In each of the case study universities several methods of data collection were combined to help increase the reliability of the research and to allow triangulation. NVivo was a vital tool to allow information from documents and interviews to be brought together.
Firstly the President at each university was asked for their consent for the study to be carried out. After Presidential approval was granted, the ethical clearance procedure in each case study university was followed until that approval was received. The President was also asked whether the name of their university could be used in this thesis and without exception, each President granted their consent for this.
Documentation for each of the case studies was then collected to gain an insight into each institution and the strategies and policies in place. Sources of this information included: strategic plans; management and academic structure charts; annual reports;
internationalisation policy documents; websites etc. These documents were the first types of units of observation for each of the case studies.
Secondly, once the documentary research was carried out, the individuals most
appropriate for the semi-structured interviews were selected. At each of the case study universities the following individuals were selected to interview:
• President / Vice-President (individual with responsibility for global initiatives including of students) – this person was identified by the President and was asked to name the subsequent interviewees
• International Office Director/Chairperson • Director of Admissions
• Director of Student Services
• The Dean of a Faculty with a predominantly local perspective • The Dean of a Faculty with significant global students.
It is important to note that job titles varied between institutions and the President
determined the first person on the list who was then required to identify which individual at their university held the post deemed closest to each of those in the remainder of the list.
The people with these roles were chosen to interview as they were closest to the focus of this thesis. It was hoped that in their institutions these individuals knew most about what the institution was doing and planning, with respect to globalisation. In order to
‘problematise’ the issues and pay attention to the dynamics and interactions that come with responses to globalisation a Dean without a global perspective was included. With this selection, it was hoped to tease out why this individual was less active and how they coped with the potential pressures to internationalise. There are many such people in each institution. Interviews with these individuals facilitated an understanding and triangulation of the institution’s strategic responses to globalisation. Six individuals at each university were planned to be included as this enabled breadth as well as depth to the study.
Through semi-structured interviews it was possible to gain an understanding of this complex issue and interviewees were more easily able to share their stories and enable the researcher to triangulate information found in documentary evidence. Interviews allowed an appropriately open approach to this area of study. The combination of documentary evidence and the findings from the semi-structured interviews formed each case study.
The interview questions for the semi-structured interviews were designed to provide the information necessary to answer the research questions. The literature was also taken into account when designing the questions and it was decided to group the questions into four main themes: the university; globalisation strategy; global recruitment and ‘overall’. In addition, a section of questions just for the International Office interviewee was designed to ask about the number of international students, their countries of origin and how global recruitment had developed. The validity of an interview can be affected if the questions are not carefully composed and logically designed, hence a significant amount of care was taken in the design stage. The interview questions are included in Appendix 2.
The individuals selected for interviewing were each contacted by email by the author, in advance, to obtain their consent and availability during the research phase. The
interviews took place in the interviewee’s choice of environment within their university. In advance of each interview, the interviewees were sent a summary of the context for the study and the preliminary research questions (Appendix 3) so that they could think through the research questions in advance, should they so desire. Each institution was visited on a separate day between February and June 2007 and interviews varied in length from 37 minutes to 1 hour 27 minutes.
Each interview began with the author introducing herself and her area of study, assuring the interviewees of their anonymity and asking permission to record the discussion. Each interview was recorded and subsequently transcribed to enable coding to be applied and any themes or trends to be identified. Prior to each interview, the author identified the institutional management arrangements for each interviewee, where possible.
The author spent sufficient time at each of the case study universities to carry out the semi-structured interviews and to get a sense of ‘institutional feel’. Policy and other documentation for each university was collected on site and in-situ observations, to supplement the primary and secondary data gathered, were made and recorded.
3.3.2.2.1 Types of interview
In unstructured interviews the participant is encouraged to tell their story. The role of the interviewer is to listen. The interviewee knows what the general topic is beforehand as it is included in obtaining consent for the interview. Sometimes the interviewer only has the opening question planned - ‘the grand tour’ question (Morse and Richards, 2002).
