thesis project case study

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods

What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods

Published on May 8, 2019 by Shona McCombes . Revised on November 20, 2023.

A case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organization, or phenomenon. Case studies are commonly used in social, educational, clinical, and business research.

A case study research design usually involves qualitative methods , but quantitative methods are sometimes also used. Case studies are good for describing , comparing, evaluating and understanding different aspects of a research problem .

Table of contents

When to do a case study, step 1: select a case, step 2: build a theoretical framework, step 3: collect your data, step 4: describe and analyze the case, other interesting articles.

A case study is an appropriate research design when you want to gain concrete, contextual, in-depth knowledge about a specific real-world subject. It allows you to explore the key characteristics, meanings, and implications of the case.

Case studies are often a good choice in a thesis or dissertation . They keep your project focused and manageable when you don’t have the time or resources to do large-scale research.

You might use just one complex case study where you explore a single subject in depth, or conduct multiple case studies to compare and illuminate different aspects of your research problem.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Once you have developed your problem statement and research questions , you should be ready to choose the specific case that you want to focus on. A good case study should have the potential to:

• Provide new or unexpected insights into the subject
• Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories
• Propose practical courses of action to resolve a problem
• Open up new directions for future research

TipIf your research is more practical in nature and aims to simultaneously investigate an issue as you solve it, consider conducting action research instead.

Unlike quantitative or experimental research , a strong case study does not require a random or representative sample. In fact, case studies often deliberately focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the research problem.

Example of an outlying case studyIn the 1960s the town of Roseto, Pennsylvania was discovered to have extremely low rates of heart disease compared to the US average. It became an important case study for understanding previously neglected causes of heart disease.

However, you can also choose a more common or representative case to exemplify a particular category, experience or phenomenon.

Example of a representative case studyIn the 1920s, two sociologists used Muncie, Indiana as a case study of a typical American city that supposedly exemplified the changing culture of the US at the time.

While case studies focus more on concrete details than general theories, they should usually have some connection with theory in the field. This way the case study is not just an isolated description, but is integrated into existing knowledge about the topic. It might aim to:

• Exemplify a theory by showing how it explains the case under investigation
• Expand on a theory by uncovering new concepts and ideas that need to be incorporated
• Challenge a theory by exploring an outlier case that doesn’t fit with established assumptions

To ensure that your analysis of the case has a solid academic grounding, you should conduct a literature review of sources related to the topic and develop a theoretical framework . This means identifying key concepts and theories to guide your analysis and interpretation.

There are many different research methods you can use to collect data on your subject. Case studies tend to focus on qualitative data using methods such as interviews , observations , and analysis of primary and secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles, photographs, official records). Sometimes a case study will also collect quantitative data.

Example of a mixed methods case studyFor a case study of a wind farm development in a rural area, you could collect quantitative data on employment rates and business revenue, collect qualitative data on local people’s perceptions and experiences, and analyze local and national media coverage of the development.

The aim is to gain as thorough an understanding as possible of the case and its context.

In writing up the case study, you need to bring together all the relevant aspects to give as complete a picture as possible of the subject.

How you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard scientific paper or thesis , with separate sections or chapters for the methods , results and discussion .

Others are written in a more narrative style, aiming to explore the case from various angles and analyze its meanings and implications (for example, by using textual analysis or discourse analysis ).

In all cases, though, make sure to give contextual details about the case, connect it back to the literature and theory, and discuss how it fits into wider patterns or debates.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Normal distribution
• Degrees of freedom
• Null hypothesis
• Discourse analysis
• Control groups
• Mixed methods research
• Non-probability sampling
• Quantitative research
• Ecological validity

Research bias

• Rosenthal effect
• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Selection bias
• Negativity bias
• Status quo bias

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, November 20). What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods. Scribbr. Retrieved April 4, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/case-study/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, primary vs. secondary sources | difference & examples, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is action research | definition & examples, unlimited academic ai-proofreading.

✔ Document error-free in 5minutes ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods

Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods

Published on 5 May 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 30 January 2023.

A case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organisation, or phenomenon. Case studies are commonly used in social, educational, clinical, and business research.

A case study research design usually involves qualitative methods , but quantitative methods are sometimes also used. Case studies are good for describing , comparing, evaluating, and understanding different aspects of a research problem .

Table of contents

When to do a case study, step 1: select a case, step 2: build a theoretical framework, step 3: collect your data, step 4: describe and analyse the case.

A case study is an appropriate research design when you want to gain concrete, contextual, in-depth knowledge about a specific real-world subject. It allows you to explore the key characteristics, meanings, and implications of the case.

Case studies are often a good choice in a thesis or dissertation . They keep your project focused and manageable when you don’t have the time or resources to do large-scale research.

You might use just one complex case study where you explore a single subject in depth, or conduct multiple case studies to compare and illuminate different aspects of your research problem.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Once you have developed your problem statement and research questions , you should be ready to choose the specific case that you want to focus on. A good case study should have the potential to:

• Provide new or unexpected insights into the subject
• Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories
• Propose practical courses of action to resolve a problem
• Open up new directions for future research

Unlike quantitative or experimental research, a strong case study does not require a random or representative sample. In fact, case studies often deliberately focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the research problem.

If you find yourself aiming to simultaneously investigate and solve an issue, consider conducting action research . As its name suggests, action research conducts research and takes action at the same time, and is highly iterative and flexible. 

However, you can also choose a more common or representative case to exemplify a particular category, experience, or phenomenon.

While case studies focus more on concrete details than general theories, they should usually have some connection with theory in the field. This way the case study is not just an isolated description, but is integrated into existing knowledge about the topic. It might aim to:

• Exemplify a theory by showing how it explains the case under investigation
• Expand on a theory by uncovering new concepts and ideas that need to be incorporated
• Challenge a theory by exploring an outlier case that doesn’t fit with established assumptions

To ensure that your analysis of the case has a solid academic grounding, you should conduct a literature review of sources related to the topic and develop a theoretical framework . This means identifying key concepts and theories to guide your analysis and interpretation.

There are many different research methods you can use to collect data on your subject. Case studies tend to focus on qualitative data using methods such as interviews, observations, and analysis of primary and secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles, photographs, official records). Sometimes a case study will also collect quantitative data .

The aim is to gain as thorough an understanding as possible of the case and its context.

In writing up the case study, you need to bring together all the relevant aspects to give as complete a picture as possible of the subject.

How you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard scientific paper or thesis, with separate sections or chapters for the methods , results , and discussion .

Others are written in a more narrative style, aiming to explore the case from various angles and analyse its meanings and implications (for example, by using textual analysis or discourse analysis ).

In all cases, though, make sure to give contextual details about the case, connect it back to the literature and theory, and discuss how it fits into wider patterns or debates.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, January 30). Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods. Scribbr. Retrieved 2 April 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/case-studies/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, correlational research | guide, design & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples, descriptive research design | definition, methods & examples.

FIND YOUR SCHOOL

Degree program, areas of focus, tuition range.

Continue to School Search

• Where to Study
• What to Know
• Your Journey

2020 Student Thesis Showcase - Part I

Have you ever wondered what students design in architecture school? A few years ago, we started an Instagram account called IMADETHAT_ to curate student work from across North America. Now, we have nearly 3,000 projects featured for you to view. In this series, we are featuring thesis projects of recent graduates to give you a glimpse into what architecture students create while in school. Each week, for the rest of the summer, we will be curating five projects that highlight unique aspects of design. In this week’s group, the research ranges from urban scale designs focused on climate change to a proposal for a new type of collective housing and so much in between. Check back each week for new projects. 

In the meantime, Archinect has also created a series featuring the work of 2020 graduates in architecture and design programs. Check out the full list, here .

