design
• Social Sciences & Behavioral Nudges
• Bandit Experiment Application
• Conferences & Events
• Reading Materials
• Energy Entrepreneurship
• Faculty & Affiliates
• SOLE Report
• Responsible Supply Chains
• Current Study Usage
• Pre-Registration Information
• Participate in a Study
• Founding Donors
• Program Contacts
• Location Information
• Participant Profile
• Network Membership
• Program Impact
• Collaborators
• Entrepreneur Profiles
• Company Spotlights
• Seed Transformation Network
• Responsibilities
• Current Coaches
• How to Apply
• Meet the Consultants
• Meet the Interns
• Intern Profiles
• Collaborate
• Research Library
• News & Insights
• Site Registration
• Alumni Directory
• Alumni Email
• Privacy Settings & My Profile
• Success Stories
• The Story of Circles
• Support Women’s Circles
• Stanford Women on Boards Initiative
• Alumnae Spotlights
• Insights & Research
• Industry & Professional
• Entrepreneurial Commitment Group
• Recent Alumni
• Half-Century Club
• Fall Reunions
• Spring Reunions
• MBA 25th Reunion
• Half-Century Club Reunion
• Faculty Lectures
• Ernest C. Arbuckle Award
• Alison Elliott Exceptional Achievement Award
• ENCORE Award
• Excellence in Leadership Award
• John W. Gardner Volunteer Leadership Award
• Robert K. Jaedicke Faculty Award
• Jack McDonald Military Service Appreciation Award
• Jerry I. Porras Latino Leadership Award
• Tapestry Award
• Student & Alumni Events
• Executive Recruiters
• Interviewing
• Land the Perfect Job with LinkedIn
• Negotiating
• Elevator Pitch
• Email Best Practices
• Resumes & Cover Letters
• Self-Assessment
• Whitney Birdwell Ball
• Margaret Brooks
• Bryn Panee Burkhart
• Margaret Chan
• Ricki Frankel
• Peter Gandolfo
• Cindy W. Greig
• Natalie Guillen
• Carly Janson
• Sloan Klein
• Sherri Appel Lassila
• Stuart Meyer
• Tanisha Parrish
• Virginia Roberson
• Philippe Taieb
• Michael Takagawa
• Terra Winston
• Johanna Wise
• Debbie Wolter
• Rebecca Zucker
• Complimentary Coaching
• Changing Careers
• Work-Life Integration
• Career Breaks
• Flexible Work
• Encore Careers
• Join a Board
• D&B Hoovers
• Data Axle (ReferenceUSA)
• EBSCO Business Source
• Global Newsstream
• Market Share Reporter
• ProQuest One Business
• RKMA Market Research Handbook Series
• Student Clubs
• Entrepreneurial Students
• Stanford GSB Trust
• Alumni Community
• How to Volunteer
• Springboard Sessions
• Consulting Projects
• 2020 – 2029
• 2010 – 2019
• 2000 – 2009
• 1990 – 1999
• 1980 – 1989
• 1970 – 1979
• 1960 – 1969
• 1950 – 1959
• 1940 – 1949
• Service Areas
• ACT History
• ACT Awards Celebration
• ACT Governance Structure
• Building Leadership for ACT
• Individual Leadership Positions
• Leadership Role Overview
• Purpose of the ACT Management Board
• Contact ACT
• Business & Nonprofit Communities
• Reunion Volunteers
• Ways to Give
• Fiscal Year Report
• Business School Fund Leadership Council
• Planned Giving Options
• Planned Giving Benefits
• Planned Gifts and Reunions
• Legacy Partners
• Giving News & Stories
• Giving Deadlines
• Development Staff
• Submit Class Notes
• Class Secretaries
• Board of Directors
• Health Care
• Sustainability
• Class Takeaways
• All Else Equal: Making Better Decisions
• If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society
• Grit & Growth
• Think Fast, Talk Smart
• Spring 2022
• Spring 2021
• Autumn 2020
• Summer 2020
• Winter 2020
• In the Media
• For Journalists
• DCI Fellows
• Other Auditors
• Academic Calendar & Deadlines
• Course Materials
• Entrepreneurial Resources
• Campus Drive Grove
• Campus Drive Lawn
• CEMEX Auditorium
• King Community Court
• Seawell Family Boardroom
• Stanford GSB Bowl
• Stanford Investors Common
• Town Square
• Vidalakis Courtyard
• Vidalakis Dining Hall
• Catering Services
• Policies & Guidelines
• Reservations
• Contact Faculty Recruiting
• Lecturer Positions
• Postdoctoral Positions
• Accommodations
• CMC-Managed Interviews
• Recruiter-Managed Interviews
• Virtual Interviews
• Campus & Virtual
• Search for Candidates
• Think Globally
• Recruiting Calendar
• Recruiting Policies
• Full-Time Employment
• Summer Employment
• Entrepreneurial Summer Program
• Global Management Immersion Experience
• Social-Purpose Summer Internships
• Process Overview
• Project Types
• Client Eligibility Criteria
• Client Screening
• ACT Leadership
• Social Innovation & Nonprofit Management Resources
• Develop Your Organization’s Talent
• Centers & Initiatives
• Student Fellowships

What PhD students do [real-life case studies and examples]

Pursuing a PhD degree is a challenging experience. For many, it is a continuation of their academic journey that started with an undergraduate degree and continued with a master’s program.

A PhD takes academic study to the next level, demanding a heightened level of knowledge and dedication. It is a lengthy and intense process that requires a significant amount of research, analysis, and writing.

But what exactly do PhD students do? What about if you are about to start a PhD? Is it the same for all PhDs?

Well, the answer to that question varies depending on their field of study, research interests, and the requirements of their specific program.

This article will help you understand exactly what a doctoral PhD student does on a typical day to produce original research and survive.  

What does a PhD student do?

Typically, a PhD students works primarily on a research project in their subject area under the guidance of a faculty member.

In addition to conducting research, PhD research students may also have teaching or working as assistants’ duties such as assisting with lectures or tutorials. 

They may also have the opportunity to deliver their own lectures or tutorials and help undergraduate students in their studies.

In the US some students spend the first three years of their course doing coursework before getting to the main research part.

Here are some of the key tasks a PhD student is likely to do during a typical PhD.

PhD students are expected to be highly self-motivated, independent, and disciplined in their work.

They need to be able to manage their time effectively to balance multiple responsibilities, including coursework, research, and teaching or assisting duties.

The overall goal of a PhD student is to make a significant contribution to the field and become an expert in their chosen area of study.

What is the schedule like for many PhD students?

The primary job of a PhD student is to undertake a research project in their field of study under the guidance and supervision of a faculty member.

PhD students work long hours to:

• gather and analyze data,
• conduct experiments, and
• publish papers related to their research.

On top of that, some may work as assistants to professors, assisting with lectures or tutorials, marking papers or exams, and helping guide undergraduates in their respective areas of study.

This very much depends on the field of study, for example here is a case study from a PhD student in cancer research:

Case Study 1

Morning Routine: The researcher’s day starts early at 7:30 am, as they prepare to go to work. They make their lunch and prepare snacks. Their workplace is conveniently located only a 10-minute walk from their home, which saves time and provides an opportunity for some light exercise.

Workday Activities: Upon arrival at the lab, the PhD researcher checks on their cell cultures and makes a to-do list for the day, which includes tasks like checking emails, planning experiments, and attending meetings. They prioritize tasks by importance and try to manage their time efficiently.

Throughout the day, the researcher works on a variety of tasks, such as staining tissues, analyzing data, and monitoring animal models. They also collaborate with colleagues on experiments and take breaks to socialize and enjoy hot chocolate.

Evening Routine: After a busy day at the lab, the researcher wraps up work around 5 pm and heads home. Although they initially planned to go to the gym, they decide to take it easy and rest due to their early start the following day. Instead, they opt for a low-key evening, picking up a vegetarian pizza and enjoying a leisurely stroll around their neighbourhood before turning in for an early night.

Here is another PhD student at MIT in the field of quantum algorithms in MIT:

Case Study 2

His daily routine revolves around research, coursework, and maintaining a balance between work and personal life. This case study provides insights into a typical day in Samuel’s life at MIT.

Morning Routine: Samuel wakes up at 8:00 AM and starts his day with a few push-ups. Before leaving for MIT, Samuel works on his research from home, checks Instagram for messages, and has breakfast.

Commute: Living close to Harvard University, Samuel enjoys a short bike ride along the Charles River to reach MIT. This scenic commute provides him with a taste of the Cambridge experience. During his ride, he passes iconic landmarks, such as the John Harvard statue and Winthrop House.

Arrival at MIT: Upon arrival, Samuel greets his colleagues and discusses their research progress. Occasionally, he faces technical issues with the servers and needs to troubleshoot them in person. After resolving any issues, he runs simulations that typically take a couple of hours to complete.

Coursework: Samuel attends a three-hour course on the design and analysis of quantum algorithms. The class is challenging, and he often collaborates with his peers to better understand the material. They also enjoy a snack break halfway through the class.

Collaboration and Socializing: Throughout the day, Samuel interacts with his fellow researchers and engages in lighthearted conversations. They discuss their hobbies, such as knitting, and share their thoughts on various topics. Samuel’s peers come from diverse backgrounds and contribute to a stimulating environment.

Fitness: After a long day, Samuel heads to the MIT gym for a workout session. Exercise helps him stay fit and provides a break from his academic routine. He often meets up with his gym buddies, and they encourage each other during their workouts.

Evening Routine: Samuel returns home around 11:00 PM, prepares a protein-rich meal, and unwinds after a long day. He is cautious about making noise to not disturb his roommates who are already asleep.

What to expect as a first-year full-time student pursuing a doctorate

As a first-year PhD student, you can expect a challenging yet fulfilling experience.

In the US your first year will involve rigorous coursework, often covering core topics in your field, and it might not be significantly more difficult than your senior year of undergrad.

However, grades become less important compared to your research and dissertation progress.

In addition to coursework, you may have to take comprehensive exams to assess your understanding of the material covered in the first year.