For this research, however, it was considered more appropriate to use semi-structured interviews as the author knew enough about the topic to develop questions in advance but not enough to anticipate the answers. Semi-structured interviews are conducted within a fairly open framework which allows for focused, but conversational, two-way
communication. Unlike using a questionnaire, where detailed questions are formulated in advance, semi-structured interviewing starts with more general questions or topics. Relevant topics are initially identified and the possible relationship between these topics and the issues become the basis for more specific questions which are prepared in advance. Semi-structured interviewing is guided in the sense that some form of interview guide is prepared beforehand and provides a framework for the interview (Morse and Richards, 2002).
questions arranged in a logical order to cover the ground required. This method is appropriate when the researcher knows enough to frame the discussion in advance.
It was decided not to use group interviews as the interactions between group members adds another dimension to the discussion and the research findings.
3.3.2.2.2 Data analysis
The analysis of the data was an ongoing and iterative process, with the interview data informing the way that the documents were analysed and the content of the documents prompting particular scrutiny of aspects of the interviews.
As case study research generates a large amount of data from multiple sources, systematic organisation of the data was important to prevent the researcher from
becoming overwhelmed by the amount of data and to prevent the researcher from losing sight of the original research purpose and questions. Advance preparation and the use of NVivo in this research were essential in processing the large amounts of data in a
documented and systematic fashion.
It was important to make and store multiple sources of evidence comprehensively and systematically, in formats that could be referenced and sorted so that converging lines of inquiry and patterns could be uncovered. The author carefully observed the object of each of the case studies and identified causal factors associated with the observed phenomenon. Renegotiation of arrangements with the objects of the study or addition of questions to interviews could have been necessary as the study progressed. Case study research is flexible but when changes were made they were always documented
systematically.
Exemplary case studies use field notes and software to categorise and reference data so that it is readily available for subsequent reinterpretation. In this research, the universities’ documentation was used to triangulate information from the interviews. Field notes were used by the author to record feelings and intuitive hunches, pose questions and document the work in progress.
Maintaining the relationship between the issue and the evidence is mandatory and the author documented, classified and coded all evidence so that it could be efficiently recalled for sorting and examination during the course of the study. NVivo was used to examine the raw data, using as many interpretations as possible, in order to find linkages between the case studies and the outcomes with reference to the original research
questions. Throughout the evaluation and analysis process, the author remained open to new opportunities and insights. The case study method, with its use of multiple data collection methods and analysis techniques, provides researchers with opportunities to triangulate data in order to strengthen the research findings and conclusions. It was important that the author was as close as possible to the data in this research in order that all links and themes were identified.
The tactics used in analysis force researchers to move beyond initial impressions to improve the likelihood of accurate and reliable findings. Exemplary case studies deliberately sort the data in many different ways to expose or create new insights and deliberately look for conflicting data to disconfirm the analysis. In this study the data was categorised, tabulated and recombined to address the initial propositions or purpose of the study and conduct cross-checks of facts and discrepancies in accounts. Follow up emails to interviewees were occasionally necessary to gather additional data, to verify key observations or check a fact.
Specific techniques included creating each university as a ‘case’ in NVivo and then populating it with the documentary evidence as it was retrieved. Transcripts of each case study interview were imported into NVivo and coded according to the topic of each
question. The quantitative data collected was used to attempt to corroborate and support the qualitative data which was useful for understanding the rationale or theory underlying relationships. It was helpful to consider each case study separately before identifying cross cutting-themes and starting to draw comparisons, differences, connections and conclusions. Interview data was analysed by comparing each interviewee’s response to a topic of the interview and developing common categories for analysis across institutions. Emerging themes were noted and explored with subsequent reference to the available documentation so that triangulation and discrepancies could be identified.
A report was produced for each case study university that summarised the findings of the interviews at that university. The reports (Appendices 4, 5, 6 and 7) provided a useful ‘mirror’ for each university in which to see itself. Once produced, the reports were shared with ‘the individual with responsibility for global initiatives including of students’ who was invited to comment and/or amend the report if there were any inaccuracies.