Redefining the Gradient by Kate Katz and Ryan Shaaban, Tulane University, M.Arch ‘20

Thesis Advisors: Cordula Roser Gray and Ammar Eloueini / Course: 01-SP20-Thesis Studio

Sea level rise has become a major concern for coastal cities due to the economic and cultural importance tied to their proximity to water. These cities have sustained their livelihood in low-lying elevations through the process of filling, bridging, and raising land over coastal ecosystems, replacing their ecological value with infrastructures focused on defining the edge between city and nature. Hard infrastructures have been employed to maintain urban landscapes but have minimal capacity for both human and non-human engagement due to their monofunctional applications focused on separating conditions rather than integrating them. They produce short-term gains with long-term consequences, replacing and restricting ecosystems and acting as physical barriers in a context defined by seasonal transition. 

To address the issues of hard infrastructure and sea level rise, this thesis proposes an alternative design strategy that incorporates the dynamic water system into the urban grid network. San Francisco was chosen as the location of study as it is a peninsula where a majority of the predicted inundation occurs on the eastern bayside. In this estuary, there were over 500 acres of ecologically rich tidal marshlands that were filled in during the late 1800s. To protect these new lands, the Embarcadero Sea Wall was built in 1916 and is now in a state of neglect. The city has set aside $5 billion for repairs but, instead of pouring more money into a broken system, we propose an investment in new multi-functional ecologically-responsive strategies. 

As sea levels rise, the city will be inundated with water, creating the opportunity to develop a new circulation system that maintains accessibility throughout areas located in the flood zone. In this proposal, we’ve designed a connective network where instance moments become moments of pause and relief to enjoy the new cityscape in a dynamic maritime district. 

On the lower level, paths widen to become plazas while on the upper level, they become breakout destinations which can connect to certain occupiable rooftops that are given to the public realm. The bases of carved canals become seeding grounds for plants and aquatic life as the water level rises over time. Buildings can protect high-risk floors through floodproofing and structural encasement combined with adaptive floorplates to maintain the use of lower levels. The floating walkway is composed of modular units that are buoyant, allowing the pedestrian paths to conform and fluctuate with diurnal tidal changes. The composition of the units creates street furniture and apertures to engage with the ecologies below while enabling a once restricted landscape of wetlands to take place within the city. 

The new vision of the public realm in this waterfront district hopes to shine an optimistic light on how we can live with nature once again as we deal with the consequences of climate change.

Unearthing the Black Aesthetic by Demar Matthews, Woodbury University, M.Arch ‘20

Advisor: Ryan Tyler Martinez Featured on Archinect

“Unearthing The Black Aesthetic” highlights South Central Los Angeles’s (or Black Los Angeles’s) unique positioning as a dynamic hub of Black culture and creativity. South Central is the densest population of African Americans west of the Mississippi. While every historically Black neighborhood in Los Angeles has experienced displacement, the neighborhood of Watts was hit particularly hard. As more and more Black Angelenos are forced for one reason or another to relocate, we are losing our history and connection to Los Angeles.

As a way to fight this gentrification, we are developing an architectural language derived from Black culture. So many cultures have their own architectural styles based on values, goals, morals, and customs shared by their society. When these cultures have relocated to America, to keep their culture and values intact, they bought land and built in the image of their homelands. That is not true for Black people in America. In fact, until 1968, Black people had no rights to own property in Los Angeles. While others began a race to acquire land in 1492, building homes and communities in their image, we started running 476 years after the race began. What percentage of land was left for Blacks to acquire? How then can we advance the development of a Black aesthetic in architecture?

This project, most importantly, is a collaboration with the community that will be for us and by us. My goal is to take control of our image in architecture; to elevate, not denigrate, Black life and culture. Ultimately, we envision repeating this process in nine historically Black cities in America to develop an architectural language that will vary based on the history and specificities of Black culture in each area.

KILLING IT: The Life and Death of Great American Cities by Amanda Golemba, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, M.Arch ’20

Advisors: Nikole Bouchard, Jasmine Benyamin, and Erik Hancock / Independent Design Thesis

For decades, post-industrial cities throughout the United States have been quietly erased through self-imposed tabula rasa demolition. If considered at all, demolition is touted as the mechanism for removing unsightly blight, promoting safety, and discarding the obsolete and the unwanted. Once deemed unworthy, rarely does a building survive the threat of demolition. 

In the last decade, the City of Chicago has erased over 13,000 buildings with 225 in just the last four months. Not only does this mass erasure eradicate the material and the spatial, but it permanently wipes the remnants of human bodies, values, and history — a complete annulment of event, time, and memory. 

But why do we feel the need to erase in order to make progress?

Our current path has led to a built environment that is becoming more and more uniform and sterile. Much of America has become standardized, mixed-use developments; neighborhoods of cookie-cutter homes and the excessive use of synthetic, toxic building materials. A uniform world is a boring one that has little room for creativity, individuality, or authenticity.

This thesis, “KILLING IT,” is a design proposal for a traveling exhibition that seeks to change perceptions of the existing city fabric by visualizing patterns of erasure, questioning the resultant implications and effects of that erasure, and proposing an alternative fate. “KILLING IT” confronts the inherently violent aspects of architecture and explores that violence through the intentionally jarring, uncomfortable, and absurd analogy of murder. This analogy is a lens through which to trace the violent, intentional, and premature ending and sterilization of the existing built environment. After all, as Bernard Tschumi said, “To really appreciate architecture, you may even need to commit a murder.”1 But murder is not just about the events that take place within a building, it is also the material reality of the building itself. 

Over the life of a building, scarring, moments in time, and decay layer to create an inhabitable palimpsest of memory. This traveling exhibition is infused with the palimpsest concept by investigating strategies of layering, modularity, flexibility, transparency, and building remains, while layering them together to form a system that operates as an inhabitable core model collage. Each individual exhibition simultaneously memorializes the violence that happened at that particular site and implements murderous adaptive reuse strategies through collage and salvage material to expose what could have been.

If we continue down our current path, we will only continue to make the same mistakes and achieve the same monotonous, sterilizing results we currently see in every American city and suburb. We need to embrace a new path that values authenticity, celebrates the scars and traces of the past, and carries memories into the future. By reimaging what death can mean and addressing cycles of violence, “KILLING IT” proposes an optimistic vision for the future of American cities. 

• Tschumi, Bernard. “Questions of space: lectures on architecture” (ed. 1990)

A New Prototype for Collective Housing by Juan Acosta and Gable Bostic, University of Texas at Austin, M.Arch ‘20

Advisor: Martin Haettasch / Course: Integrative Design Studio Read more: https://soa.utexas.edu/work/new-prototype-collective-housing

Austin is a city that faces extreme housing pressures. This problem is framed almost exclusively in terms of supply and demand, and the related question of affordability. For architects, however, a more productive question is: Will this new quantity produce a new quality of housing? 

How do we live in the city, how do we create individual and collective identity through architecture, and what are the urban consequences? This studio investigates new urban housing types, smaller than an apartment block yet larger and denser than a detached house. Critically assessing existing typologies, we ask the question: How can the comforts of the individual house be reconfigured to form new types of residential urban fabric beyond the entropy of tract housing or the formulaic denominator of “mixed-use.” The nature of the integrative design studio allowed for the testing of material systems and construction techniques that have long had an important economic and ecological impact.

“A New Prototype for Collective Housing” addresses collectivity in both a formal and social sense, existing between the commercial and residential scales present in Austin’s St. John neighborhood as it straddles the I-35 corridor; a normative American condition. A diversity of programs, and multigenerational living, create an inherently diverse community. Additionally, a courtyard typology is used to negotiate the spectrum of private and shared space. Volumes, comprising multiple housing units ranging from studio apartments to four bedrooms, penetrate a commercial plinth that circulates both residents and mechanical systems. The use of heavy timber ensures an equitable use of resources while imbuing the project with a familiar material character.

ELSEWHERE, OR ELSE WHERE? by Brenda (Bz) Zhang, University of California at Berkeley, M.Arch ’20

Advisors: Andrew Atwood and Neyran Turan See more: https://www.brendazhang.com/#/elsewhere-or-else-where/

“ELSEWHERE, OR ELSE WHERE?” is an architectural fever dream about the San Francisco Bay Area. Beginning with the premise that two common ideas of Place—Home and Elsewhere—are no longer useful, the project wonders how disciplinary tools of architecture can be used to shape new stories about where we are.