You may be given multiple attempts to pass these exams, and their structure will vary depending on your field and institution.

In other countries such as the UK, AUS and Europe it is unlikely you will have coursework or exams and may get started with the research and dissertation right away.

Also, teaching or research assistantships are common in the first year, providing you with funding and valuable experience

. You may be responsible for leading discussion groups, grading assignments, or conducting quizzes, which can help you develop your communication skills and prepare you for future presentations or dissertation defense.

While you may not begin your dissertation research immediately, it’s essential to start thinking about potential topics and seeking advisers early on.

Establishing relationships with professors, peers, and other research professionals will help you build a supportive community throughout your academic journey.

It’s important to recognize that every PhD program and individual experience will vary, and some students may struggle initially with feelings of inadequacy.

Remember that if you were admitted to a PhD program, you belong there. Be prepared to face challenges, but also be kind to yourself and allow time for growth and learning.

By staying diligent, focused, and well-organized, you can successfully navigate your first year.

Work-Life Balance of a PhD Student – whats its like to be a PhD student

The importance of work-life balance in a PhD cannot be overstated, as it plays a crucial role in maintaining overall well-being and productivity.

Pursuing a PhD can be an intense and demanding experience, often requiring long hours and dedication.

However, striking a balance between work, hobbies, and social life is vital to prevent burnout and ensure a fulfilling academic journey.

PhD students often face varying work hours, with some working 24 to 36 hours per week, while others may clock in 50 to 60 hours or more, depending on the research and deadlines.

It is common for students to work on weekends or evenings, especially when approaching submission dates. Despite the demanding schedule, it is essential to make time for personal interests, sports, and social activities to maintain a healthy state of mind.

Examples of work-life balance in a PhD include allocating specific time for hobbies or sports, ensuring regular social interactions, and taking breaks when needed.

By being intentional about maintaining a balanced lifestyle, students can experience increased productivity, emotional well-being, and a more enjoyable PhD journey.

Wrapping up – what time as a PhD student is really like

Pursuing a PhD is a challenging yet rewarding experience that requires dedication, self-motivation, and discipline.

PhD students engage in research projects under faculty guidance, perform experiments, analyze data, and publish their findings. They may also have teaching or assistant duties, which provide valuable experience and develop their communication skills.

Balancing coursework, research, and teaching responsibilities is crucial for success in a PhD program.

First-year PhD students should expect rigorous coursework, comprehensive exams, and the opportunity to develop relationships with professors and peers.

Work-life balance is vital for maintaining overall well-being and productivity throughout the PhD journey.

By allocating time for hobbies, sports, and social activities, students can prevent burnout and ensure a fulfilling academic experience.

Each PhD program and individual experience will vary, but by staying diligent, focused, and well-organized, students can successfully navigate the challenges and make significant contributions to their chosen field of study.

Dr Andrew Stapleton has a Masters and PhD in Chemistry from the UK and Australia. He has many years of research experience and has worked as a Postdoctoral Fellow and Associate at a number of Universities. Although having secured funding for his own research, he left academia to help others with his YouTube channel all about the inner workings of academia and how to make it work for you.

Thank you for visiting Academia Insider.

We are here to help you navigate Academia as painlessly as possible. We are supported by our readers and by visiting you are helping us earn a small amount through ads and affiliate revenue - Thank you!

2024 © Academia Insider

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln

• < Previous Dissertation

Home > gradstudies > UNL Dissertations > 208

Graduate Studies

Dissertations and Doctoral Documents from University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2023–

Fighting racism and hate: a case study of black graduate students' perceptions of a university president's responses to racialized incidents.

Kaleb L. Briscoe , University of Nebraska-Lincoln Follow

0000-0002-6333-9867

First Advisor

Deryl K. Hatch-Tocaimaza

Committee Members

Christina W. Yao, Stephanie Bondi, Sydney Freeman, Jr., Amanda Morales

Educational Studies (Educational Leadership and Higher Education)

Date of this Version

Document type.

Dissertation

A dissertation presented to the faculty of the Graduate College at the University of nebraska in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Major: Educational Studies (Educational Leadership and Higher Education)

Under the supervision of Professor Deryl K. Hatch-Tocaimaza

Lincoln, Nebraska, February 2020

Copyright 2020, Kaleb L. Briscoe.Used by permission

This qualitative, single case study examined Black graduate students’ perceptions of a university president’s responses to racialized incidents and how these perceptions inform Black graduate students’ larger contextual understanding of campus racial climate. Guided by Hurtado et al.’s (2012) Multi-Contextual Model for Diverse Learning Environments, the research questions were: What are Black graduate students’ perceptions of a university president’s responses to racialized incidents at a PWI? How do Black graduate students’ perceptions of a university president’s responses to racialized incidents inform their larger contextual understanding of campus racial climate at a PWI? Data was analyzed on an institutional-level through institutional documents, president statements, and one, 60 minute interview with 4 staff members and on an individual-level through a demographic survey and two, 60-90 minute interviews with 12 Black graduate students from a large, predominantly White institution in the Mid-Atlantic, the University of Maryland.

The findings were displayed through narrative summaries. As a result of the president’s responses to racialized incidents, Black graduate students felt othered, marginalized, and silenced. Findings demonstrated the lack of institutional response strategies that the president of University of Maryland used to address racialized incidents. Overall, participants viewed the president’s responses to racialized incidents as being untimely, inadequate, and inappropriate. Almost all students and staff participants shared that the president’s responses to racialized incidents through campus statements used non-performative and anti-Blackness rhetoric. Black graduate students reported that the president’s responses, from their vantage point, lacked action-oriented language, next steps, and strategies to assist them during the aftermath of the incidents.

The findings from this study underscored a direct connection between the president’s responses to racialized incidents and how Black graduate students at one campus perceive racial climate as being negative. This further illustrates the significance of the role of the presidency when addressing issues of race and racism, and how their responses have the power to disrupt or harm both the personal lived experiences of individuals and the broader campus racial climate for Black graduate students. Several implications for practice and recommendations for theory and future research are offered.

Recommended Citation

Briscoe, Kaleb L., "Fighting Racism and Hate: A Case Study of Black Graduate Students' Perceptions of a University President's Responses to Racialized Incidents" (2020). Dissertations and Doctoral Documents from University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2023– . 208. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dissunl/208

Since September 16, 2024

Included in

Educational Sociology Commons , Higher Education Commons , Inequality and Stratification Commons , Leadership Studies Commons , Race and Ethnicity Commons , Race, Ethnicity and Post-Colonial Studies Commons

Advanced Search

Search Help

• Notify me via email or RSS
• Administrator Resources
• How to Cite Items From This Repository
• Copyright Information
• Collections
• Disciplines

Author Corner

• Guide to Submitting
• gradstudies Website

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

• General & Introductory Industrial Engineering
• Industrial Engineering / Project Management

Project Management Case Studies, 6th Edition

ISBN: 978-1-119-82199-1

Digital Evaluation Copy

Harold Kerzner

The latest edition in the gold standard of project management case study collections

As a critical part of any successful, competitive business, project management sits at the intersection of several functional areas. And in the newly revised Sixth Edition of Project Management Case Studies , world-renowned project management professional Dr. Harold Kerzner delivers practical and in-depth coverage of project management in industries as varied as automotive, healthcare, government, manufacturing, communications, construction, chemical, aerospace, and more.

The latest edition of this bestselling book acts as the perfect supplement to any project management textbook or as an aid in the preparation for the PMP certification exam. The author includes new topics, like risk management, information sharing, scope changes, crisis dashboards, and innovation.

The Sixth Edition includes ten new case studies and a wide array of updates to existing cases to meet today’s industry standards and reflect the unique challenges facing modern project management professionals. This new edition:

• Features 10 new case studies from LEGO, NorthStar, Berlin Brandenburg Airport, and more
• Includes over 100 case studies drawn from real companies illustrating successful and poor implementation of project management
• Provides coverage of broad areas of project management as well as focused content on the automotive, healthcare, government, manufacturing, communications, construction, chemical, and aerospace industries
• Offers new topics including risk management, information sharing, scope changes, crisis dashboards, and innovation

Perfect for students taking courses on project management during their undergraduate degrees and at the graduate level as part of an MBA or graduate engineering program, Project Management Case Studies is also an indispensable resource for consulting and training companies who work with other professionals.

Harold Kerzner, PhD, is Senior Executive Director for Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the International Institute of Learning, Inc. (IIL). Dr. Kerzner’s impact on the project management industry inspired IIL to establish the Kerzner International Project Manager of the Year Award. IIL also donated $1M to the Project Management Institute Educational Foundation (PMIEF) to establish the Dr. Harold Kerzner Scholarship Fund.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Building a Foundation for a Successful Doctoral Student Journey: A Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Investigation

Dannelle d. stevens.

College of Education, Portland State University, Portland, OR USA

Micki M. Caskey

Doctoral students’ program non-completion continues to be a worldwide phenomenon. Given the challenges across the globe following the 2020-22 pandemic, we need scholarly and skilled PhD and education (EdD) doctoral program graduates. A place to look for retention improvement is by studying what students learn and how they are taught in their university doctoral programs. One purpose of this case study was to describe how 12 EdD students in a program seminar responded to instruction in research and writing strategies during their first year of a four-year program. The second purpose was to examine student responses to formative assessments and describe and explain ongoing instructional adjustments using a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) framework within our own faculty community of practice. Analysis of surveys and student work indicated that writing and research strategies were instructive, engaging, and useful in building research and writing foundations. Analysis of multiple formative assessments helped us refine our instructional strategies during the year. Because all students completed the first high stakes program milestone (comprehensive paper) in year two, our findings suggested that the seminar’s instructional strategies established a foundation for student success and timely program progress. Using multiple formative assessments over time was critical in strengthening our teaching practice as well. We recommended instructional practices associated with student research and writing skill development as well as student progress and retention.

