Case Study Research Topic 6

Response 6-1

The audience preferences will dictate that form of my case study report. I anticipate my audience being other lecturers, instructors, and administrators within the postsecondary environment. It is not unwise to assume that my audience would also be my dissertation committee. I am basing much of this on my own experience and knowing a common critique of proposed actions within the university. I aim to present the material with a lot of evidence. So often, we complain that things are given to us without having any scientific evidence. There is also not a clear indication of the procedures or who the subjects were. I aim to be clear and concise about how I implemented the study and how I propose to implement it on a larger scale within the university. This connection is very important. I will also keep it concise as administration does not often take the time to read long reports and will get lost in the details. I will include bulleted points to highlight important aspects.

Response 6-2

I plan on using a linear-analytic structured approach to my case study report. This starts with a description of the study, of the problem, and a review of literature. From there, I would report on the data collected, the analysis, and major findings. I believe that this would also speak to my audience who is most used to this layout in reading research. In fact, we even teach classes on how to read scientific research and this is the most common structure encountered.

Response 6-3

In Yin (2014), he reviews over what makes an exemplary case study. First, it must be significant, meaning there is something unique about this study and/or population. Considering a gap in research on mentoring with at-risk undergraduate students, this would satisfy this aspect. The case study must be complete, meaning that it fully explains the phenomenon. I do not feel that I would declare my study as done without fully exploring all found themes and codes. The study must consider other perspectives, which I anticipate exploring during my analysis. I will utilize all documentation, or evidence, in order to come up with my findings. Lastly, the study must be engaging. This will be the trickiest part since that will fall on my skill as a writing to captivate my audience.

Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

 

Case Study Research Topic 5

Response 5-1

After the formal mentoring concludes, I will collect the fieldnotes from the students. These, along with my journal, will be analyzed using grounded theory. Grounded theory is an inductive method looks at generating theory based on existing data (Glaser& Strauss, 1967). That is, rooted or “grounded” in the data rather than a theory that is preconceived. In qualitative data analysis, there are three levels of coding in grounded theory. The first is open, meaning breaking the data into pieces. The second is axial, or putting the data back together into defined categories, and the last is selective, or integrating the key categories to inform the theory. I will review the notes using open ethnographic coding. I will then review them using focused coding. Codes and then emerging themes will emerge. That is, the notes and journal will be read, re-read, creation of initial codes, identifying themes and organizing codes, and lastly to create a thematic map.

Glaser, E.G., and Strauss, A.L., (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Weidenfeld and Nicplson, London, England.



Response 5-2

Pattern matching is when one compares two patterns in order to determine if they are the same or if they differ (Yin, 2014). This is the main procedure of theory-testing with cases in a case study. Testing matches an observed pattern with what we would expect and seeing if they align, or match, with each other. As I review the fieldnotes in particular, I will see if the students' perspectives "match" my hypothesis that mentoring will increase the levels of self-efficacy and have a positive impact on college-going attitudes.

Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Response 5-3

Explanation building will be used to answer my research question using the information gained from the feildnotes, survey, and journal entries. I aim to give an adequate, and accurate explanation of how mentoring impacts self-efficacy. There is an assumption that it does impact it, but it is not known how. I will first challenge the assumption using the notes to determine that there is a difference, and from there explain how and why.

Case Study Research Topic 4

Response 4-1

In order to answer my research question, it is important to have information from the student's perspectives on their college-going experiences and barriers. This will be answered by having the students complete fieldnotes of their experiences and opinions after each meeting. Additionally, I plan on writing journal entries after each mentoring meeting to see if my observations align with the students'. Also, I anticipate using a survey to measure perceptions of college-going barriers as well to help with the validity of the study.

Response 4-2

As mentioned above, I plan on using documentation, direct observations, and participant observations as my sources of data. Documentation will include the survey. Direct observations will be my own journal entries, and participant observations will be the field notes. I plan on using the survey data to show the overall barrier perspectives as pre- and post- tests. The fieldnotes will serve as a way to explain those results. My journal entries will be used to enhance any information found at that point.

Response 4-3

Yin (2014) proposes to develop a case study database using the six sources of data: documentation, archival records, interviews, direct observations, participant observations, and physical artifacts. The three mentioned in 4-2 are the ones that I will have access to and would fit for the question. I do not have a need for archival records to determine self-efficacy, nor would I need to collect any physical artifacts.

Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Case Study Research Topic 3

Response 3-1

There are five desired attributes necessary to be a case study researcher (Yin, 1014). First is to ask good questions and to interpret the answers fairly. This can be tricky to determine what questions to ask and in what way to ask them without soliciting bias. I have practiced developing questions in previous classes and with the help of my peers who have piloted them, I feel that I have gotten better at this. I do think that this is something that I will continue to work on. I to feel that I do a better job at interpretation. This practice I received in a class last semester where I was surprised by the findings. I piloted a focus group with some students and their responses and subsequent themes were borderline shocking to me. I did not anticipate the resulting themes, which shows that I did not block things that did not fit into my preconceived narrative. This relates to be a good listener, the next attribute. The third one is to stay adaptive. I have struggled with this throughout the program since my approach to my PoP changed so much. It was difficult to keep changing things so frequently. As I have delved further into my proposal, I find that I am adapting more easily and quickly. I am less married to strict ideas or theories. The fourth attribute is to have a firm grasp of the issues being studied. This I have developed as I developed by research questions and my literature review. That is, I was able to determine what the gaps in the literature were and where my project fits in. The last attribute is to conduct the research ethically. I feel that this is not an issue for me. I have developed skills as an ethical researcher throughout the years, including as the HIPAA trainer for Gila County, instructor for a clinical research course, and carrying out various research projects.

Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Response 3-2

My proposed case study focuses on at-risk students. There are several characteristics that make it more difficult for Public Health students from traditionally underrepresented backgrounds to complete undergraduate programs, let alone continue to additional schooling. This study will be focusing on potential improvements at the micro-level, and more specifically, ways that ASU can positively impact self-efficacy and success among our at-risk students. Thus, the purpose of this study is to understand how a mentoring program affects the self-efficacy of at-risk students and how mentoring and self-efficacy relate to perceptions of college-going success of at-risk students in Public Health and closely-related fields. The study will provide insight from the perspective of both students and a faculty mentor on how to improve at-risk students’ abilities and likelihood of degree completion.

For the audience, the results of this study will be beneficial to researchers and instructors in diversity education and health-related fields, educational policy-makers in general, and help guide professional practice that will support the learning of high risk students. The findings from this study will help those decision-makers consider and implement innovative tools for serving these students to promote the achievement at the university.

Response 3-3

Within my case study, I plan on collecting fieldnotes from the students after each mentoring meeting, which should number eight. This will not confine the students to a survey. I anticipate working around the students' schedules and availability to meet for each session.

Additionally, since I will be their mentor, they may feel the need to censor their notes as they will be submitting them to me for analysis. To alleviate this concern, I aim to anonymize the notes by having them sending it to Dr. Molly Ott, the Principle Investigator. Dr. Ott will assign a randomized number to the files and remove any identifying information before sending the file to me. I will then store this information in a locked desk in a locked office, thus satisfying any ethical requirement.

Case Study Research Topic 2

Response 2-1

The first proposition would be an exploratory case study ("Understanding", 2017). That is to show that further investigation is necessary. The question of how a mentoring program influences the self-efficacy in at-risk undergraduate students is fairly novel. We know that self-efficacy will influence behavior and have various impacts on grade point averages and other school measures of success. We do not know what the influence of mentoring will have on self-efficacy, especially not in this population. If I chose to do an exploratory study, it will be used as a preliminary project that will hopefully justify the need for a larger project later on. Looking at types of mentoring, who is the mentor, its structure, and so forth, may all be studied in further detail.

The second proposition is an instrumental case study ("Understanding", 2017). This is one that looks at a case to gain insights into a phenomenon. The focus would be on the relationship between mentoring itself and the students. Then it would look at why some students have higher self-efficacy levels compared to others.

Understanding the Different Types of Case Studies. (2017, August). Retrieved from https://www.universalclass.com/articles/business/case-studies-types.htm

Response 2-2

I was planning on using the Self-Efficacy Beliefs Theory as the basis of this case study. Self-efficacy beliefs (or theory) helps to understand how people feel, think, motivate themselves, and behave (Bandura, 1994). According to Albert Bandura (1977), who originally proposed the theory, self-efficacy is an individual’s confidence about the chances of successfully accomplishing a task. Bandura premised that people with higher levels of self-efficacy are more likely to achieve favorable outcomes. Bandura (1994) looks at four processes within this theory: cognitive, motivational, affective, and selection. Cognitive process is influenced by one’s appraisal of their own capabilities by setting personal goals. The higher an individual’s perceptions of his or her capability, the higher will be the goal. Motivational process is how one will motivate themselves and thus their actions. Motivation process is based on the expectation that a certain outcome will come out of a behavior, and this behavior relates to the original goal. Affective process is one’s beliefs in their capabilities. The higher the self-efficacy, the more that they feel they will have control over their situation and circumstances and thus they will believe they have a higher capacity to achieve the goal. Selection process is how the person conducts their life. The theory premises that people’s choices, including whether to attempt actions to achieve goals and what goals to set for themselves is influenced by their self-efficacy. This case study aims to explain the phenomenon that mentoring has on self-efficacy. This "how" is key and can be explained using this theory.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.

Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In R.J. Corsini (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Psychology, 2(3), 368-369.

Response 2-3

Since I am leaning to an exploratory case study, I anticipate using a multiple case approach. That is I have several subjects/students that I would study and use them to inform a larger project later on. In order to inform this approach, I can use various studies on mentoring and self-efficacy in other populations, such as high school students. I would be interested in knowing what other variables may be playing a part in the levels of self-efficacy. For example, if those with seeing financial barriers as a large problem have different levels compared to those who do not perceive a strong social support within this institution.

 

Case Study Research Topic 1

Response 1-1

Since I am still working on my dissertation proposal, I will be developing a question relating to that. I will be evaluating a mentoring program on students here at Arizona State University. These students would be at-risk students majoring in Public Health or a health-related program, such as Health Education and Health Promotion. For purposes of this case study and assignment, “at-risk” will be defined as any student who is first-generation, identifies as an underrepresented racial or ethnic minority, is eligible for federal Pell grants (which are provided to individuals designated as low-income), or is identified by CHS as being in high financial need. I want to see how participation in a mentoring program would influence these students. In particular, I wanted to look at the relationship of mentoring with self-efficacy and barriers to finishing college. My question is:

How does participation in a mentoring program influence at-risk Public Health students’ self-efficacy and their perceptions of barriers to finishing college?
 Response 1-2
In Yin (2014), he states that:
           "a case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon (the 'case')
           in depth and within its real-world context, especially when the boundaries between
           phenomenon and context may not be clearly evidence. A case study inquiry copes with the
           technically distinctive situation in which there will be many more variables of interest than
           data points, and as a result relies on multiple sources of evidence, with data needing to
           converge in a triangulating fashion, and as a result benefits from the prior development of
           theoretical propositions to guide data collection and analysis."

Using this two-fold definition, I can argue that the case study work I am considering meetings this criteria. First, I am looking at current students in my program within ASU. I am not looking at previous or historical data. Perspectives and how these perspectives influence behavior may be difficult to ascertain when looking at a large scale data collection. Case studies will allow for a much more in-depth evaluation of the phenomenon. A narrative will need to be developed on an individual basis rather than as a group. There will likely be multiple influences and thus variables, which will only be able to be examined through a case study approach. 

Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Response 1-3

This question of "how does participation in a mentoring program influence at-risk Public Health students’ self-efficacy and their perceptions of barriers to finishing college?" directly relates to my epistemological perspective. My theoretical framework uses the Self-Efficacy Theory. Self-efficacy beliefs (or theory) helps to understand how people feel, think, motivate themselves, and behave (Bandura, 1994). According to Albert Bandura (1977), who originally proposed the theory, self-efficacy is an individual’s confidence about the chances of successfully accomplishing a task. Bandura premised that people with higher levels of self-efficacy are more likely to achieve favorable outcomes. This is key in evaluating how something, in this case the mentoring program, can influence perspectives and thus behaviors. This theory looks specifically at HOW people feel and respond to things.  

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.

Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In R.J. Corsini (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Psychology, 2(3), 368-369.

DFS Week 8 Reaction

I have worked about 10 hours this week.

I have been working on the wrap up of my work, analyzing the interviews. I did not meet officially with Jason this week. We have been communicating via email and had a networking happy hour on Tuesday.

The networking happy hour was similar to the last; however, much bigger! I met people from all different program areas and divisions. One of the people from the last happy hour and I interviewed was there, so it was nice to see a friendly face. He also introduced me to people as the evening went on. As silly as this sounds, I have to motivate myself quite a bit to get to these events. Once I am there, I am glad I went, but many times at the end of a long work day, going out and doing more work-related activities is a chore. I was exhausted when I got home! It is important; however, to be known and seen at these events. Leaders need to be shown as part of the group and human (something outside of the confines of an office). It allows leaders to see their team as individuals as well.

I expect to work on project with Jason through the rest of the summer. We both feel like there is more that can be explored with the work. Revisiting the original questions, one of them was to determine what the gaps were and how to address them. We have definitely identified some gaps, but the trickier part unsurprisingly is how to address them. This requires a bit more strategy and planning. If there is anything I have learned from reading Change Wars and Turnaround Leadership for Higher Education this semester is that it takes a lot of forethought in order to make successful change (Fullan & Scott, 2009; Hargreaves & Fullan, 2009).

Fullan, M., & Scott, G. (2009). Turnaround leadership for higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

 

Heargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2009). Change wars. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.