For our purposes, “Home,” although primarily used to describe a place of domestic habitation, is also referring generally to a “familiar or usual setting,” as in home-base, home-court, home-page, and even home-button. As a counterpoint, Elsewhere shifts our attention “in or to another place,” away. This thesis is situated both in the literal spaces of Elsewhere and Home (landfills, houses, wilderness, base camps, wastelands, hometowns) and in their culturally constructed space (value-embedded narratives determining whether something belongs, and to whom). Since we construct both narratives through principles of exclusion, Elsewhere is a lot closer to Home than we say. These hybrid spaces—domestic and industrial, urban and hinterland, natural and built—are investigated as found conditions of the Anthropocene and potential sites for new understandings of Place.

Ultimately, this thesis attempts to challenge conventional notions of what architects could do with our existing skill sets, just by shifting our attention—Elsewhere. The sites shown here and the concerns they represent undeniably exist, but because of the ways Western architecture draws thick boundaries between and around them, they resist architectural focus—to our detriment.

In reworking the physical and cultural constructions of Homes and Elsewheres, architects are uniquely positioned to go beyond diagnostics in visualizing and designing how, where, and why we build. While this project looks specifically at two particular stories we tell about where we are, the overall objective is to provoke new approaches to how we construct Place—both physically and culturally—within or without our discipline.

Share this entry

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share by Mail

You might also like

About Study Architecture

• Section 2: Home
• Developing the Quantitative Research Design
• Qualitative Descriptive Design
• Design and Development Research (DDR) For Instructional Design
• Qualitative Narrative Inquiry Research
• Action Research Resource
• Case Study Design in an Applied Doctorate

Qualitative Research Designs

Case study design, using case study design in the applied doctoral experience (ade), applicability of case study design to applied problem of practice, case study design references.

• SAGE Research Methods
• Research Examples (SAGE) This link opens in a new window
• Dataset Examples (SAGE) This link opens in a new window
• IRB Resource Center This link opens in a new window

The field of qualitative research there are a number of research designs (also referred to as “traditions” or “genres”), including case study, phenomenology, narrative inquiry, action research, ethnography, grounded theory, as well as a number of critical genres including Feminist theory, indigenous research, critical race theory and cultural studies. The choice of research design is directly tied to and must be aligned with your research problem and purpose. As Bloomberg & Volpe (2019) explain:

Choice of research design is directly tied to research problem and purpose. As the researcher, you actively create the link among problem, purpose, and design through a process of reflecting on problem and purpose, focusing on researchable questions, and considering how to best address these questions. Thinking along these lines affords a research study methodological congruence (p. 38).

Case study is an in-depth exploration from multiple perspectives of a bounded social phenomenon, be this a social system such as a program, event, institution, organization, or community (Stake, 1995, 2005; Yin, 2018). Case study is employed across disciplines, including education, health care, social work, sociology, and organizational studies. The purpose is to generate understanding and deep insights to inform professional practice, policy development, and community or social action (Bloomberg 2018).

Yin (2018) and Stake (1995, 2005), two of the key proponents of case study methodology, use different terms to describe case studies. Yin categorizes case studies as exploratory or descriptive . The former is used to explore those situations in which the intervention being evaluated has no clear single set of outcomes. The latter is used to describe an intervention or phenomenon and the real-life context in which it occurred. Stake identifies case studies as intrinsic or instrumental , and he proposes that a primary distinction in designing case studies is between single and multiple (or collective) case study designs. A single case study may be an instrumental case study (research focuses on an issue or concern in one bounded case) or an intrinsic case study (the focus is on the case itself because the case presents a unique situation). A longitudinal case study design is chosen when the researcher seeks to examine the same single case at two or more different points in time or to capture trends over time. A multiple case study design is used when a researcher seeks to determine the prevalence or frequency of a particular phenomenon. This approach is useful when cases are used for purposes of a cross-case analysis in order to compare, contrast, and synthesize perspectives regarding the same issue. The focus is on the analysis of diverse cases to determine how these confirm the findings within or between cases, or call the findings into question.

Case study affords significant interaction with research participants, providing an in-depth picture of the phenomenon (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019). Research is extensive, drawing on multiple methods of data collection, and involves multiple data sources. Triangulation is critical in attempting to obtain an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon under study and adds rigor, breadth, and depth to the study and provides corroborative evidence of the data obtained. Analysis of data can be holistic or embedded—that is, dealing with the whole or parts of the case (Yin, 2018). With multiple cases the typical analytic strategy is to provide detailed description of themes within each case (within-case analysis), followed by thematic analysis across cases (cross-case analysis), providing insights regarding how individual cases are comparable along important dimensions. Research culminates in the production of a detailed description of a setting and its participants, accompanied by an analysis of the data for themes or patterns (Stake, 1995, 2005; Yin, 2018). In addition to thick, rich description, the researcher’s interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations contribute to the reader’s overall understanding of the case study.

Analysis of findings should show that the researcher has attended to all the data, should address the most significant aspects of the case, and should demonstrate familiarity with the prevailing thinking and discourse about the topic. The goal of case study design (as with all qualitative designs) is not generalizability but rather transferability —that is, how (if at all) and in what ways understanding and knowledge can be applied in similar contexts and settings. The qualitative researcher attempts to address the issue of transferability by way of thick, rich description that will provide the basis for a case or cases to have relevance and potential application across a broader context.

Qualitative research methods ask the questions of "what" and "how" a phenomenon is understood in a real-life context (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019). In the education field, qualitative research methods uncover educational experiences and practices because qualitative research allows the researcher to reveal new knowledge and understanding. Moreover, qualitative descriptive case studies describe, analyze and interpret events that explain the reasoning behind specific phenomena (Bloomberg, 2018). As such, case study design can be the foundation for a rigorous study within the Applied Doctoral Experience (ADE).

Case study design is an appropriate research design to consider when conceptualizing and conducting a dissertation research study that is based on an applied problem of practice with inherent real-life educational implications. Case study researchers study current, real-life cases that are in progress so that they can gather accurate information that is current. This fits well with the ADE program, as students are typically exploring a problem of practice. Because of the flexibility of the methods used, a descriptive design provides the researcher with the opportunity to choose data collection methods that are best suited to a practice-based research purpose, and can include individual interviews, focus groups, observation, surveys, and critical incident questionnaires. Methods are triangulated to contribute to the study’s trustworthiness. In selecting the set of data collection methods, it is important that the researcher carefully consider the alignment between research questions and the type of data that is needed to address these. Each data source is one piece of the “puzzle,” that contributes to the researcher’s holistic understanding of a phenomenon. The various strands of data are woven together holistically to promote a deeper understanding of the case and its application to an educationally-based problem of practice.

Research studies within the Applied Doctoral Experience (ADE) will be practical in nature and focus on problems and issues that inform educational practice.  Many of the types of studies that fall within the ADE framework are exploratory, and align with case study design. Case study design fits very well with applied problems related to educational practice, as the following set of examples illustrate:

Elementary Bilingual Education Teachers’ Self-Efficacy in Teaching English Language Learners: A Qualitative Case Study

The problem to be addressed in the proposed study is that some elementary bilingual education teachers’ beliefs about their lack of preparedness to teach the English language may negatively impact the language proficiency skills of Hispanic ELLs (Ernst-Slavit & Wenger, 2016; Fuchs et al., 2018; Hoque, 2016). The purpose of the proposed qualitative descriptive case study was to explore the perspectives and experiences of elementary bilingual education teachers regarding their perceived lack of preparedness to teach the English language and how this may impact the language proficiency of Hispanic ELLs.

Exploring Minority Teachers Experiences Pertaining to their Value in Education: A Single Case Study of Teachers in New York City

The problem is that minority K-12 teachers are underrepresented in the United States, with research indicating that school leaders and teachers in schools that are populated mainly by black students, staffed mostly by white teachers who may be unprepared to deal with biases and stereotypes that are ingrained in schools (Egalite, Kisida, & Winters, 2015; Milligan & Howley, 2015). The purpose of this qualitative exploratory single case study was to develop a clearer understanding of minority teachers’ experiences concerning the under-representation of minority K-12 teachers in urban school districts in the United States since there are so few of them.