If the 2020–2022 pandemic taught us anything, it was the interconnectedness of people across the globe. The pandemic caused major tears in the fabric that connects our lives in the social, economic, and political sectors. Higher education worldwide was not immune to the serious disruptions caused by COVID-19, the stealth virus underlying the pandemic. Universities and colleges cancelled classes, discontinued programs, and some closed their doors forever (Reis & Grady, 2020 ). The pandemic forced faculty and students to look deep inside their typical teaching and learning practices to find survival strategies.

Despite disruptions, universities need to fulfill the societal expectations for doctoral program graduates to be highly qualified and curious people who can address complex and multi-faceted problems. Doctoral program graduates add to the intellectual and creative firepower to douse our fears and lead us out of numerous and pervasive economic, educational, political, social, and health care challenges, revealed by the pandemic. EdD doctoral students are being prepared to address complex problems in their real world of practice. Because faculty are teaching the next generation of real-world problem-solvers, what they teach and how they teach becomes the foundation for research-informed practices of educational leaders in the future (Golde, 2006 ).

During the current educational context, faculty continue to be responsible for refining doctoral student research skills and fostering the development of educational leaders who address enduring problems of practice and contribute creative and research-grounded solutions in universities, schools, or other educational settings. Identifying practices that ensure doctoral student completion is essential in improving doctoral programs that invite, support, and sustain future educational leaders. Yet, even before the pandemic, a lingering problem in higher education worldwide was the number of doctoral students who enter but do not complete their studies (Lindsay, 2015 ). In the United States, more than 50% of PhD doctoral students do not complete their degrees (Church, 2009 ). In other countries such as Australia and the United Kingdom, the pattern of PhD non-completion degrees is also evident ranging from around 35–45% non-completion for full time students (Park, 2005 ). Unfortunately, most of the doctoral retention statistics are focused on PhD programs and do not include professional practice doctorates like the EdD. Given the pervasive impact of the pandemic on health, families, and even research funding (de Wit & Altbach, 2021 ), doctoral student completion rates are more likely to be impacted. However, according to Flaherty ( 2021 ), “It’s almost certain that COVID-19 played a role in how many students were able to finish their Ph.D.s… but it’s unclear from the data [Davies, 2020] how big a role” (p. 1). Yet, our 2002–2010 review of our own doctoral program in a U.S. urban comprehensive university shows our EdD students following a similar pattern as PhD students with an average of 45% non-completion rate.

Is doctoral student non-completion a worthwhile problem? Some say low retention and completion rates are acceptable because the programs are weeding out students who unprepared for the rigors of graduate work (Smallwood, 2004 ). Yet, others say that non-completion in U.S. doctoral education merits not only student but institutional attention (Lovitts, 2001 ; Park, 2005 ). With potential feelings of disappointment and, even failure, the psychological cost for doctoral program student dropouts is high (Lovitts, 2001 ; Smallwood, 2004 ). Because minority students tend to leave their programs at a higher rate than White students (Smallwood, 2004 ), the psychological cost for the minority student community is an additional concern for our core social justice values. Research seems to indicate that when faculty are sensitive and responsive to student needs in their teaching and interactions, students seem to be more engaged and, therefore, more likely to be successful (Amrein-Beardsley et al., 2012 ; Grant et al., 2014 ; Lee & Boud, 2003 ; Wellington, 2010 ; Zambo et al., 2014 ). In fact, a substantial body of research has demonstrated that faculty practices can have a powerful effect on undergraduate student success (Delmas & Childs, 2021 ; Tight, 2020 ; Umbach & Wawrzynski, 2005 ).

Some researchers sought to disentangle factors that undergird the lack of doctoral student program completion and looked for ways to support students through completion (Ahern & Manathunga, 2004 ; Bastalich et al., 2014 ; Lindsay, 2015 ; Zambo et al., 2014 ). Mentoring offered critical support (Caffarella & Barnett, 2000 ; Hilliard, 2012 ; Kamler, 2008 ; Mullen, 2001 ; Simpson & Matsuda, 2008 ; Thein & Beach, 2010 ). Writing groups fostered much needed peer support (Aitchison, 2009 ; Aitchison & Lee, 2006 ). Hilliard ( 2012 ) zeroed in on advisor quality:

…it is important for the advisor to continue to practice positive professional relationships and provide relevant academic support to candidates. The advisor should work closely with other faculty members and listen to the voices of candidates to ensure candidates’ success. (p. 7)

Another program practice, a cohort experience upon entry and throughout an EdD program, increased student retention and success (Friesen & Jacobsen, 2021 ; Zambo et al., 2013 ).

Many doctoral programs prepare candidates to earn either a PhD or an education doctorate (EdD). Many EdD students do not fit the traditional image of PhD graduate students (McAlpine et al., 2009 ). Typical PhD students attend the university full time with and spend their time teaching, assisting in a class, or doing research in a laboratory, and are fully immersed in a university setting. Whereas most EdD students seek to complete a degree while working full time in a professional setting, they can remain unaware and out-of-touch with the university campus facilities and student services (Taylor, 2007 ). Friesen and Jacobsen ( 2021 ) offer a more extensive discussion and comprehensive comparison of the EdD and PhD.

Preparation for a doctoral program most often begins with a master’s degree; yet master’s degree programs in education vary. Entering EdD doctoral students have very disparate master’s degree experiences, especially with academic writing and research. Some arrive grounded in the language and expectations surrounding research because they wrote a master’s thesis. Others complete a master’s program that offers in-depth understandings of the nature and practice of research as well as authentic research experiences, a strong foundation for an EdD degree (Brown et al., 2021 ; Jacobsen et al., 2018b ). Still other master’s students may write and publish an article based on their research. For these three groups of master’s students, their background knowledge may bode well for a smooth transition to doctoral writing and research expectations. However, other EdD students may have earned their master’s degree alongside a teaching credential, and, therefore, lack essential research knowledge and experience. In addition, as working professionals, many EdD students may be returning to the university later in life. For some, the socialization practices of writing, studying, and relationship-building among students in graduate school may be unknown (Sverdlik et al., 2018 ). International EdD students may be full time students like typical PhD students and yet can be at a disadvantage because academic literacies for reading research and writing are in a second language. To combat attrition, university faculty need to design programs that account for this variance in master’s degree experience.

In recent years, many U.S. faculty doctoral programs have banded together to design EdD programs that better meet student needs, seek to increase student retention, and strengthen the potentially significant contribution of the EdD graduate to research-informed educational practice. Through a cross-institutional network, Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED 2021 ) offers convenings and resources for faculty restructuring doctoral programs with the working professional in mind. In its underlying philosophy, CPED views education doctoral students as strong educational leaders who improve their schools and communities through research-informed practices. Then, EdD recipients can apply their research skills in their professional practice. Thus, CPED encourages faculty to aim their EdD programs at developing scholarly practitioners. The program goals are to teach doctoral students the skills, dispositions, and orientations to go forth into the world as problem-solvers in their professional practice settings. CPED EdD programs are designed to increase student retention and build solid research skills and practices without sacrificing the rigor of PhD programs (Shulman et al., 2006 ).

Our research was situated in an education doctoral program at an urban comprehensive university in the Western United States. Following interactions with CPED colleagues, we modified our program to meet the needs of our specific students. Our revised student learning outcomes included key elements from CPED: building a professional knowledge base, enhancing collaborative skills, and applying research-informed knowledge to the real-world problems in the workplace. In our own seminar, we sought to develop these CPED outcomes through encouraging interactions within a student community of practice (Wenger, 1998 ) where students reflected and applied their rich practical and professional background to real-world problems as scholarly practitioners (McClintock, 2004 ; Teeuwsen et al., 2014 ; Zambo et al., 2013 ). Thus, we expected our students to be scholars and apply that scholarly foundation to assess and address problems of practice in their professional settings.

Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks

Our study focused on describing and explaining the experiences of two groups: our education doctoral students and us, the instructors. We used situated learning theory (Lave & Wenger, 1991 ) to frame our research. Within our faculty group, we used a conceptual framework: the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) (Felten, 2013 ). Referencing the SoTL framework in our investigation enhanced our research credibility (Billot et al., 2017 ). To share ideas and work together as faculty under the SoTL umbrella, we also used the practices of mutual engagement , joint enterprise , and shared repertoire (Wenger, 1998 ), key components of a community of practice (Tierney et al., 2020 ).

Situated Learning and Communities of Practice

When describing situated learning theory, Lave and Wenger ( 1991 ) explained that “learning is not merely situated in practice—as if it were some independently reifiable process that just happened to be located somewhere; learning is an integral part of generative social practice in the lived-world” (p. 35). In other words, social interaction and shared experiences lead to learning within a specific context. Situated learning experiences contrast with classroom experiences in which knowledge remains abstract and without context. In our program, we situated learning within the doctoral seminar to engage our students with experiences to build academic writing and research knowledge. As instructors our learning was situated in the doctoral student seminar and based on student responses to activities and experiences related to academic writing and research.

Lave and Wenger ( 1991 ) described the generative social practice, situated learning, as “legitimate peripheral participation” (p. 29)—a process by which newcomers become members of a “community of practice” (p. 29). Over time and through active participation within the community, members acquire more knowledge and experience; the newcomers or novice learners move from the periphery of the community to the center of learning community alongside the old-timers or expert learners. Peripheral participation is not just any participation but participation in the legitimate or authentic activities that signify the community’s unique qualities. In our case, we included assignments and classroom activities that mirrored the typical work and expectations of an academic community, such as submission of an Institutional Review Board application and presenting a research poster. Key features of a community of practice included mutual engagement , joint enterprise , and shared repertoire (Wenger, 1998 ).

Our goal was for students to experience working in a community of practice where they could tap their experiences as leaders and working professionals and, through legitimate participation, move toward the identity of scholarly practitioners and meet personal and professional needs (Caskey et al., 2020 ; Foot et al., 2014 ; Olson & Clark, 2009 ).

Because writing and research are essential throughout any doctoral program, we hoped that our students would succeed in the short run, within the first year, completing the high stakes comprehensive examination core paper, and, in the long run, within the four-year program plan, the dissertation.

