Free accessResearch articleFirst published online 2012-6
The Research Process in a Multi-level Mixed-Methods Case Study: International Organization Headquarters and Field Employee Perspectives of a Program in Southern Sudan
This article provides an overview of the methods and data-collection process for a multi-level mixed-methods case study. Data for the study were gathered through phone interviews and electronic surveys from individuals working on the same educational program in Southern Sudan, though some were supporting the program from outside the country. The primary comparison was to examine the varied perceptions held by staff involved in a program, that depended on whether they worked in the field, the program office or the international or regional headquarters. This article examines mixed-method research using remote data collection. It also examines how previous experience working on a different program in Southern Sudan helped to prepare for this study.
References
1.
AndersonA.MartoneG.RobinsonJ.RognerudE. & Sullivan-OwomoyelaJ. (2006) Standards Put to the Test: implementing the INEE Minimum Standards for education in emergencies, chronic crisis and early reconstruction. Network Paper No. 57. London: Overseas Development Institute: Humanitarian Practice Network. http://www.odihpn.org/report.asp?id=2858
2.
BarnettM. & FinnemoreM. (2004) Rules for the World: international organizations in global politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
DaviesL. (2004) Education and Conflict: complexity and chaos. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
6.
DengF.M. (1995) War of Visions: conflict of identities in the Sudan. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
7.
DengL.B. (2006) Education in Southern Sudan: war, status and challenges of achieving Education For All goals, Respect: Sudanese Journal for Human Rights' Culture and Issues of Cultural Diversity, 4, 1–27.
8.
EdwardsM. & HulmeD. (1998) Too Close for Comfort? The Impact of Official Aid on Non-governmental Organizations, Current Issues in Comparative Education, 1(1), 6–28.
9.
EdwardsM.HulmeD. & Save the Children Fund (1996) Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO performance and accountability in the post-cold war world. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press.
PhillipsD. & OchsK. (2003) Processes of Policy Borrowing in Education: some explanatory and analytical devices, Comparative Education, 39(4), 451–461. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305006032000162020
17.
RappleyeJ. & PaulsonJ. (2007) Educational Transfer in Situations Affected by Conflict: towards a common research endeavour, Research in Comparative and International Education, 2(3), 252–271. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2007.2.3.252
18.
RubinH.J. & RubinI.S. (2005) Qualitative Interviewing: the art of hearing data, vol. 2. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
Save the Children (2006) Rewrite the Future: education for children in conflict affected countries. Cambridge: Cambridge House.
SrivastavaP. (2006) Reconciling Multiple Researcher Positionalities and Languages in International Research, Research in Comparative and International Education, 1(3), 210–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2006.1.3.210
23.
Steiner KhamsiG. (2010) The Politics and Economics of Comparison, Comparative Education Review, 54(3), 323–342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/653047
24.
SuzukiN. (1998) Inside NGOs: managing conflicts between headquarters and the field offices in non-governmental organizations. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
25.
TeddlieC. & YuF. (2007) Mixed Methods Sampling: a typology with examples, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 77–100. doi:10.1177/2345678906292430
26.
VavrusF. & BartlettL. (2010) Critical Approaches to Comparative Education: vertical case studies from Africa, Europe, the Middle East, and the Americas. London: Macmillan.