Exploring the Impact of an Urban Teacher Residency Program on Teachers’ Cultural Intelligence: A Qualitative Case Study

The problem to be addressed by this case study is that teacher candidates often report being unprepared and ill-equipped to effectively educate culturally diverse students (Skepple, 2015; Beutel, 2018). The purpose of this study was to explore and gain an in-depth understanding of the perceived impact of an urban teacher residency program in urban Iowa on teachers’ cultural competence using the cultural intelligence (CQ) framework (Earley & Ang, 2003).

Qualitative Case Study that Explores Self-Efficacy and Mentorship on Women in Academic Administrative Leadership Roles

The problem was that female school-level administrators might be less likely to experience mentorship, thereby potentially decreasing their self-efficacy (Bing & Smith, 2019; Brown, 2020; Grant, 2021). The purpose of this case study was to determine to what extent female school-level administrators in the United States who had a mentor have a sense of self-efficacy and to examine the relationship between mentorship and self-efficacy.

Suburban Teacher and Administrator Perceptions of Culturally Responsive Teaching to Promote Connectedness in Students of Color: A Qualitative Case Study

The problem to be addressed in this study is the racial discrimination experienced by students of color in suburban schools and the resulting negative school experience (Jara & Bloomsbury, 2020; Jones, 2019; Kohli et al., 2017; Wandix-White, 2020). The purpose of this case study is to explore how culturally responsive practices can counteract systemic racism and discrimination in suburban schools thereby meeting the needs of students of color by creating positive learning experiences. 

As you can see, all of these studies were well suited to qualitative case study design. In each of these studies, the applied research problem and research purpose were clearly grounded in educational practice as well as directly aligned with qualitative case study methodology. In the Applied Doctoral Experience (ADE), you will be focused on addressing or resolving an educationally relevant research problem of practice. As such, your case study, with clear boundaries, will be one that centers on a real-life authentic problem in your field of practice that you believe is in need of resolution or improvement, and that the outcome thereof will be educationally valuable.

Bloomberg, L. D. (2018). Case study method. In B. B. Frey (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of educational research, measurement, and evaluation (pp. 237–239). SAGE. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/nu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmethods.sagepub.com%2FReference%2Fthe-sage-encyclopedia-of-educational-research-measurement-and-evaluation%2Fi4294.xml

Bloomberg, L. D. & Volpe, M. (2019). Completing your qualitative dissertation: A road map from beginning to end . (4th Ed.). SAGE.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE.

Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443–466). SAGE.

Yin, R. (2018). Case study research and applications: Designs and methods. SAGE.

• << Previous: Action Research Resource
• Next: SAGE Research Methods >>
• Last Updated: Jul 28, 2023 8:05 AM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/c.php?g=1013605

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

A case study research paper examines a person, place, event, condition, phenomenon, or other type of subject of analysis in order to extrapolate  key themes and results that help predict future trends, illuminate previously hidden issues that can be applied to practice, and/or provide a means for understanding an important research problem with greater clarity. A case study research paper usually examines a single subject of analysis, but case study papers can also be designed as a comparative investigation that shows relationships between two or more subjects. The methods used to study a case can rest within a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method investigative paradigm.

Case Studies. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010 ; “What is a Case Study?” In Swanborn, Peter G. Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London: SAGE, 2010.

How to Approach Writing a Case Study Research Paper

General information about how to choose a topic to investigate can be found under the " Choosing a Research Problem " tab in the Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper writing guide. Review this page because it may help you identify a subject of analysis that can be investigated using a case study design.

However, identifying a case to investigate involves more than choosing the research problem . A case study encompasses a problem contextualized around the application of in-depth analysis, interpretation, and discussion, often resulting in specific recommendations for action or for improving existing conditions. As Seawright and Gerring note, practical considerations such as time and access to information can influence case selection, but these issues should not be the sole factors used in describing the methodological justification for identifying a particular case to study. Given this, selecting a case includes considering the following:

• The case represents an unusual or atypical example of a research problem that requires more in-depth analysis? Cases often represent a topic that rests on the fringes of prior investigations because the case may provide new ways of understanding the research problem. For example, if the research problem is to identify strategies to improve policies that support girl's access to secondary education in predominantly Muslim nations, you could consider using Azerbaijan as a case study rather than selecting a more obvious nation in the Middle East. Doing so may reveal important new insights into recommending how governments in other predominantly Muslim nations can formulate policies that support improved access to education for girls.
• The case provides important insight or illuminate a previously hidden problem? In-depth analysis of a case can be based on the hypothesis that the case study will reveal trends or issues that have not been exposed in prior research or will reveal new and important implications for practice. For example, anecdotal evidence may suggest drug use among homeless veterans is related to their patterns of travel throughout the day. Assuming prior studies have not looked at individual travel choices as a way to study access to illicit drug use, a case study that observes a homeless veteran could reveal how issues of personal mobility choices facilitate regular access to illicit drugs. Note that it is important to conduct a thorough literature review to ensure that your assumption about the need to reveal new insights or previously hidden problems is valid and evidence-based.
• The case challenges and offers a counter-point to prevailing assumptions? Over time, research on any given topic can fall into a trap of developing assumptions based on outdated studies that are still applied to new or changing conditions or the idea that something should simply be accepted as "common sense," even though the issue has not been thoroughly tested in current practice. A case study analysis may offer an opportunity to gather evidence that challenges prevailing assumptions about a research problem and provide a new set of recommendations applied to practice that have not been tested previously. For example, perhaps there has been a long practice among scholars to apply a particular theory in explaining the relationship between two subjects of analysis. Your case could challenge this assumption by applying an innovative theoretical framework [perhaps borrowed from another discipline] to explore whether this approach offers new ways of understanding the research problem. Taking a contrarian stance is one of the most important ways that new knowledge and understanding develops from existing literature.
• The case provides an opportunity to pursue action leading to the resolution of a problem? Another way to think about choosing a case to study is to consider how the results from investigating a particular case may result in findings that reveal ways in which to resolve an existing or emerging problem. For example, studying the case of an unforeseen incident, such as a fatal accident at a railroad crossing, can reveal hidden issues that could be applied to preventative measures that contribute to reducing the chance of accidents in the future. In this example, a case study investigating the accident could lead to a better understanding of where to strategically locate additional signals at other railroad crossings so as to better warn drivers of an approaching train, particularly when visibility is hindered by heavy rain, fog, or at night.
• The case offers a new direction in future research? A case study can be used as a tool for an exploratory investigation that highlights the need for further research about the problem. A case can be used when there are few studies that help predict an outcome or that establish a clear understanding about how best to proceed in addressing a problem. For example, after conducting a thorough literature review [very important!], you discover that little research exists showing the ways in which women contribute to promoting water conservation in rural communities of east central Africa. A case study of how women contribute to saving water in a rural village of Uganda can lay the foundation for understanding the need for more thorough research that documents how women in their roles as cooks and family caregivers think about water as a valuable resource within their community. This example of a case study could also point to the need for scholars to build new theoretical frameworks around the topic [e.g., applying feminist theories of work and family to the issue of water conservation].

Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. “Building Theories from Case Study Research.” Academy of Management Review 14 (October 1989): 532-550; Emmel, Nick. Sampling and Choosing Cases in Qualitative Research: A Realist Approach . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2013; Gerring, John. “What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?” American Political Science Review 98 (May 2004): 341-354; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Seawright, Jason and John Gerring. "Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research." Political Research Quarterly 61 (June 2008): 294-308.

Structure and Writing Style

The purpose of a paper in the social sciences designed around a case study is to thoroughly investigate a subject of analysis in order to reveal a new understanding about the research problem and, in so doing, contributing new knowledge to what is already known from previous studies. In applied social sciences disciplines [e.g., education, social work, public administration, etc.], case studies may also be used to reveal best practices, highlight key programs, or investigate interesting aspects of professional work.