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

To observe and evaluate how our instructional practices supported student learning in a community of practice, we formed our own faculty community of practice. In his SoTL framework, Felten ( 2013 ) argued that “[F]or scholarly inquiry into student learning to be recognized as significant intellectual work in the academy, we (the community of practitioners) need to articulate our shared norms, our common principles of good practice of inquiry into student learning” (p. 122). We identified connections between Felten’s principles of SoTL practice and our instructional context (see Table  1 ).

Application of SoTL Principles of Practice to Instructional Context

Our faculty community of practice included Wenger’s ( 1998 ) key indicators: mutual engagement , joint enterprise , and shared repertoire . Our mutual engagement entailed collaborating in planning, teaching, assessing, and reflecting on our teaching. We shared a common passion for teaching but had little experience in collaborating to teach the same class. With our overall shared goal of student learning, we were risk-takers and willing to try new methods. Being professors, we had extensive experience as university faculty; yet we had little experience working with a cohort of doctoral students over a year. Our joint enterprise required us to respond to situations as they arose as well as be consistent in our observation and reflection practices. From student formative assessments and our own reflections, we determined what was important, what to discuss, and what actions to take. Before each seminar, we met to develop the agenda. Afterwards, we took notes in our journals to reflect on what worked and what did not. Then we shared the notes with each other and used our observations and reflections to collaborate and develop the agenda and activities for the next seminar. We also rotated giving written feedback on student work every week. By developing a shared repertoire of practice, we developed a coherence in our community of practice through our instructional routines, activities, and strategies. Using the SoTL framework and working in a community of practice, we took a stance as investigators examining student responses to our instructional practices not as evaluators judging the merits of our teaching.

Based on the SoTL framework we had four assumptions about our process. First, data is valued and used regularly : we collected and analyzed formative assessments as information not evaluation. Second, reflection improves practice : we not only talked about our teaching; we wrote and shared reflections from our journals about our teaching. Third, teaching is a work-in-progress : we could never be perfect as teachers; the best stance was to view teaching as a journey not a destination and to learn from that journey to foster student learning. Finally, collaboration strengthens practice : we were present in all the seminar classes; when one of us was not teaching, the other was observing and taking notes. Our collaboration was based on what we did and how we did it. In Fig.  1 , we illustrated the components of our faculty community of practice as applied to our SoTL project.

Application of SOTL to Our Faculty Community of Practice

We had two overarching research questions:

• How did doctoral students respond to the seminar experiences within a community of practice?
• Using a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning lens, what did we learn from our students about our teaching practices in our own community of practice?

Our study’s purposes were to (a) describe and explain how 12 EdD students responded to seminar experiences, and (b) apply a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning conceptual framework to our instructional practices to improve our teaching and impact student learning.

In the methods section, we articulate our use of a qualitative case study method: describing the context, participants, and seminar features, identifying the data sources, and reporting methods of data analysis.

We used a qualitative case study design because we were interested in investigating how our doctoral program seminar features helped our students be successful. In a case study, researchers investigate “a contemporary phenomenon (the ‘case’) in depth and within its real-world context…” (Yin, 2009 , p. 16). A case study is developed within a specific bounded system (Creswell, 2013 ; Merriam, 2009 ). Thus, a case study method was appropriate for discovering and interpreting our EdD students’ and our own learning experiences within that bounded system, the doctoral seminar.

Our educational doctoral program was in a Northwestern United States urban comprehensive university with an enrollment of approximately 28,600 students. Following a three-year pilot, our revised program admitted a cohort of 24 students to the 72-credit program comprised of courses, seminars, internships, and milestones (see Table  2 ). During the first year of our four-year doctoral program in an evening format which met fall, winter, and spring quarters, the full cohort took the three-course educational theory sequence. During the second year as foundation for developing their dissertation proposal by the end of the second year, the full cohort took the three-course research sequence.

EdD Program of Study with Milestones by Year

* Quarter credits

** Completed at the end of Year 1

The program also divided the full cohort into two smaller seminars to develop learning communities that met over three terms in each of the first two years of the program. This investigation focused on our experience as instructors with the smaller learning community, the doctoral seminar. In the second year we also supervised the students in a workplace internship where they piloted their ideas for their dissertation research. At the end of the second year, we wanted our students to be prepared to work with an advisor and defend the dissertation proposal during the third year and, finally, in the fourth year, to gather data and defend their dissertation.

Participants: Students

Our participants, 12 EdD students, were in the small learning community seminar. Most were female (9), spoke English as their first language (9), and were currently working professionals (9). About one-third of our students (4) were non-native speakers of English; of these, three were international students and former working professionals. The other eight held positions as adjunct faculty in education (3), teachers (2), a school administrator (1), an educational consultant (1), and a higher education administrator (1). Thus, many were currently grappling with the complex problems of practice in their professional settings. Their experience with academic writing and conducting research varied. Seven of 12 our students wrote a thesis for their master’s degree, while five completed a teacher work sample for a teaching credential and master’s degree.

Participants: Faculty

We, two female, White, and English-speaking professors, taught the doctoral student seminars. Prior to co-teaching in the doctoral program, we had taught in the same department for 14 years; we drew on extensive experience as public-school teachers. We were adept at developing curriculum, comfortable in the classroom, and experienced in teaching university classes for more than 30 combined years. We had served on student doctoral committees as advisors and committee members. Yet, we were new to co-planning curriculum and co-teaching a year-long doctoral student seminar.

Doctoral Seminar

We designed our doctoral seminar with two communities of practice in mind—the student community of practice and the faculty community of practice. To describe this seminar and the resulting communities of practice we will focus on two questions: how did we teach and what did students learn.

How Did We Teach? To guide students’ development of academic writing skills and knowledge of research methods, we used the cognitive apprenticeship instructional method (Collins, 2006 ) with an emphasis on modeling, coaching , and scaffolding . We applied this method often, as illustrated by the following example: how to develop an argument for a manuscript. First, we modeled how we used the one-page argument template (Graff & Birkenstein, 2018 ; Stevens, 2019 ) on our own manuscripts. Then, we coached the students as they used the template to frame the argument for their own research problem of practice for their comprehensive paper. After they developed their argument, we scaffolded the refinement of their argument to fit within their comprehensive paper using faculty and peer feedback within their small writing groups. We followed this instructional pattern of modeling, coaching, and scaffolding for teaching students how to do focused freewrites (Stevens & Cooper, 2009 ), write key sentences, develop an abstract, write an Institutional Review Board (IRB) proposal, set writing goals, and work in writing groups (Stevens, 2019 ). A fuller description of our research related to the use of the cognitive apprenticeship appeared in another manuscript (Caskey & Stevens, 2021 ).

The writing challenge for students was to develop their research and writing skills and, for the comprehensive exam paper, to identify a problem of practice and analyze it through the three theoretical perspectives taught in the program courses: learning, leadership, and program/policy. When students submitted successive drafts, we gave feedback and directed their attention to strategies and rhetorical structures that undergird academic writing (Stevens, 2019 ). For each draft, we used the track changes and comment features in MS (Microsoft) WORD™ and uploaded students’ drafts with our embedded feedback to their folder in the course management system. We created writing groups—smaller communities of practice in which our students set writing goals to be accountable for progress and to experience the shift of roles as readers (reviewers) and contributors (writers) (Guerin et al., 2015 ). We allocated at least 30 minutes of class time for their writing groups and expected groups to meet weekly for an hour outside of class. Their goals were to integrate faculty and peer feedback on three authentic assignments: the IRB proposal, the mini-research project, and the comprehensive paper.

What Did Students Learn? We wanted our students to learn how to be better thinkers and writers as well as become more familiar and comfortable with conducting research. We found that other doctoral programs included content about research ethics and expectations of IRB approval for student projects (Jacobsen et al., 2018a ) as well as opportunities for students to design action-oriented research experiences (Murakami-Ramalho et al., 2013 ). We created low-stakes assignments that helped students become conversant with research terminology and procedures—without the high-stakes expectations of a dissertation proposal. For example, our doctoral students designed a mini-research project about their selected topic but had only one to three research participants. The research design paper included a title, abstract, a two to three-page introduction with a concise argument and a clear purpose, a brief two-three page literature review, and methods identifying participants and data collection tools. Next, after an introduction to the ethics of conducting research and analysis of one of our own IRB proposals, students developed a proposal for their mini-research project and submitted it to the university’s IRB. Once the university approved their project, they collected the data. During the seminars, they worked on data analysis, interpretation, displays, and summaries. Using our research poster template, they shared their posters with the full cohort of doctoral students in a mock-conference format. Although their proposal was a full manuscript, the only outcome to present the results was a poster presentation. We documented the impact of these experiences on students’ identity as researchers in a prior publication (Caskey et al., 2020 ).

Data Collection

Our study focus used two data sets: completion of seminar assignments and responses to a series of anonymous formative assessments. Completion of key seminar assignments would demonstrate student’s engagement and success. The series of anonymous formative assessments would tell us, the instructors, what teaching methods and situated learning experiences impacted their learning. To conduct our study, we secured approval from our university’s IRB.

Key Seminar Assignments

We examined student completion of IRB proposal with university approval, mini-research project, and successive drafts of the comprehensive paper, a program milestone that all students needed to pass for continuation into the program’s second year.

Formative Assessments

Because we were curious about student learning and improving our practice, we used multiple formative assessments over time to learn how students responded to our assignments and teaching methods. In Table  3 , we listed the three, anonymous formative assessments along with collection dates. In February, we administered the first formative assessment—a Plus-Wishes chart. Students listed positive aspects of the program in the left column (Plus) and aspects that needed to change in the right column (Wishes). The chart included a narrative section for students to share their thoughts about their experiences in the doctoral seminar. Because we situated their learning within a community of practice, we gave students time to complete this open-ended chart in the seminar.

Formative Assessments of Doctoral Student Seminar Experiences

In March, we conducted our second formative assessment, the Experiences Questionnaire, which had two questions: “What two experiences stood out for you?” and “Please describe those experiences.” In this second assessment, we wanted students to distill their experiences into the most significant ones and invited their suggestions for improvement. Again, we provided students with time to complete this questionnaire during the seminar.

