CHAPTER FIVE
5.4.2 Advantages and Limitations of Case Study
According to Neale et al (2006, p. 4) the case study provides more detailed information than what is available through other methods, such as surveys. Case
172
studies produce first- hand information because it occurs in a natural setting (Sarantakos, 2005). A complete picture is provided because data is collected from multiple methods (that is, interviews, observation, document reviews, questionnaires). For this study the researcher chose the case study because she was interested in obtaining a complete story of the implementation of the road safety education programme. This involved the educator‟s experiences of implementing the programme, the factors that enabled or restrained the implementation process. The researcher was also interested to know whether the students were acquiring the necessary knowledge to make them safe and responsible road users. Not only does the case study have advantages, it also has limitations and pitfalls, which is described below. This served as a guide for the conduct of the research project.
It can be lengthy because it provides detailed information about the case. The five teachers provided a lengthy account of their implementation experiences. The researcher had to ensure that these rich in-depth accounts were presented in a manner that will hold and capture the reader‟s attention.
There is a concern that case studies lack rigor. Neale et al (2006) states that case studies are viewed, as being less rigorous than other research methods. The reason advanced for this is that qualitative research is still considered to be unscientific and that case study researchers have not been systematic in their data collection (Flyvbjerg, 2006). Results relate to the unit of analysis only and there is no room for inductive generalizations (Sarantakos, 2005). Case study researchers have also been accused of allowing bias in their findings, because it entails personal impressions.
The case study is too subjective, allowing too much scope for the researcher‟s own interpretations (Flyvbjerg, 2006). Hence there is no assurance of objectivity, validity and reliability (Sarantakos, 2005; Flvybjerg, 2006). Access to the field is limited and also to the personal and subjective information that is the basis of case studies.
Another limitation is that the interviewer effect may cause distortions, even the presence of the researcher can be destructive, states Sarantakos (2005). Flyvbjerg (2006) states that the bias toward verification is general, but that the alleged deficiency of the case study and other qualitative methods is that more room is allowed for the researcher‟s subjective and arbitrary judgments than any other method.
173
Another complaint about the case study is that it is not generalizable. A common complaint about the case study is that it is not possible to generalise from one case to another. It is also stated that case studies have been prone to overgeneralization because a few examples are chosen to represent the population and they may not be a typical representation of the population (Neale et al., 2006). Generalization, is a standard aim in quantitative research, according to Silverman (2010), because it is achieved by statistical sampling procedures, which allows the researcher to make inferences about the whole population. Silverman (ibid), further state that such sampling procedures are, however, usually unavailable in qualitative research. This concern about the validity of information, is shared by Terre Blanche et al (2006), who states that casual links are difficult to test and that generalisations cannot be made from single case studies. Silverman (2010) emphasises that representativeness is of perennial concern to case study researchers. In this regard Babbie & Mouton (2006) recommend that the number of case study sites should be increased to overcome this problem. Multi-site case studies is also advocated by (Gay, Mills &
Airasion, 2009, p. 430), because it improves the generalizability of the research. For the purpose of this study, five primary schools were chosen because they demonstrated the phenomenon that the researcher was interested in and because it was easily accessible and the researcher knew that she would obtain the relevant data that the researcher was interested in soliciting. Flyvbjerg (2006) states that the advantage of the case study is that it can “close in” on real life situations and test views directly in relation to phenomena as they unfold in practice.
Two of the schools were schools that were formerly under the Department of Education and Training (DET). The one school is a rural school that caters for the local farming community. This school consists of one block with a pre-fab room that serves as the principal‟s office. This school participates in the DOT scholar patrol programme. Regional scholar patrol competitions are held annually. This school is one of the top three performing schools where this programme is concerned. The principal and the teacher participant in this study avidly supports the DOT road safety programmes. This school is neat and well maintained. It also has a well maintained vegetable garden that is used for the schools feeding scheme. For the purpose of this study this school will referred to as school A. The classroom that I had observed a lesson in had both Grade Four and Grade Five learners.
