In retrospect, Theme 6 - But is quality all there is?

The last stepstone, before the summit!

Ahh, the last theme, the last seminar and the last retrospective reflection. I am actually quite sad that this course is over. It has really introduced a nice variety to the various ways I usually think and go about my studies. Although I think the course could have done with slightly less topics, instead letting the students delve deeper into just a few of them, I have once again been reminded that knowledge can be so many things.


Now, the regular question is at hand; what did I learn during this final seminar? Well, I am glad to say, quite a lot! First of, I learned that a presumed case study might not necessarily be a case study just because that the attached paper says it is. As you may, or may not, know I used the same paper to answer both of the question sets for this weeks theme, and although it was a very interesting read, I am not really sure it could be considered a case study any longer.

Of course, one can always ask if that means that my previous post becomes null and void, as in a worthless waste of time. Did I grasp anything at all regarding the given concept if I was unable to pick a proper paper? While I suppose this is ultimately a question for the examiner, I would argue that, just like every previous theme, the seminars have been place where I actually learn the details of the actual topic.

Nevertheless I do have a far greater understanding of what this obscurity called case study is now, and equipped with this tiny piece of knowledge I feel I will be able to better understand studies of that kind in the future, or even dismiss them if they prove sub-par. Moreover, I now realise why case studies are so frequent in modern research and also why, if I am allowed to paraphrase what was touched upon during the lecture, the fact that a general definition is pretty hard to come by.

Another thing I was reminded of, yet again something that I think has been a reoccurring theme among these themes (see what I did there?) is that the gist of any study is choice of method. Because for any given research the choice of methods, that is to say the various ways of going about the actual practice, is paramount to the validity of its results. As I keep saying in this blog, this might seem obvious when frankly stated, but I still feel it is easy to overlook the importance of how you go about your research, especially when judging the conclusion.

Speaking about methods, I was introduce to a broad variety of methods upon the seminar, as the the other participants had obviously chosen different papers. There was of course a great variety of quality, or should I say feasibility, for these methods in relation to their respective paper, but that is to be expected as well. Most of what could be found was semi-structured interviews, and various similar approaches when trying to gain personal opinions.

Last but not least, we tried to give a good definition of what a case study is. This might be the only part of my previous blogpost that somewhat hit the mark, I have taken the liberty of pasting it below for your convenience:

A case study is an examination of a particular subject, its details and any related contextual conditions. In other words, you study a something existing in a specific time and place, such as an event or a group of people. All such studies, much like any other form of research, make usage of one or more methods when analysing the chosen phenomena.


I will be missing Iljas monologues on the coming Friday afternoons, but at least I am aware of how little I know. In time, maybe that will change.


Time by the way, is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so! And with that I finally leave you to your thoughts!