In general, the structure of a case study research paper is not all that different from a standard college-level research paper. However, there are subtle differences you should be aware of. Here are the key elements to organizing and writing a case study research paper.

I.  Introduction

As with any research paper, your introduction should serve as a roadmap for your readers to ascertain the scope and purpose of your study . The introduction to a case study research paper, however, should not only describe the research problem and its significance, but you should also succinctly describe why the case is being used and how it relates to addressing the problem. The two elements should be linked. With this in mind, a good introduction answers these four questions:

• What is being studied? Describe the research problem and describe the subject of analysis [the case] you have chosen to address the problem. Explain how they are linked and what elements of the case will help to expand knowledge and understanding about the problem.
• Why is this topic important to investigate? Describe the significance of the research problem and state why a case study design and the subject of analysis that the paper is designed around is appropriate in addressing the problem.
• What did we know about this topic before I did this study? Provide background that helps lead the reader into the more in-depth literature review to follow. If applicable, summarize prior case study research applied to the research problem and why it fails to adequately address the problem. Describe why your case will be useful. If no prior case studies have been used to address the research problem, explain why you have selected this subject of analysis.
• How will this study advance new knowledge or new ways of understanding? Explain why your case study will be suitable in helping to expand knowledge and understanding about the research problem.

Each of these questions should be addressed in no more than a few paragraphs. Exceptions to this can be when you are addressing a complex research problem or subject of analysis that requires more in-depth background information.

II.  Literature Review

The literature review for a case study research paper is generally structured the same as it is for any college-level research paper. The difference, however, is that the literature review is focused on providing background information and  enabling historical interpretation of the subject of analysis in relation to the research problem the case is intended to address . This includes synthesizing studies that help to:

• Place relevant works in the context of their contribution to understanding the case study being investigated . This would involve summarizing studies that have used a similar subject of analysis to investigate the research problem. If there is literature using the same or a very similar case to study, you need to explain why duplicating past research is important [e.g., conditions have changed; prior studies were conducted long ago, etc.].
• Describe the relationship each work has to the others under consideration that informs the reader why this case is applicable . Your literature review should include a description of any works that support using the case to investigate the research problem and the underlying research questions.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research using the case study . If applicable, review any research that has examined the research problem using a different research design. Explain how your use of a case study design may reveal new knowledge or a new perspective or that can redirect research in an important new direction.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies . This refers to synthesizing any literature that points to unresolved issues of concern about the research problem and describing how the subject of analysis that forms the case study can help resolve these existing contradictions.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research . Your review should examine any literature that lays a foundation for understanding why your case study design and the subject of analysis around which you have designed your study may reveal a new way of approaching the research problem or offer a perspective that points to the need for additional research.
• Expose any gaps that exist in the literature that the case study could help to fill . Summarize any literature that not only shows how your subject of analysis contributes to understanding the research problem, but how your case contributes to a new way of understanding the problem that prior research has failed to do.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important!] . Collectively, your literature review should always place your case study within the larger domain of prior research about the problem. The overarching purpose of reviewing pertinent literature in a case study paper is to demonstrate that you have thoroughly identified and synthesized prior studies in relation to explaining the relevance of the case in addressing the research problem.

III.  Method

In this section, you explain why you selected a particular case [i.e., subject of analysis] and the strategy you used to identify and ultimately decide that your case was appropriate in addressing the research problem. The way you describe the methods used varies depending on the type of subject of analysis that constitutes your case study.

If your subject of analysis is an incident or event . In the social and behavioral sciences, the event or incident that represents the case to be studied is usually bounded by time and place, with a clear beginning and end and with an identifiable location or position relative to its surroundings. The subject of analysis can be a rare or critical event or it can focus on a typical or regular event. The purpose of studying a rare event is to illuminate new ways of thinking about the broader research problem or to test a hypothesis. Critical incident case studies must describe the method by which you identified the event and explain the process by which you determined the validity of this case to inform broader perspectives about the research problem or to reveal new findings. However, the event does not have to be a rare or uniquely significant to support new thinking about the research problem or to challenge an existing hypothesis. For example, Walo, Bull, and Breen conducted a case study to identify and evaluate the direct and indirect economic benefits and costs of a local sports event in the City of Lismore, New South Wales, Australia. The purpose of their study was to provide new insights from measuring the impact of a typical local sports event that prior studies could not measure well because they focused on large "mega-events." Whether the event is rare or not, the methods section should include an explanation of the following characteristics of the event: a) when did it take place; b) what were the underlying circumstances leading to the event; and, c) what were the consequences of the event in relation to the research problem.

If your subject of analysis is a person. Explain why you selected this particular individual to be studied and describe what experiences they have had that provide an opportunity to advance new understandings about the research problem. Mention any background about this person which might help the reader understand the significance of their experiences that make them worthy of study. This includes describing the relationships this person has had with other people, institutions, and/or events that support using them as the subject for a case study research paper. It is particularly important to differentiate the person as the subject of analysis from others and to succinctly explain how the person relates to examining the research problem [e.g., why is one politician in a particular local election used to show an increase in voter turnout from any other candidate running in the election]. Note that these issues apply to a specific group of people used as a case study unit of analysis [e.g., a classroom of students].

If your subject of analysis is a place. In general, a case study that investigates a place suggests a subject of analysis that is unique or special in some way and that this uniqueness can be used to build new understanding or knowledge about the research problem. A case study of a place must not only describe its various attributes relevant to the research problem [e.g., physical, social, historical, cultural, economic, political], but you must state the method by which you determined that this place will illuminate new understandings about the research problem. It is also important to articulate why a particular place as the case for study is being used if similar places also exist [i.e., if you are studying patterns of homeless encampments of veterans in open spaces, explain why you are studying Echo Park in Los Angeles rather than Griffith Park?]. If applicable, describe what type of human activity involving this place makes it a good choice to study [e.g., prior research suggests Echo Park has more homeless veterans].

If your subject of analysis is a phenomenon. A phenomenon refers to a fact, occurrence, or circumstance that can be studied or observed but with the cause or explanation to be in question. In this sense, a phenomenon that forms your subject of analysis can encompass anything that can be observed or presumed to exist but is not fully understood. In the social and behavioral sciences, the case usually focuses on human interaction within a complex physical, social, economic, cultural, or political system. For example, the phenomenon could be the observation that many vehicles used by ISIS fighters are small trucks with English language advertisements on them. The research problem could be that ISIS fighters are difficult to combat because they are highly mobile. The research questions could be how and by what means are these vehicles used by ISIS being supplied to the militants and how might supply lines to these vehicles be cut off? How might knowing the suppliers of these trucks reveal larger networks of collaborators and financial support? A case study of a phenomenon most often encompasses an in-depth analysis of a cause and effect that is grounded in an interactive relationship between people and their environment in some way.

NOTE:   The choice of the case or set of cases to study cannot appear random. Evidence that supports the method by which you identified and chose your subject of analysis should clearly support investigation of the research problem and linked to key findings from your literature review. Be sure to cite any studies that helped you determine that the case you chose was appropriate for examining the problem.

IV.  Discussion

The main elements of your discussion section are generally the same as any research paper, but centered around interpreting and drawing conclusions about the key findings from your analysis of the case study. Note that a general social sciences research paper may contain a separate section to report findings. However, in a paper designed around a case study, it is common to combine a description of the results with the discussion about their implications. The objectives of your discussion section should include the following:

Reiterate the Research Problem/State the Major Findings Briefly reiterate the research problem you are investigating and explain why the subject of analysis around which you designed the case study were used. You should then describe the findings revealed from your study of the case using direct, declarative, and succinct proclamation of the study results. Highlight any findings that were unexpected or especially profound.

Explain the Meaning of the Findings and Why They are Important Systematically explain the meaning of your case study findings and why you believe they are important. Begin this part of the section by repeating what you consider to be your most important or surprising finding first, then systematically review each finding. Be sure to thoroughly extrapolate what your analysis of the case can tell the reader about situations or conditions beyond the actual case that was studied while, at the same time, being careful not to misconstrue or conflate a finding that undermines the external validity of your conclusions.

