76 satellite schools. The next section of the chapter discusses the case study research approach that was adopted in this study.
77 Furthermore, McMillan and Schumacher (2006, p. 395) aver that, “a case study design focuses on one phenomenon, which the researcher chooses to understand in-depth regardless of the number of sites or participants for the study.” Whereas, Gerring (2004, p. 342) states case study research involves, “intensive study of a single unit for the purpose of understanding a larger class of (similar) units … observed at a single point in time or over some delimited period of time.” Therefore, “case studies provide an opportunity for the researcher to gain a deep holistic view of the research problem, and may facilitate describing, understanding and explaining a research problem or situation” (Baxter and Jack, 2008, p.
545).
In addition, Thompson (2010, p. 40) states, “case studies are good for describing and expanding the understanding of a phenomenon and are often used to study people and Programmes particularly in education. A case study can offer a refinement of understanding…” Therefore, this study’s adoption of the case study approach was intended to understand the social capital of land reform beneficiaries and communal famers on satellite schools. Furthermore, Stake (1995, p. 8) elaborates, “We take a particular case and come to know it well, not primarily as to how it is different from others but what it is, what it does.”
Thus, a case study approach has a strength of allowing the researcher to know a particular case intimately to a larger extent.
In this study the researcher chose the case study method because it involves the assemblage of all-embracing data in order to produce an in-depth understanding of the unit being analysed (Borg & Gall, 1989). Yin (1994, p. 31) further argues, “… the major rationale for using this (case study design) is when your investigation must cover both a particular phenomenon and the context within which the phenomenon is occurring.” Hence, a case study was considered appropriate for this study as the researcher sought to interrogate the phenomenon of social capital in the perspective of land reform in Zimbabwe. The researcher wanted to study the land reform beneficiaries and communal farmers in their natural setting and therefore the case study resonates with his desire to do so (Babbie, 2008; Corbetta, 2011).
Furthermore, Yin (2003, p. 1) states, “in general, case studies are the preferred strategy when
‘how’ or ‘why’ questions are being posed, when the investigator has little control over events
78 and when the focus is a contemporary phenomenon within some real-life context.” Hence, since the critical questions in this study on the social capital of land reform beneficiaries and communal farmers were ‘how’ and ‘why’ the researcher elected to employ a case study research approach. In addition, Rossman and Rallis (2003, p. 105) state, “the strength of case studies is their complexity, and their use of multiple sources to obtain multiple perspectives.”
Thus, in this study the researcher utilized multiple sources to generate multiple perspectives at grass roots level, that is from farmers, village heads and school heads.
In addition, there are different case study typologies. Yin (2014) reveals that there is the single case design as well as the multiple case design. Yin (2004, p. 6) explains “The term
“case study” can refer to either single-or multiple-case studies. They represent two types of case study designs.” Furthermore, Yin (2014, p. 11) states,
“The single case design is appropriate when the case: is critical to test a specific theory with a clear set of propositions; represents an extreme or unusual case; is representative of a situation; reveals a situation; is longitudinal. A multiple case design is particularly relevant for testing the conclusions, avoiding extraneous variation, providing a larger picture of a complex phenomenon, comparing different studies.”
This study in its endeavour to compare the social capital influences of land reform beneficiaries and communal farmers on satellite schools utilised a multiple case study design according to Yin (2004). However, Creswell (2013) terms the same design, a bounded multisite case study. Creswell (2013, p. 97) avers a
“case study is a qualitative approach in which the investigator explores a real life, contemporary bounded system (a case) or multiple bounded systems (cases) over time through detailed, in-depth data collection involving multiple sources of information…, the unit of analysis in a case study might be multiple cases (multisite study) or a single case (a within site study).”
Therefore, this study -guided by this conceptualization of the case study approach by Creswell (2013) adopted a multisite study involving two communities and their respective satellite schools. Yin (2004, p. 6) argues, “having multiple cases might help you to strengthen
79 the findings from your entire study—because the multiple cases might have been chosen as:
replications of each other, deliberate and contrasting comparisons, or hypothesized variations.” In this study, the two case were chosen as deliberate and contrasting comparisons to reveal disparities in the social capital influences of land reform beneficiaries and communal farmers on satellite schools. Furthermore, Yin (2004, p. 25) reveals,
The motive underlying the selection of multiple-cases is not different from that used by scientists initially defining a series of experiments. As with multiple experiments, multiple-case studies are not selected to represent some universe but instead to pursue a logical framework of inquiry.
Thus, it follows in this study that the researcher utilised Tiro and Sambo case studies to follow a rational outline of inquiry.
A multisite case study approach was used to study the social capital influences on two satellite schools and their respective communities namely Tiro (Ward 6) and Sambo (Ward 18) which are both located in the Masvingo district. These two communities wereselected by the researcher because of their participation in the construction of satellite schools. These two communities were used as case studies due to the researcher’s discernment that they were going to bring to the fore the phenomena under study through a social capital lens. The phenomenon under study pertains to a comparison of social capital influences of two different communities therefore, each type of community is represented. The study compared two communities of land reform beneficiaries (Tiro) and communal farmers (Sambo). Tiro and Sambo were both included in this study due to their differences in the structure of land ownership. Sambo: by virtue of being a communal area the land is owned by the state through the Communal Land Act of 1983, as amended in 2002. Whereas, Tiro community is composed of land reform beneficiaries and the land is owned individually through offer letters received by the individual farmers. In addition, the disparities in land ownership between the two communities are also accompanied by differences in the size of the farms or land owned by the land reform beneficiaries and communal farmers. The Tiro land reform beneficiaries own larger farms as compared to their counterparts in communal areas such as Sambo. Disparities between the two cases is also extended to wealth, as has already been alluded in this thesis (under Section 2.6) communal farmers are food insecure. It is against
80 this background of disparities in these two communities that the researcher revealed the differences in the social capital influences of land reform beneficiaries and communal farmers on satellite schools. However, Yin (2004, p. 8) advises, “none of the cases should be considered “controls” for each other, in the same sense of the term “control group,” because in case study research you do not manipulate “treatments” or control any real-life events.”
Hence, in this study neither Tiro community nor Sambo community were regarded as a control group. The studying of Tiro and Sambo communities as part of a multiple case study helped the researcher,
to respond to a common criticism of single-case studies—that they are somehow unique and idiosyncratic and therefore have limited value beyond the circumstances of the single case…have a modest amount of comparative data, even if the cases were chosen to be confirmatory cases….(Yin, 2004, p.8).
Therefore, the selection of two cases can be reasoned to have allowed the researcher to address the major shortcoming of single-case studies and thus enhance the strength of the research design to a larger extent. The next section of the methodology chapter unravels the study sites used in this research.