The final formative assessment was the Critical Incident Questionnaire (CIQ) (Brookfield, 2017 ), which we administered once a month for three months: April, May, June. Brookfield ( 2017 ) argued the CIQ could help faculty understand students’ perspectives and experiences and gain a more nuanced understanding of learning experiences. Because we were aware of the broader brushstrokes of what seemed to be working in our seminars, we used the CIQ to seek a clearer understanding about how specific assignments and activities worked within their student community of practice.

Data Analysis

First, we tabulated the completion of the three seminar assignments: an IRB proposal, mini-research project, and successive drafts of comprehensive paper. Collecting and analyzing student responses to our teaching was part of our SoTL work, where data collected from students are used to improve teaching practice, not evaluate whether we are “good teachers” or not. We analyzed the formative assessment data each month in February, March, April, and May. We collaborated on the formative assessment analysis using a constant comparative method to identify patterns during an open-ended coding process (Merriam, 2009 ). After reading and re-reading the data, we compared data segments “to determine similarities and differences” (Merriam, 2009 , p. 30) and assigned data to tentative categories that informed our instructional decisions. After reflecting on the data each month, we adjusted our instruction. Finally, we reviewed the clustered responses across the data to identify themes and select representative verbatim quotes for this paper.

During our two years of teaching the doctoral seminar, we studied our EdD students’ development as researchers and writers as well as our instructional methods. First, we examined the development of their identity as researchers as measured by the pre-post administration of the draw-a-researcher test (Caskey et al., 2020 ), which we based on the classic draw-a-scientist test (Finson, 2002 , 2009 ; Foutz et al., 2015 ). We learned that our embedded writing support model contributed to the development of a researcher identity. Second, we conducted an end-of-year multi-level survey to zero in on our teaching method of modeling, coaching, and scaffolding in the cognitive apprenticeship model (Caskey & Stevens, 2021 ).

For this case study, we examined student assignment completion and formative assessments to investigate both our EdD students’ and our instructor doctoral seminar experiences. These two data sources connected specifically to the two purposes of this case study.

Purpose I: Describing and Explaining Students’ Responses to Seminar Assignments

To begin, we summarize the findings from three seminar assignments: IRB proposal, mini-research project, and comprehensive paper. Student learning was situated within the doctoral seminar. All 12 students completed and submitted an IRB proposal and received university approval before conducting their mini-research project. First, they acquired the skill and confidence to complete the IRB proposal. Within this student community of practice, they shared ideas and engaged in the mutual practice of writing an IRB proposal. Second, our EdD students designed, conducted, and presented a mini-research project. All 12 EdD students excelled at initiating and completing these two authentic, low-stakes assignments.

All students also turned in and received feedback on successive drafts of the comprehensive paper throughout the first year. They learned to incorporate extensive instructor feedback and respond to peer feedback within the safe space of the seminar. Again, student learning was situated within the doctoral seminar. This student community of practice allowed them to live the process of building a writing practice (Guerin et al., 2015 ) as evidenced by all 12 successfully completing and defending the comprehensive paper on time. Success on the seminar assignments seemed to bode well for student retention and program completion in this first year of the program. Although we could not attribute their final success in the program to the year-long seminar, 11 of 12 EdD students (92%) completed their dissertations and doctorate within the four-year timeline.

Purpose II: Improving Our Teaching and Student Learning Using a SoTL Perspective

In this section, we delineate the findings derived from our analysis of the three formative assessments: Plus-Wishes Chart, Experiences Questionnaire, and Critical Incident Questionnaires.

Plus-Wishes Chart

In February of the first year, we used an open-ended Plus-Wishes Chart to assess what was working in the program (plus) and what needed to change (wishes). This first assessment served as a mid-year assessment allowing us to make informed instructional decisions based on student feedback. Students listed aspects of the program on a plus as well as listed others on the wishes side. In total they listed 60 different program aspects with 47 responses across the chart on the plus side and 13 on the wishes side.

Of 47 plus responses, 21 related to academic writing instruction and support, 13 referenced advising and interactions with the instructors, and nine focused on opportunities for interactions within the learning community. Representative plus responses included:

• Clear explanations; breaking things down in component parts; detailed explanations; skill-building activities (e.g., reading academic articles).
• Individual meetings with advisors.
• Community-building activities; structure of the whole session.

Regarding the wishes side, four responses listed the need for structural changes— features outside the purview of our instruction. Three responses noted wanting more opportunities for peer feedback on their academic writing. The remaining responses did not relate to the content of the program (e.g., parking, laptops). Representative wishes included:

• Change the schedule of the seminars to weekdays.
• More time for peer review/feedback on writing.

In the narrative section, we invited our students to comment on their pluses and wishes. Their comments included:

• I consider this class the “glue” that holds the core classes together. I like the fact that this class is so well-structured because it helps us understand the big picture.
• I feel very lucky to join (have) this seminar…where I am and what I need to do….
• Taken as a whole, the leadership seminar has been a very positive one. The goals for this first term have been clearly defined, and the activities appropriately scaffolded to reach those goals.
• Overall, the weekend classes, energizing rather than tiring. I like the work session nature of the class in which we get to get a good start on projects and get immediate feedback before going off on our own.
• This seminar is invaluable for the success of doctoral students. I couldn’t imagine navigating the program without it.

Experiences Questionnaire

In March, we administered the second formative assessment, the Experiences Questionnaire on which the 12 students identified and described two experiences that “stood out for them.” Twelve identified writing ( n  = 8) and the authentic research task of writing an IRB proposal ( n  = 6) as significant. Five responses related to classroom discussion activities. We identified three themes that contributed to their learning: writing, research, and class discussions (see Table  4 ).

Themes Derived from Experiences Questionnaire Responses

In the narrative section, typical responses included:

• Going through IRB process forced me to focus on my topic in a tighter way and clearing up parts that were confusing. It was also great experience for my dissertation and gave me ideas on how to conduct my study.
• I really like the feedback from the instructors and how to proceed on the next draft. Your clarification on what to do next and arranging the structure of the paper helped tremendously. Now it is just a matter of revision and tweeking the parts.
• Core paper analysis helped me in writing my core paper and what structure I should use, reference list.

In the suggestions section, representative comments were:

• very helpful class.
• more frequent peer feedback would be nice. I like having many different eyes look at my paper so I can incorporate how other people understand my topic. I like to see what others are working on and how they are going about it.
• I don’t have any suggestions, very useful class, exceeded my expectations.

Across these themes, we found that our students highlighted specific learning experiences, which had transpired or were fostered within the seminar.

Critical Incident Questionnaire

The third formative assessment was the Critical Incident Questionnaire (CIQ). Because we administered it monthly, we had three sets of CIQ questionnaires. Each month, we analyzed the student responses and adjusted our instructional methods (see Table  5 ). The questions in the CIQ were:

Analysis of Students’ CIQ Responses and Our Instructional Decisions

• At what moment in the seminar did you feel most engaged with what was happening?
• At what moment in the seminar were you most distanced from what was happening?
• What action that anyone (teacher or student) took during the seminar did you find most affirming or helpful?
• What action that anyone took during the seminar did you find most puzzling or confusing?
• What about the seminar surprised you the most?

In each of the preceding CIQ questions, we italicized the key words to help guide our interpretation of students’ responses; these words were not italicized when we gave the CIQs to the students. In Table  5 , we noted parenthetically to which CIQ question the response was found.

Regarding writing, students noted comprehensive paper development, peer sharing of comprehensive paper, pre-writing activities, and writing scaffolds. Repeatedly, they referenced experiences within the seminar space—their community of practice. They listed research activities including the mini-research project, data analysis, and faculty research presentations. Further analysis of responses to CIQ questions across three datasets led us to categorize the findings into four clusters: instructional processes, content, personal preferences, and program structure. Overall student responses were 115 (81%) for instructional processes, 11 (8%) for content, 9 (6%) for personal, and 7 (6%) for program structure. The CIQ was a rich source of formative feedback.

Themes from Formative Assessments

After analysis of the three assessments (Plus-Wishes Chart, Experiences Questionnaire, CIQ) administered during winter and spring terms, we identified four themes.

Theme 1: Provide Authentic, Low-Stakes Practice on Key Components of the Dissertation

Across formative assessments, students consistently responded positively to the assignments related to components of the dissertation: writing an IRB proposal, receiving IRB approval, and presenting a poster session about their research.

Theme 2: Focus on Building a Toolkit of Writing and Research Strategies

Students learned a set of strategies that provided practice in identifying the rhetorical infrastructure of academic writing and research (Stevens, 2019 ). Within their community of practice, we helped them build a toolkit of these strategies that could be applied to other writing tasks. For example, the strategies of freewriting and writing a purpose statement could be used for developing conference proposals, writing grants, or composing a newsletter article. We agreed with Rai and Lillis ( 2013 ) who argued for a more explicit connection about writing expectations across academic and professional settings to strengthen practitioners’ professional practice writing and communication skills. Across all formative assessments students seemed to appreciate having a set of ‘go-to’ strategies to address research and writing expectations.

Theme 3: Create a Community of Practice

Our EdD students shared repeatedly the importance of their community of practice. The seminar structure created the space and time needed for legitimate peripheral practice and community-building. They experienced mutual engagement , joint enterprise , and shared repertoire within the larger seminar community as well as the smaller writing groups. Their mutual engagement required interaction, negotiation, and sustained relations where their own competence, and the competence of others emerged (Wenger, 1998 ). They gave and received peer feedback on written drafts and exchanged ideas about unfamiliar or complex topics. Across the seminar, our EdD students participated in the joint enterprise of traversing along a doctoral program path. Together, they held one another mutually accountable and worked collaboratively to improve their research skills and academic writing practice. Their shared repertoire of practice helped to bring “coherence to the melody of activities” (Wenger, 1998 , p. 82) and ways of doing the work. Together, they acquired and applied strategies, skills, and knowledge to aid in academic writing and conducting research.