174
School B is situated in a township. This school is also well maintained and neat. It has a well maintained garden and the courtyard area was paved. This is a large primary school. It is one of the very few primary schools in the area that has a fully functional computer room where learners are taught computer literacy. This school is situated in a fairly densely populated area.
School C is a former House of Delegates School. Prior to 1994 it catered for only Indian learners. The parents of these learners were employed mainly by the hatcheries that dominate in that area. The school student demographics has subsequently changed, but the principal and the teachers are still predominantly Indian. The classroom that I had observed the lesson in had 42 learners.
School D and E are situated in a predominately Indian area. School D is regarded as being the best school in the area. Admission to this school is sought after. The school has developed a good reputation for having an excellent teaching and learning ethos.
The infrastructure is excellently maintained. The classrooms have air conditioning units that were sponsored by private companies and individuals.
Two other schools were also considered for this project. One was a school situated in a township (School F) and the other school was a former model C (School G), a school that is situated in an affluent suburb.
I had telephonically arranged meetings with the principals of all seven schools. I also explained to them that I would like the Heads of Department to be present at this meeting. The Head of Department will be able to assist with liaising with the identified educator for an appropriate time and date for the lesson observation and interview. The Principals had agreed to meet. The Principals had given me time and dates for the meetings. During the meeting I had explained to the Principals and the Heads of Department the purpose of the visit. The Principals and Heads of Department gave me times and dates for the school visits. After the meeting I left all the necessary documents with the principal, so that he could give them to the chosen teacher.The Principal, the educator and learners were required to sign the consent forms. The Principals assured me that they would be ready when I next visited the schools. Five of the seven schools had agreed to be part of this study. The two schools mentioned above did not participate. At school (G), the Head of Department
175
(HoD) informed me that the teachers did not want to be disturbed because they already had too much work to do. She assured me that they were implementing the road safety education programme as per the course packs. She also informed me that she and the teachers felt that road safety education was very important. She also informed me that the course packs were easy to use and that the teachers had no problems in implementing them in the classroom. She also informed me that all the teachers had completed all the lessons in the course packs because they were good lessons as well as easy to implement.
At School (F), the HOD and Principal did not attend the meeting because they had to attend a SADTU meeting on that day. The Deputy Principal was tasked with meeting me. He and two administration staff members were the only two people present at the school on that day. The learners were also dismissed early. He was quite amenable to me coming back to the school for the purpose of this study. He also gave me a date and time for the subsequent visit. On the day of the scheduled observation, the principal was again not available. The Deputy Principal was there to receive me. I had to wait for half an hour before the HoD came to the office. She did not look very happy about being called. The Deputy Principal suggested that I accompany her to the staff-room to discuss this matter with her. I was aware that two teachers from this school had attended the training workshop and that they were issued with the course packs. After chatting about the programme, she informed me that they had not implemented the programme. She also informed me that the teachers that attended the workshop did not cascade the information to the staff. The reasons that she had advanced were that teachers had too much work to do, they did not have time to implement this because it was not compulsory and examinable. It was regarded as being extra work because it was from the Department of Transport and not from the Department of Education. Subsequently the teachers did not see the value or the merit in implementing this programme. She iterated that learning about road safety was important, but that they did not have time to implement it. She also admitted that she did not look at the packs and does not know what the content of the course packs are because she did not have time to do so. She said that priority was given to directives from the Department of Education.
176
There is no method that is totally free of problems, and case studies are no exception.
They may have problems in meeting the requirements of objective methodologies, just as quantitative methods have problems in meeting the requirements of interpretivist designs. Sarantakos (2005) argues that overall case studies are the most useful and popular method and it as legitimate as any other research method. This assertion is given credibility by (Yin, 2003 as cited in Gay et al., 2009) that case study research is an all-encompassing method covering design, data collection techniques, and specific approaches to data analysis.