Relate the Findings to Similar Studies No study in the social sciences is so novel or possesses such a restricted focus that it has absolutely no relation to previously published research. The discussion section should relate your case study results to those found in other studies, particularly if questions raised from prior studies served as the motivation for choosing your subject of analysis. This is important because comparing and contrasting the findings of other studies helps support the overall importance of your results and it highlights how and in what ways your case study design and the subject of analysis differs from prior research about the topic.

Consider Alternative Explanations of the Findings Remember that the purpose of social science research is to discover and not to prove. When writing the discussion section, you should carefully consider all possible explanations revealed by the case study results, rather than just those that fit your hypothesis or prior assumptions and biases. Be alert to what the in-depth analysis of the case may reveal about the research problem, including offering a contrarian perspective to what scholars have stated in prior research if that is how the findings can be interpreted from your case.

Acknowledge the Study's Limitations You can state the study's limitations in the conclusion section of your paper but describing the limitations of your subject of analysis in the discussion section provides an opportunity to identify the limitations and explain why they are not significant. This part of the discussion section should also note any unanswered questions or issues your case study could not address. More detailed information about how to document any limitations to your research can be found here .

Suggest Areas for Further Research Although your case study may offer important insights about the research problem, there are likely additional questions related to the problem that remain unanswered or findings that unexpectedly revealed themselves as a result of your in-depth analysis of the case. Be sure that the recommendations for further research are linked to the research problem and that you explain why your recommendations are valid in other contexts and based on the original assumptions of your study.

V.  Conclusion

As with any research paper, you should summarize your conclusion in clear, simple language; emphasize how the findings from your case study differs from or supports prior research and why. Do not simply reiterate the discussion section. Provide a synthesis of key findings presented in the paper to show how these converge to address the research problem. If you haven't already done so in the discussion section, be sure to document the limitations of your case study and any need for further research.

The function of your paper's conclusion is to: 1) reiterate the main argument supported by the findings from your case study; 2) state clearly the context, background, and necessity of pursuing the research problem using a case study design in relation to an issue, controversy, or a gap found from reviewing the literature; and, 3) provide a place to persuasively and succinctly restate the significance of your research problem, given that the reader has now been presented with in-depth information about the topic.

Consider the following points to help ensure your conclusion is appropriate:

• If the argument or purpose of your paper is complex, you may need to summarize these points for your reader.
• If prior to your conclusion, you have not yet explained the significance of your findings or if you are proceeding inductively, use the conclusion of your paper to describe your main points and explain their significance.
• Move from a detailed to a general level of consideration of the case study's findings that returns the topic to the context provided by the introduction or within a new context that emerges from your case study findings.

Note that, depending on the discipline you are writing in or the preferences of your professor, the concluding paragraph may contain your final reflections on the evidence presented as it applies to practice or on the essay's central research problem. However, the nature of being introspective about the subject of analysis you have investigated will depend on whether you are explicitly asked to express your observations in this way.

Problems to Avoid

Overgeneralization One of the goals of a case study is to lay a foundation for understanding broader trends and issues applied to similar circumstances. However, be careful when drawing conclusions from your case study. They must be evidence-based and grounded in the results of the study; otherwise, it is merely speculation. Looking at a prior example, it would be incorrect to state that a factor in improving girls access to education in Azerbaijan and the policy implications this may have for improving access in other Muslim nations is due to girls access to social media if there is no documentary evidence from your case study to indicate this. There may be anecdotal evidence that retention rates were better for girls who were engaged with social media, but this observation would only point to the need for further research and would not be a definitive finding if this was not a part of your original research agenda.

Failure to Document Limitations No case is going to reveal all that needs to be understood about a research problem. Therefore, just as you have to clearly state the limitations of a general research study , you must describe the specific limitations inherent in the subject of analysis. For example, the case of studying how women conceptualize the need for water conservation in a village in Uganda could have limited application in other cultural contexts or in areas where fresh water from rivers or lakes is plentiful and, therefore, conservation is understood more in terms of managing access rather than preserving access to a scarce resource.

Failure to Extrapolate All Possible Implications Just as you don't want to over-generalize from your case study findings, you also have to be thorough in the consideration of all possible outcomes or recommendations derived from your findings. If you do not, your reader may question the validity of your analysis, particularly if you failed to document an obvious outcome from your case study research. For example, in the case of studying the accident at the railroad crossing to evaluate where and what types of warning signals should be located, you failed to take into consideration speed limit signage as well as warning signals. When designing your case study, be sure you have thoroughly addressed all aspects of the problem and do not leave gaps in your analysis that leave the reader questioning the results.

Case Studies. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Gerring, John. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices . New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007; Merriam, Sharan B. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education . Rev. ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1998; Miller, Lisa L. “The Use of Case Studies in Law and Social Science Research.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 14 (2018): TBD; Mills, Albert J., Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Putney, LeAnn Grogan. "Case Study." In Encyclopedia of Research Design , Neil J. Salkind, editor. (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010), pp. 116-120; Simons, Helen. Case Study Research in Practice . London: SAGE Publications, 2009;  Kratochwill,  Thomas R. and Joel R. Levin, editors. Single-Case Research Design and Analysis: New Development for Psychology and Education .  Hilldsale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992; Swanborn, Peter G. Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London : SAGE, 2010; Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods . 6th edition. Los Angeles, CA, SAGE Publications, 2014; Walo, Maree, Adrian Bull, and Helen Breen. “Achieving Economic Benefits at Local Events: A Case Study of a Local Sports Event.” Festival Management and Event Tourism 4 (1996): 95-106.

Writing Tip

At Least Five Misconceptions about Case Study Research

Social science case studies are often perceived as limited in their ability to create new knowledge because they are not randomly selected and findings cannot be generalized to larger populations. Flyvbjerg examines five misunderstandings about case study research and systematically "corrects" each one. To quote, these are:

Misunderstanding 1 :  General, theoretical [context-independent] knowledge is more valuable than concrete, practical [context-dependent] knowledge. Misunderstanding 2 :  One cannot generalize on the basis of an individual case; therefore, the case study cannot contribute to scientific development. Misunderstanding 3 :  The case study is most useful for generating hypotheses; that is, in the first stage of a total research process, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building. Misunderstanding 4 :  The case study contains a bias toward verification, that is, a tendency to confirm the researcher’s preconceived notions. Misunderstanding 5 :  It is often difficult to summarize and develop general propositions and theories on the basis of specific case studies [p. 221].

While writing your paper, think introspectively about how you addressed these misconceptions because to do so can help you strengthen the validity and reliability of your research by clarifying issues of case selection, the testing and challenging of existing assumptions, the interpretation of key findings, and the summation of case outcomes. Think of a case study research paper as a complete, in-depth narrative about the specific properties and key characteristics of your subject of analysis applied to the research problem.

Flyvbjerg, Bent. “Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12 (April 2006): 219-245.

• << Previous: Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Next: Writing a Field Report >>
• Last Updated: Mar 6, 2024 1:00 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

Successful thesis proposals in architecture and urban planning

Archnet-IJAR

ISSN : 2631-6862

Article publication date: 1 May 2020

Issue publication date: 11 November 2020

The purpose of this research is to improve the understanding of what constitutes a successful thesis proposal (TP) and as such enhance the quality of the TP writing in architecture, planning and related disciplines.

Design/methodology/approach

Based on extended personal experience and a review of relevant literature, the authors proposed a conception of a successful TP comprising 13 standard components. The conception provides specific definition/s, attributes and success rules for each component. The conception was applied for 15 years on several batches of Saudi graduate students. The implications of the conception were assessed by a students' opinion survey. An expert inquiry of experienced academics from architectural schools in nine countries was applied to validate and improve the conception.

Assessment of the proposed conception demonstrated several positive implications on students' knowledge, performance and outputs which illustrates its applicability in real life. Experts' validation of the conception and constructive remarks have enabled further improvements on the definitions, attributes and success rules of the TP components.

Research limitations/implications

The proposed TP conception with its 13 components is limited to standard problem-solving research and will differ in the case of other types such as hypothesis-based research.