We learned how important it was for our students to give and receive feedback from their peers. Because of some disagreement about the value of peer feedback, we were initially hesitant incorporate opportunities for extensive peer feedback (Man et al., 2018 ). However, students mentioned the desire for more opportunities within their communities of practice at several junctures in the formative assessments. Thus, we created many more situated learning opportunities for peer feedback.

Limitations

We acknowledge the limitations of our case study focused on EdD students’ and instructors’ experiences within the doctoral seminars. First, our sample size was small. To mitigate this limitation, we need to gather data across multiple cohorts. Because cohorts only start every two years, it would be necessary to work with other institutions. Second, the formative assessments measured the students’ perceptions—in this case, their development as writers and researchers. We could include alternative data collection methods (e.g., observation) to address this limitation. Third, the use of multiple formative assessments over several months could be viewed as a drawback. However, from a SoTL perspective, the number of assessments gathered over time was informative and lead to strengthening our instructional practices as we taught the yearlong seminar. Fourth, completion of seminar assignments (i.e., comprehensive paper drafts, IRB proposal) provided only a snapshot of the quality of student work. The use of evaluative measures (e.g., rubrics) could produce detailed information about students’ abilities as writers and researchers. Fifth, this research is situated in a United States EdD program in which nearly half of our students did not complete a research-focused master’s degree. Our findings might not apply to PhD programs or doctoral programs in other countries.

According to the annual Survey of Earned Doctorates, declines in student enrollment and graduation reflect the pandemic’s effect on doctoral student retention (Flaherty, 2021 ; National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics & National Science Foundation, 2021 ). This trend can have a lasting impact on scholarly endeavors, and research-informed practice. While these are PhD data, we assume the EdD data has a similar trend. To address the tears in our social, economic, and political fabric due to the pandemic, we need more EdD doctoral students to become educational leaders charged with making critical decisions that affect students, families, and overall community life. EdD programs occupy a much-needed role in contributing to research on practice and producing professionals whose practice is deeply informed by research (Amrein-Beardsley et al., 2012 ; Friesen & Jacobsen, 2021 ; Kumar & Dawson, 2013 ; Shulman et al., 2006 ; Taylor, 2007 ). Our study provides research-based strategies on how doctoral programs can be structured to build a foundation for students as researchers and writers that seems to put them on a solid path toward graduation and educational leadership.

What are our recommendations for building a program with a solid foundation for education doctoral students? First, develop assignments that match the kind of work students are expected to do for their dissertation. Incorporate scaled-down, low-stakes versions of authentic tasks such as a mini-research and poster project that align with the university’s IRB processes. By creating these types of assignments, faculty build student confidence, deepen their familiarity with academic expectations, and extend their content knowledge. Because writing is one of the most challenging aspects of graduate work (Caskey & Stevens, 2021 ; Cotterall, 2011 ; Sverdlik et al., 2018 ), faculty should take steps to support students in practicing worthwhile writing and research strategies and imagining themselves as competent writers and researchers.

Second, create a student community of practice. Give students the time to meet in writing groups, be held accountable, and share their work. Not only do experienced faculty need to model how students can grapple with key elements of writing and research, but students also need to work with their peers. Students can practice and view themselves as a community of scholarly practitioners who engage in academic conversations (Huff, 1999 ) over the feasibility of research and its application to complex problems. Although many EdD programs use a cohort model (Bista & Cox, 2014 ), we found that to get full benefit from the cohort model, it is important to foster the development of a community of practice as well.

Third, gather formative assessment data while teaching because these data can be pivotal for improving our practice and fostering timely student learning. The SoTL Framework (Felten, 2013 ) reinforces our stance that teaching is a work in progress, and the best way to make improvements is to gather data from students about what and how they are learning. The time and effort of formative data analysis informs and strengthens a faculty community of practice where they are mutually engaged in teaching together as well as developing a joint enterprise. A shared repertoire of instructional practices can make a difference for students. The series of formative assessments can help to document, adjust, and refine instructional practices in real time.

Finally, several aspects of our work could benefit from further research. First, we need to more closely examine how student communities of practice work. What are students doing during the allocated time? What are they learning about academic writing and research? Second, we need more comprehensive data on EdD student completion rates to better evaluate the effectiveness and impact of programs. Although Kumar and Dawson ( 2013 ) assessed the post program impact of the EdD, it would be good to have more research comparing EdD programs with post dissertation EdD leadership completion rate and impact. Because the EdD makes a significant contribution to practice, research on practice and practice informing research, identifying quality EdD programs would strengthen those outcomes.

Biographies

Ph.D., Professor Emerita, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, received her degree from Michigan State University in educational psychology. Her research focuses on ways to identify strategies to help graduate students and faculty become confident, skillful, and successful as writers, teachers, and researchers. She has written numerous articles and five books. Her most recent book is Write More, Publish More, Stess Less! Five key principles for a creative and scholarly practice , 2019.

Ph.D., Professor Emerita, College of Education at Portland State University holds a doctoral degree inCurriculum and Instruction from the University of South Florida. Her research areas span doctoral education, academic writing strategies, and middle grades education. She has experience as a doctoral program director, book series co-editor, journal editor, and writing coach. She is author or editor of 15 books and numerous peer-reviewed publications who shares her scholarly work at national and international conferences.

Declarations

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript. No funding, grants or other support were received.

All authors certify that the study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments as well as their university’s Institutional Review Board.

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Dannelle D. Stevens and Micki M. Caskey. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Dannelle D. Stevens, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Dannelle D. Stevens, Email: ude.xdp@dsnevets .

Micki M. Caskey, Email: ude.xdp@myeksac .