Practical implications

The proposed conception is a useful directive and evaluative tool for writing and assessing thesis proposals for graduate students, academic advisors and examiners.

Social implications

The research contributes to improving the quality of thesis production process among the academic community in the built environment fields.

Originality/value

The paper is meant to alleviate the confusion and hardship caused by the absence of a consensus on what constitutes a successful TP in the fields of architecture, urban planning and related disciplines.

• Urban planning
• Architecture
• Built environment
• Postgraduate research
• Writing successful thesis proposals

Abdellatif, M. and Abdellatif, R. (2020), "Successful thesis proposals in architecture and urban planning", Archnet-IJAR , Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 503-524. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARCH-12-2019-0281

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2020, Mahmoud Abdellatif and Reham Abdellatif

Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode .

1. Introduction

After the postgraduate student completes her/his coursework in a master programme or passes the comprehensive exam and becomes a doctoral candidate in a doctoral programme, s/he is allowed to submit a “Thesis Proposal” (TP) to her/his department whose main concern is to assess whether the topic is suitable for a graduate study and for the time and resources available ( Afful, 2008 ; Kivunja, 2016 ; Reddy, 2019 ).

The department then sends the submitted TP to higher bodies for official approval. Once approved, the TP becomes a legal binding or “a formal contract” ( Walliman, 2017 ) and “a statement of intent” ( Hofstee, 2006 ) between the researcher and the university. If the student adheres to all prescribed TP requirements within the specified time, s/he will be awarded the degree ( Leo, 2019 ).

Guided by his/her academic advisor, the student prepares the TP within which the researcher explains the research problem, questions, aim and objectives, scope, and methodologies to describe, analyse and synthesize the research problem and develop solutions for it ( Paltridge and Starfield, 2007 ). In addition, the proposal includes a brief about research significance and expected contributions; a preliminary review of literature; thesis structure and approximate completion timeline; and a list of relevant references ( Kivunja, 2016 ; Thomas, 2016 ; Kornuta and Germaine, 2019 ).

1.1 Statement of the problem and research aim

After decades of writing, supervising and refereeing master and doctoral theses in the fields of Architecture and Urban Planning, the authors noticed that TP's differ in format and content from a school to another. This may be considered a healthy matter because it gives room for flexibility that absorbs the variety of research problems and techniques. Yet, the absence of a consensus on what constitutes a successful TP could cause confusion and hardship to both students and advisors ( Kamler and Thomson, 2008 ; Abdulai and Owusu-Ansah, 2014 ). The review of literature indicates that TP writing has been tackled in depth in many fields (see for instance Gonzalez, 2007 ; Balakumar et al. , 2013 ; Eco, 2015 ; Kivunja, 2016 ; Glatthorn and Randy, 2018 ; Kornuta and Germaine, 2019 ). Apart from thesis proposal instruction and guideline manuals posted on universities' websites, the authors believe that there is a lack of in-depth research on the issue of producing successful thesis proposals in the fields of Architecture and Planning.

To propose a successful TP conception which determines the standard components of TP and sets specific definitions, attributes and rules of success for each component.

To apply the proposed conception on several batches of graduate students, then assess its impact on students' performance and output along the years of application.

To validate the proposed conception by getting the insights of experienced academics from architecture and planning schools worldwide, and as such, improve and finalize the conception.

1.2 Research methodology

To propose the Successful TP Conception , the authors relied on two sources: knowledge extracted from their extended experience and a review of relevant studies and instruction manuals and guidelines for preparing TP in several worldwide universities. The Conception has been applied on several batches of master and doctoral students from IAU, KSA for almost 15 years between 2005 and 2020 during their enrolment in three courses in the College of Architecture and Planning, IAU, KSA. These courses are “ARPL 603 Research Methods” and “BISC 600 Research Methods” for the master's level and “URPL 803 Seminar (3): Doctoral Research Methods” for the doctoral level.

From a total of 60 students, 39 students (65%) completed the survey; of whom 12 students (31%) were doctoral and 27 students (69%) were masters students.

- Improve their understanding of the components of a successful TP.

- Enhance their performance in developing their TP's.

- Conduct a more effective self-assessment of their developed TP's.

- Enhance their performance along other stages of producing their theses and dissertations.

- Maintain any other benefits adding to students' research capabilities.

The first part recorded the general characteristics of respondents.

The second inquired about experts' viewpoints on the definitions, attributes and the rules of success of the components of the proposed TP conception.

2. Proposing the Successful TP Conception

2.1 components of a tp for a standard problem-solving research type.

A review of thesis writing guidelines posted on universities' websites and other related literature has indicated that the number of components of a masters' or doctoral thesis proposal varies. After a thorough review of related literature and with their experience, the authors have been convinced that, in its standard form, a TP should include 13 components. Chronically arranged, as appearing in the proposal, they are: title page, abstract, keywords, background, statement of the problem, research questions, research aim and objectives, research scope, research significance and contributions, preliminary review of literature, research methodology, thesis structure and timeline, and references list ( Ostler, 1996 ; Simpson and Turner, 2004 ; Zhou, 2004 ; Davies, 2011 ; Axelrod and Windell, 2012 ; Donohue, 2018 ; Glatthorn and Randy, 2018 ; Kornuta and Germaine, 2019 ). It is worth mentioning that these 13 components will differ in the case of a hypothesis-based research whose aim is to validate a specific hypothesis that a specific variable/s is/are or is/are not the main cause/s of an investigated research problem. This paper is limited only to the standard problem-solving research type.

2.2 Building the Successful TP Conception

Setting a general definition for each component including its meaning, importance, functions and contents.

Outlining the most important attributes that must be considered when writing the component.

Based on step 1 and 2, the authors extracted a list of success rules which provides a concise definition for each component of the TP, and/or describes the relationship between the component and other components of the TP (the list is summarized at the end of Part 2).

2.2.1 Research title

This is the first item that appears to the reader. It invites or detains him/her from proceeding to other contents ( Blaxter et al. , 2010 ). The research title is positioned in the title page along with several basic data, namely, the title; the names of the Department, College, University, study programme, researcher and advisory committee; and submission date.

The research title should be useful, discussing an issue critical to society; true, conveying a real message about the investigated problem ( Donohue, 2018 ); concise, presenting the message with the minimum number of words; adequate, using the right wording to explain the intended meaning; and attractive , stimulating the reader's attention. Iterations in refining the research title go hand-in-hand with refining the research question ( Groat and Wang, 2013 ).

2.2.2 The abstract

It is the first item that appears in the TP after the title and of the same significance; yet, it is the last to be written ( Kornuta and Germaine, 2019 ). It has a marketing function ( Lamanauskas, 2019 ); it calls the reader in or alienates him out. A comprehensive abstract contains a summary of the problem, aim, scope, methodology, importance, contributions and outline ( Koopman, 1997 ).

The Abstract should be concise or brief with a maximum of 200–300 words; adequate, including profiles of all parts of the proposal; clear, expressing its message without ambiguity; and interrelated, serving as a body of sequential, coherent and connected ideas ( Blaxter et al. , 2010 ).

2.2.3 The keywords

These are a set of words or terms used for archiving, tabulation and electronic search on databases. They should include essential “subject terms” describing the research topic, the unique sub-specializations and focus of the research (what is researched), the contextual scope of the research (where and when), and the used research methodology (how to conduct the research) ( Lamanauskas, 2019 ). They are better written by splitting the title into its separate single words or terms which must be found in the abstract, as well ( Mack, 2012 ).

Keywords should be brief, not more than 8–12 words; adequate, conveying the research theme, scope, aim and approach; exact, focusing on the investigated topic and scope; and standard, using scientific terminology used in the field.

2.2.4 The background

This is a gradual preparation of the reader from the larger scientific field to the specific field, from the wider geographic area to the immediate area, and from the larger timeframe to the immediate one. It starts from the strategic level and general scope of the research and gradually reaches the level closer to the examined problem ( Abdellatif and Abdellatif, 2005 ). It places the study within the larger context of the research, creates interest to the reader and catches his attention, and includes quotations and statistics leading the reader to proceed ( Babbie, 2014 ).