• Ahern K, Manathunga C. Clutch-starting stalled research students. Innovative Higher Education. 2004; 28 (4):237–254. doi: 10.1023/B:IHIE.0000018908.36113.a5. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aitchison C. Writing groups for doctoral education. Studies in Higher Education. 2009; 34 (8):905–916. doi: 10.1080/03075070902785580. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aitchison C, Lee A. Research writing: Problems and pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education. 2006; 11 (3):265–278. doi: 10.1080/13562510600680574. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Amrein-Beardsley A, Zambo D, Moore DW, Buss RR, Perry NJ, Painter SR, Carlson DL, Foulger TS, Olson K, Puckett KS. Graduates respond to an innovative educational doctorate program. Journal of Research on Leadership Education. 2012; 7 (1):98–122. doi: 10.1177/1942775112440630. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bastalich W, Behrend M, Bloomfield R. Is non-subject based research training a ‘waste of time,’ good only for the development of professional skills? An academic literacies perspective. Teaching in Higher Education. 2014; 19 (4):373–384. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2013.860106. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Billot, J., Rowland, S., Carnell, B., Amundsen, C., & Evans, T. (2017). How experienced SoTL researchers develop the credibility of their work. Teaching & Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal , 5 (1), 10.20343/teachlearninqu.5.1.8
• Bista K, Cox DW. Cohort-based doctoral programs: What we have learned over the last 18 years. International Journal of Doctoral Studies. 2014; 9 :1–20. doi: 10.28945/1941. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brookfield, S. (2017). Becoming a critically reflective teacher (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
• Brookfield, S., & Preskill, S. (2016). The discussion book: 50 great ways to get people talking . Jossey-Bass.
• Brown B, Jacobsen M, McDermott M, Simmons M, Eaton SE, Roberts V, Becker S. Research-based learning in an online course-based Master of Education program. International Journal on Innovations in Online Education. 2021 doi: 10.1615/IntJInnovOnlineEdu.2022041609. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Caffarella RS, Barnett BG. Teaching doctoral students to become scholarly writers: The importance of giving and receiving critiques. Studies in Higher Education. 2000; 25 (1):39–52. doi: 10.1080/030750700116000. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate. (2021). The Knowledge Forum on the EdD. https://www.cpedinitiative.org/
• Caskey MM, Stevens DD. Leveraging a cognitive apprenticeship instructional model to support doctoral student writing and program completion. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching. 2021; 32 (2):151–181. [ Google Scholar ]
• Caskey, M. M., Stevens, D. D., & Yeo, M. (2020). Examining doctoral student development of a researcher identity: Using the draw a researcher test. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice , 5 (1), 10.5195/ie.2020.92
• Church SE. Facing reality: What are doctoral students’ chances for success? Journal of Instructional Psychology. 2009; 36 (4):307–318. [ Google Scholar ]
• Collins, A. (2006). Cognitive apprenticeship. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 47–60). Cambridge University Press.
• Cotterall S. Doctoral students writing: Where’s the pedagogy? Teaching in Higher Education. 2011; 16 (4):413–425. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2011.560381. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among the five approaches . SAGE Publications.
• de Wit, H., & Altbach, P. G. (2021). Fighting for funding and against inequality post-COVID-19. International Higher Education , (105), 3–4. 10.36197/IHE.2021.105.01
• Delmas PM, Childs TN. Increasing faculty engagement in the early alert process. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 2021; 58 (3):283–293. doi: 10.1080/14703297.2020.1740102. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Felten P. Principles of good practice in SOTL. Teaching and Learning Inquiry. 2013; 1 (1):121–125. doi: 10.20343/teachlearninqu.1.1.121. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Finson KD. Drawing a scientist: What we do and do not know after fifty years of drawings. School Science and Mathematics. 2002; 102 (7):335–345. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb18217.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Finson, K. D. (2009). What drawings reveal about perceptions of scientists: Visual data operationally defined. In J. E. Pedersen & K. D. Finson (Eds.), Visual data: Understanding and applying visual data to research in education . Sense.
• Flaherty, C. (2021, December 3). The new PhDs. Inside Higher Ed . https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/12/03/survey-shows-annual-decline-number-phds-awarded
• Foot R, Crowe AR, Tollafield KA, Allan CE. Exploring doctoral student identity development using a self study approach. Teaching and Learning Inquiry. 2014; 2 (1):103–118. doi: 10.20343/teachlearninqu.2.1.103. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Foutz T, Singer KP, Navarro M, Thompson S. Investigating the extent that an integrative learning module broadens the perception of first-year students about the engineering profession. American Journal of Engineering Education. 2015; 6 (2):99–111. doi: 10.19030/ajee.v6i2.9505. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Friesen S, Jacobsen M. Collaborative design of professional graduate programs in education. International Journal of Designs for Learning. 2021; 12 (1):64–76. doi: 10.14434/ijdl.v12i1.25778. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Golde, C. M. (2006). Preparing stewards of the discipline. In C. M. Golde, & G. E. Walker (Eds.), Envisioning the future of doctoral education: Preparing stewards of the discipline Carnegie, essays on the doctorate (pp. 3–20). Jossey-Bass.
• Graff, G., & Birkenstein, C. (2018). They say / I say: The moves that matter in academic writing (4th ed.). W. W. Norton & Co.
• Grant K, Hackney R, Edgar D. Postgraduate research supervision: An ‘agreed’ conceptual view of good practice through derived metaphors. International Journal of Doctoral Studies. 2014; 9 :43–60. doi: 10.28945/1952. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guerin C, Carter S, Aitchison C. Blogging as community of practice: Lessons for academic development? International Journal for Academic Development. 2015; 20 (3):212–223. doi: 10.1080/1360144X.2015.1042480. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hilliard, A. T. (2012). Advising doctorate candidates and candidates’ views during the dissertation process. Journal of College Teaching & Learning , 10 (1), 7–12. 10.19030/tlc.v10i1.7525
• Huff, A. S. (1999). Writing for scholarly publication . SAGE Publications.
• Jacobsen M, Eaton SE, Brown B, Simmons M, McDermott M. Action research for graduate program improvements: A response to curriculum mapping and review. Canadian Journal of Higher Education. 2018; 48 (1):82–98. doi: 10.47678/cjhe.v48i1.188048. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jacobsen M, McDermott M, Brown B, Eaton SE, Simmons M. Graduate students’ research-based learning experiences in an online Master of Education program. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice. 2018; 15 (4):56–74. doi: 10.53761/1.15.4.4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kamler, B. (2008). Rethinking doctoral publication practices: Writing from and beyond the thesis. Studies in Higher Education , 33 (3), 283–294. 10.1080/03075070802049236
• Kumar S, Dawson K. Exploring the impact of a professional practice education doctorate in educational environments. Studies in Continuing Education. 2013; 35 (2):165–178. doi: 10.1080/0158037X.2012.736380. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation . Cambridge University Press.
• Lee A, Boud D. Writing groups, change and academic identity: Research development as local practice. Studies in Higher Education. 2003; 28 (2):187–200. doi: 10.1080/0307507032000058109. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lindsay, S. (2015). What works for doctoral students in completing their thesis? Teaching in Higher Education , 20 (2), 183–196. 10.1080/13562517.2014.974025
• Lovitts, B. E. (2001). Leaving the ivory tower: The causes and consequences of departure from doctoral study . Rowman & Littlefield.
• Man D, Xu Y, O’Toole JM. Understanding autonomous peer feedback practices among postgraduate students: A case study in a Chinese university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2018; 43 (4):527–536. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2017.1376310. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McAlpine L, Jazvac-Martek M, Hopwood N. Doctoral student experience in Education: Activities and difficulties influencing identity development. International Journal for Researcher Development. 2009; 1 (1):97–109. doi: 10.1108/1759751X201100007. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McClintock, C. (2004). The scholar-practitioner model. In A. DiStefano, K. E. Rudestan, & R. J. Silverman (Eds.), Encyclopedia of distributed learning . (pp. 394–397) SAGE.
• Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative Research: A guide to design and implementation (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass
• Mullen CA. The need for a curricular writing model for graduate students. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 2001; 25 (1):117–126. doi: 10.1080/03098770020030551. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Murakami-Ramalho E, Militello M, Piert J. A view from within: How doctoral students in educational administration develop research knowledge and identity. Studies in Higher Education. 2013; 38 (2):256–271. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2011.578738. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics & National Science Foundation (2021). Doctorate recipients from U.S. universities: 2020 (NSF 22–300). https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf22300/
• Olson K, Clark CM. A signature pedagogy in doctoral education: The leader-scholar community. Educational Researcher. 2009; 38 (3):216–221. doi: 10.3102/0013189X09334207. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Park C. War of attrition: Patterns of non-completion amongst postgraduate research students. Higher Education Review- London. 2005; 38 (1):48–53. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rai L, Lillis T. ‘Getting it write’ in social work: Exploring the value of writing in academia to writing for professional practice. Teaching in Higher Education. 2013; 18 (4):352–364. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2012.719157. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reis T, Grady M. Doctoral advising in COVID-19: Opportunity for change. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Perspectives in Higher Education. 2020; 5 (1):136–140. doi: 10.32674/jimphe.v5i1.2652. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shulman LS, Golde CM, Bueschel AC, Garabedian KJ. Reclaiming education’s doctorates: A critique and a proposal. Educational Researcher. 2006; 35 (3):25–32. doi: 10.3102/0013189X035003025. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Simpson, S., & Matsuda, P. K. (2008). Mentoring a long-term relationship: Situated learning in a doctoral program. In C. P. Casanave, & X. L. Li (Eds.), Learning the literacy practices of graduate school: Insiders’ reflections on academic enculturation (pp. 90–104). University of Michigan Press.
• Smallwood S. January 16). Doctor dropout. The Chronicle of Higher Education. 2004; 50 (19):A10. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stevens, D. D. (2019). Write more! Publish more! Stress less! Five key principles for a creative and sustainable scholarly practice . Stylus Publishing.
• Stevens, D. D., & Cooper, J. E. (2009). Journal keeping: How to use reflective writing for learning, teaching, professional insight, and positive change . Stylus Publishing.
• Sverdlik A, Hall N, McAlpine L, Hubbard K. The PhD experience: A review of the factors influencing doctoral students’ completion, achievement, and well-being. International Journal of Doctoral Studies. 2018; 13 :361–388. doi: 10.28945/4113. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taylor A. Learning to become researching professionals: The case of the doctorate of education. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. 2007; 19 (2):154–166. [ Google Scholar ]
• Teeuwsen P, Ratković S, Tilley SA. Becoming academics: Experiencing legitimate peripheral participation in part-time doctoral studies. Studies in Higher Education. 2014; 39 (4):680–694. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2012.729030. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thein, A. H., & Beach, R. (2010). Mentoring doctoral students towards publication within scholarly communities of practice. In C. Aitchison, & B. Kamler (Eds.), Publishing pedagogies for the doctorate and beyond (pp. 117–136). Routledge.
• Tierney AM, Aidulis D, Park J, Clark K. Supporting SoTL development through communities of practice. Teaching & Learning Inquiry. 2020; 8 (2):32–52. doi: 10.20343/teachlearninqu.8.2.4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tight M. Student retention and engagement in higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 2020; 44 (5):689–704. doi: 10.1080/0309877X.2019.1576860. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Umbach PD, Wawrzynski MR. Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education. 2005; 46 (2):153–184. doi: 10.1007/s11162-004-1598-1. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wellington J. More than a matter of cognition: An exploration of affective writing problems of post-graduate students and their possible solutions. Teaching in Higher Education. 2010; 15 (2):135–150. doi: 10.1080/13562511003619961. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity . Cambridge University Press.
• Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Zambo D, Buss RR, Zambo R. Uncovering the identities of students and graduates in a CPED-influenced EdD program. Studies in Higher Education. 2013; 40 (2):1–20. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2013.823932. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zambo R, Zambo D, Buss RR, Perry JA, Williams TR. Seven years after the call: Students’ and graduates’ perceptions of the re-envisioned EdD. Innovative Higher Education. 2014; 39 (2):123–137. doi: 10.1007/s10755-013-9262-3. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Search within the TIB website or find specialist literature and information in the TIB Portal.

The TIB Portal allows you to search the library's own holdings and other data sources simultaneously. By restricting the search to the TIB catalogue, you can search exclusively for printed and digital publications in the entire stock of the TIB library.

Book Review Article (English)

• ISSN: 1035-8811 , 1757-6547
• Article (Journal)  /  Electronic Resource

How to get this title?

Show citation formats, export, share and cite, pricing information, please choose your delivery country and your customer group.

*   Mandatory field

More details on this result

• Title: Book Review Article
• Published in: The Australian Journal of Anthropology ; 11, 1 ; 59-77
• Publisher: Blackwell Publishing Ltd
• New search for: Blackwell Publishing Ltd
• Publication date: 2000-04-01
• Size: 19 pages
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-9310.2000.tb00263.x
• Type of media: Article (Journal)
• Type of material: Electronic Resource
• Language: English
• Source: Wiley

Table of contents

Table of contents – volume 11, issue 1.

Show all volumes and issues

The tables of contents are generated automatically and are based on the data records of the individual contributions available in the index of the TIB portal. The display of the Tables of Contents may therefore be incomplete.

Similar titles

• Master of Arts in Religious Studies
• Admission Requirements
• Financial Aid
• Reisacher Summer Fellowship
• Reisacher Summer Fellowship – Application Cover Sheet
• Major in Religious Studies (Requirements for the BA)
• Honors Thesis and Departmental Honors in Religious Studies
• Minor in Religious Studies
• Earn a BA and MA in Five Years (Integrated Graduate Studies program)
• Why Study Religion?
• RLGN Fall 2024
• AFST Fall 2024
• Transfer Credit
• Calendar of Events
• How to Give

Shopping cart

College of Arts and Sciences

Department of religious studies.

• Alumni Spotlight

Undergraduate

• Major in Religious Studies (BA Requirements)
• Minor in African and African American Studies
• Reisacher Summer Fellowship - Application Cover sheet
• RLGN/JDST/AFST Courses for UGER
• Program in Jewish Studies

First of Five Finite Future Lectures: Bayo Akomolafe, “Death is a Distraction: Responsibility at Posthuman Precipices” 9/25/24

• September 17, 2024

What if it’s too late to avoid some kind of ecological catastrophe? Maybe it’s not, and we should be doing everything we can so that it isn’t. Still, what if it is? Shouldn’t we also be talking about that? What kind of a future do we want to create for ourselves on such a horizon? What might it mean to  collapse well ?

Bayo Akomolafe, the 2025 Hildegarde and Elbert Baker Visiting Scholar in the Humanities, presents “Death is a Distraction: Responsibility at Posthuman Precipices,” the first lecture in a series of free public lectures by internationally renowned scholars and public intellectuals made possible by the Henry Luce Foundation

Wednesday, September 25th at 6pm

Thwing Center, Excelsior Ballroom

11111 Euclid Ave. Cleveland, OH 44106

Free to the Public, no registration required

For more on Bayo Akomolafe visit: www.bayoakomolafe.net and  www.emergencenetwork.org

For more on Finite Futures visit: Finite Futures | h.lab | Case Western Reserve University

Rooted with the Yoruba people in a more-than-human world, Bayo Akomolafe is a father, life-partner, posthumanist thinker, essayist, poet, teacher, public intellectual. He is the author of two books, These Wilds Beyond our Fences: Letters to My Daughter on Humanity’s Search for Home and We Will Tell our Own Story: The Lions of Africa Speak. He is the founder of the Emergence Network, a global initiative that seeks to convene communities in new ways in response to the civilizational challenges we face as a species, and he is host of the postactivist course/festival/event, “We Will Dance with Mountains.” Dr. Akomolafe currently lectures at Pacifica Graduate Institute, California, and has held several other appointments at prestigious institutions, including the Aspen Institute, UC Berkeley’s Othering and Belonging Institute, the Schumacher Centre for New Economics, and the Council of an Uncertain Human Future. The recipient of several recent awards for his global contributions, he is also a member of the Club of Rome, a fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, and an ambassador for the Wellbeing Economy Alliance.

Main navigation

• Our Research
• Our Initiatives
• Open Science
• Ways to Give

Welcoming Stephanie Zandee to the Ludmer Centre and The Neuro

• Add to calendar
• Tweet Widget

Stephanie Zandee, PhD, recently joined McGill, where she will be an Assistant Professor in the Integrated Program in Neuroscience, and a researcher and the leader of the Zandee Lab. Joining the Montreal Neurological Institute, Prof. Zandee is the first new Principal Investigator to embark on the Single-Cell Genomic Brain Initiative, studying multiple sclerosis (MS) at the single-cell level. We had the chance to speak with her about her career thus far, and her ambitions in her new role.

Tell us about your research and your career so far.

I started my career at Radboud University (Nijmegen, the Netherlands), where I studied molecular life sciences. I really enjoyed the combination of chemistry and the relationship to disease biology, so I completed a master’s degree in Molecular Mechanisms of Disease. This is an international honours program, with a cohort of 24 people coming from all over the world each year. It was great to work with people from different backgrounds and cultures. As part of the program, I completed an internship at the University of Edinburgh. I was particularly interested in the intersection of neuroscience and immunology, as such MS was a highly relevant field of study. I studied MS lesion pathology and created a method to study up to 7 different markers simultaneously to understand lesions better. I became interested in anti-inflammatory regulatory T cells, and why they don’t behave normally in MS patients. I completed my doctorate deepening my understanding of this phenomenon. I also worked in mouse models of MS, using machine learning on immunofluroescent images of lesions.

For my postdoctoral studies, I joined the laboratory of Alexandre Prat, MD, PhD at the Centre de Recherche du CHUM at Université de Montréal (UdeM), to further explore the regulatory T cells migration over the blood—brain barrier. During my postdoctoral fellowship, I was leading the MS Brain Bank and rapid autopsy program, where I will continue to help out now. I also collaborated with Rubèn López-Vales, PhD , at Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, looking at cytokine IL-37 in MS mouse models. Though we don’t know much about this anti-inflammatory cytokine, we know it plays a role in autoimmune diseases and cancer. In the case of autoimmune diseases, people with higher levels of cytokine IL-37 tend to have better disease outcomes. In mouse models of MS, we found that higher expression of it was associated with less influx of immune cells into the spinal cord and brain, and less demyelination. In one of my postdoctoral projects, I looked at the effect of IL-37 on the blood-brain barrier. We also found cells in the Central Nervous System (CNS) that can make cytokine IL-37, potentially hinting at a self-regulatory mechanism to treat inflammation in the brain. This is what I am to investigate further with my lab.

How will the Zandee Lab integrate these findings and advance MS research?

The lab’s overarching goal will be to look at MS pathology, and the underlying factors and molecular underpinnings which govern the timing and the location of lesions. Following up on my findings with Prof. López-Vales, I want to study cytokine IL-37 during homeostasis and CNS inflammation to better understand its role in the brain and explore its potential as a treatment by triggering its expression. We will use a combination of techniques and modalities, such as single-cell RNA sequencing, neuroimaging and flow cytometry. In collaboration with researchers at Mila , we will be using multimodal analysis and machine learning to combine the findings from these different methods to try and discover underlying disease patterns.

Why do you want to use single-cell technology for your research?

Other techniques, such as bulk RNA sequencing, have been helpful and provide a lot of information. However, the patterns we extract from them include a combination of cell types in different states. We don’t know if the information comes from cells in homeostasis or in disease state. The benefit of single-cell sequencing is that we can tease apart these different cell clusters. Adding spatial sequencing, we could then see where these cells are in the tissue and in the actual lesion. Technology has evolved and we are now able to get spatial sequencing at a single-cell resolution. This combination of single-cell and spatial sequencing is ideal to understand what is happening, and where.

Was there a specific event that inspired you to study multiple sclerosis?

There are two that come to mind. During my internship and my PhD, I used confocal microscopy to develop a staining method looking at as many biomarkers in tissue as possible. I managed to design a method that can measure seven different markers simultaneously, which was a huge accomplishment. I was also learning how to use machine learning methods to take into account the vast amount of information coming out of this method. Looking at machine learning analysis, I wondered how we could do this for hundreds of thousands of molecules to really understand what these cells are doing, how they communicate with each other, and what causes lesion development. Realizing how machine learning could help science move forward was a big moment and I wanted to be a part of that.

Another big moment was when I accompanied a neuropathologist to see the brain of a human being, all while respecting the patient’s dignity and sacrifice. These individuals donate their brain to science to help others with the same disease. Holding that patient’s brain and seeing their lesions, you can’t get much closer to the disease. I know I can’t help that person anymore, but I hope I can contribute to their wish of granting a better life for those who are still alive.

Tell us about your collaborations to enhance the impact of your research.

I will continue collaborating with Dr. Prat at UdeM, working with brain tissues from the Brain Bank. At The Neuro, I will be collaborating closely with Adil Harroud, MD , Jack Antel, MD , Jo Anne Stratton, PhD , and also with Wayne Moore, MD . Dr. Harroud is a specialist in MS genetics, Dr. Antel is an expert in oligodendrocytes (the cells that produce the protective myelin sheath surrounding neurons), Prof. Stratton is more focused on ependymal cells, while Dr. Moore is studying contribution of the choroid plexus to lesion formation. The Zandee Lab will focus on differences between periventricular and deep white matter lesions. The five of us will bring our combined research in these different brain areas together, and it’s a great opportunity for us to get a more complete picture of what’s happening. At the Ludmer Centre, I’m very interested in working with Corina Nagy, PhD , and plan on using tissue from the Douglas Bell Canada Brain Bank. I’m very interested in doing nuclear sequencing, which Prof. Nagy and Prof. Stratton are both experts in. I look forward to all these collaborations.

How will your research contribute to the development of new treatments or diagnostic tools?

Studying the disease at the single-cell level will allow us to look at the disease states of the different cell types, and to better understand the disease progression and its different phases. It could potentially help us identify the pathways that are up- or down-regulated and give us a better candidate for what mechanism to target for treatment options. Many of the existing treatment options target the immune system, but none target the brain itself. If we can find the specific mechanism in the CNS or have a better understanding of what’s happening in the lesions, we can really improve the lives of the patients. At The Neuro, scientists are developing Positron Emission Tomography (PET) tracers for inflammation in the brain which can be used to follow patients over time and see the response to different treatment options in the future. If we can identify more non-invasive imaging-based targets through single-cell sequencing, that would be amazing.

Why did you decide to stay in Montreal and at McGill? There are a lot of collaborations happening across Canada. People are reaching out to help each other, and I really like this environment. At McGill, there are a lot of collaborations between the people in the MS field, like the ones I mentioned earlier. Montreal is a beacon of hope in neuroscience research, and there is a particularly good MS hub here. From clinical to neuroimaging, to single-cell and nuclear sequencing, there is a community of researchers looking at different aspects of MS. It’s the whole package.

What are your vision and your mission in building your own lab? What values do you want to pass on to the next cohort of scientists?

I want to create a space where we are continually learning from each other. It’s great to see the student trajectory from when they first enter the lab, start to gain confidence, and come up with their own interpretation and ideas. Each new cohort brings new ideas and perspectives, and it’s a privilege to witness this journey as they become their own scientists. I’ve trained a lot of students in the past, and I look forward to welcoming my first master’s student, Sara Chafik, this fall. In the Zandee Lab, I want to cultivate a passion for multidisciplinary approaches in science. More and more, we see the involvement of multiple systems in different disease mechanisms. We need to start looking over the bounds and borders of our own field for different experts to come together, learn from each other and expand our knowledge to more than one system. I would like my trainees to think outside the box and learn from other disciplines.

Anything else you’d like to mention?

I’m thankful to everybody who’s helped me along the way. I’ve had great teachers and mentors and amazing opportunities. Sometimes these were my supervisors, but there were also people from other labs or just a bit ahead of me in their career. I’m part of the International Women in Multiple Sclerosis , a society where different researchers support each other. I first joined as a mentee and am now in a place to offer mentorship. It’s nice to be able to receive support, but to also be able to pay it forward. Of course, your lab supervisors are the obvious mentors and will help you find your path; all these other mentors are just as important for you to progress in your career. You don’t become an assistant professor overnight - it takes a village.

Department and University Information

Ludmer centre.

• Ways To Give