The background statement should be striking, drawing the reader's attention to the research; brief, not lengthy; gradual, moving from the general level surrounding the investigated issue to the specific level; and careful, not speeding up in disclosing the study problem, aim or methodology to the reader ( Axelrod and Windell, 2012 ; Pautasso, 2013 ).

2.2.5 The statement of the problem

Statement of the General Research Problem is a narrative describing a negative aspect/s prevailing in the investigated urban environment/ecosystem or architectural setting; it is equivalent to the negative wording of the research aim ( Abdellatif and Abdellatif, 2005 ). It stimulates interest in the study; scientifically explained to convey a simple, clear and specific issue to which a reader can relate and is useful to the society at large ( Balakumar et al. , 2013 ). In the humanities and social sciences many dissertations endeavour to establish the conditions of the problem, not to solve it ( Dorst, 2011 ).

In formulating the research problem, it is useful to consider it a problem which hinders the natural development of the society and/or environment and leads to a decline in the Quality of Life (QOL) or Quality of Environment (QOE) or both. A development problem is a factor/cause leading to either a quantitative or qualitative deficiency in satisfying a human need or both such as a lack of certain service or inadequate provision of the service ( Abdellatif, 2015 ). To arrive at a successful statement of the general problem, the researcher should pinpoint the main cause/s behind the study problem. All what comes next depends on the clarity of the problem statement.

Technically oriented research (TOR), which places emphasis on the process and procedures as the primary basis of effective design, TOR can be either systematic, or computational, or managerial.

Conceptually driven research (CDR), which can be either psychological or person–environment. The psychological type is driven by the goal of matching knowledge with the nature of the design problem, its components, context and social and environmental requirements. Whereas, the person–environment type places emphasis on the socio-cultural and socio-behavioural factors as they relate to the design process itself and to settings, buildings and urban environments.

Classify the investigated situation to branched dimensions, e.g. demographic, planning, regulatory, economic, social, environmental, etc.

Trace the causes or the influencing factors that lead to the emergence or aggravation of the problem/s in each dimension.

Clarify the problem more by identifying the consequences or adverse effects (the symptoms of the problem) that resulted from those causes. This helps isolate the causes from the consequences to focus on treating the causes not the consequences. Using temporary painkillers will not eliminate the disease; it only tranquilizes the symptoms.

Statement of the consequences of the problem is a narrative that describes the negative effects caused by sub-problems on the investigated environment ( Goetz et al. , 2005 ).

The statement of consequences of the problem should be focused, where each consequence focuses on one independent sub-problem; articulate, not overlapping with other consequences; rooted, relating to one of the roots of the general problems; deep, providing description for specific symptom; and comprehended, could be perceived, described and determined ( Abdellatif, 2015 ).

2.2.6 Research questions

What is the nature of the development problem as defined by the latest findings of previous literature, similar studies and published statistical reports?

What are the key features of the investigated problem according to a direct field survey?

What are the appropriate links between different variables of the study (causes, consequences, etc.) according to the information gathered from the theoretical review and field surveys?

What are the extracted results and the appropriate solutions and/or recommendations to deal with the general research problem and its sub-problems?

What are the critical contributions of the research findings on the life and/or environmental qualities?

How can the research increase the benefits of research results on the ground?

What are the research areas/points that need further investigation?

Research questions should be specific, each question addresses one sub-problem; unduplicated, each question does not repeat itself in a different format; sequential, or arranged according to their importance and order; and interrelated, where each question relates to other questions.

2.2.7 Research aim, goals and objectives

The general aim of the research is a specific and clear statement presenting the overall purpose of the study. It is directed to find an appropriate and effective solution to the general research problem ( Donohue, 2018 ). It is an attempt to fill a gap between a negative reality of an environment/ecosystem/or development situation and a desired positive future to be achieved at the end of the research process ( Glatthorn and Randy, 2018 ). The aim should be properly stated to ensure the success of all the following stages of the scientific research process.

Exploring the problem by defining the research problem, formulating aim and objectives, designing the methodology, defining the scope, and highlighting the expected contributions.

Collecting secondary data by defining basic concepts and terms, reviewing relevant literature and previous studies, and describing the most important characteristics of the investigated environment from secondary sources and statistical reports.

Collecting primary data via direct field surveys and based on the views of concerned population, experts and officials to describe the characteristics of the investigated development problem.

Analysing the gathered data by using theoretical and field data to determine the appropriate links among different variables of the study (e.g. causes, consequences, etc.).

Synthesizing the gathered data by integrating the findings of analysis to build appropriate approaches or solutions to deal with the general problem.

Extracting conclusions and writing recommendations to highlight research findings and make them more useful and effective.

A micro level objective contributes to solving the specific investigated problem (e.g. a specific quantitative or qualitative problem that hinders the development of a sector of society, environment, or eco-system).

A macro level objective contributes to realizing a higher goal (e.g. improving the overall quality of life of a larger community, upgrading the quality of the larger environment, etc.).

Development objectives should apply the SMART goal rule (previously explained); and be non-overlapping by ensuring that each objective is focused and not conflicting with other objectives.

2.2.8 Research scope

Thematic scope clarifies the general and specific areas of the research (e.g. the research falls within the field of sustainable development in general and focuses on social sustainability).

Geographic/Spatial scope specifies the spatial boundaries of the physical environment within which the research is applied (e.g. a specific local or regional setting).

Temporal scope shows the past, present and future spans the research will cover indicating the number of years from the historical information inventory until the expected completion date. If the research aim is to develop future strategies or policies, the span will extend to future target point.

Research Scope should be categorized, by being classified by subject, place and time; focused, by reaching the closest limits of the investigated research problem, environment and time; and clear, by not being so general or ambiguous.

2.2.9 Research significance and contributions

They highlight the most important benefits and the main beneficiaries from solving the research problem; the potential positive impacts of the study on the life and environmental qualities ( Groat and Wang, 2013 ). Contributions differ in nature (theoretical or applied or both) and in size (huge, average, or marginal). There is a positive relationship between the size of contributions and the size of impacted beneficiaries (individuals, groups, institutions, communities, societies), the scale of the impacted geographic boundaries (local, national or global), the type of impacted development sectors (service, production, etc.) and the numbers of the impacted sectors (one, a few, or all sectors). Research significance increases as the size of contributions increases. Specifying the research significance, expected contributions and potential beneficiaries helps promote the research and provides rational justifications for conducting it. The higher the contributions and the greater the sectors of the beneficiaries, the more significant the research is ( Abdellatif and Abdellatif, 2005 ). According to Balakumar et al. (2013) research significance justifies the need for the research that is being proposed.

Research significance and expected contributions should be categorized, in terms of type (theoretical or applied contribution or both), size and nature of the beneficiaries (individuals, institutions, communities, etc.) and geographical extent (small site, district, city, region, nation, etc.); clear, simple and comprehensible to the reader; and realistic, real, accurate and not exaggerated.

2.2.10 The preliminary review of literature

This is an initial review of literature dealt with relevant problems. It aims to build an initial understanding of the problem, identify the most important variables that have been considered, cite methodologies used to deal with the problem; make use of the latest findings and record the various recommendations/solutions suggested to deal with the problem ( Hart, 1998 ; Grix, 2001 ). According to Dunleavy (2003) , it is a critical review on related recent research that is well documented, structured, analysed and synthesized. It offers the researcher an opportunity to engage with other scholars in one's disciplinary community.

In addition to having a separate part, it is useful to combine the literature review with other components of the TP (e.g. the research problem, questions, aim and objectives, and methodology). It is important that the review presents differing perspectives or contrasting views of the topic and reports the complexities of the issue ( Kornuta and Germaine, 2019 ). By conducting the review, the researcher becomes able to build an initial but comprehensive understanding of the causes and consequences of the problem, the methodologies used to study and analyse the problem and the solutions proposed to deal with it by synthesizing various viewpoints of previous studies, thereby, supporting her/his principle argument about the study problem with the results derived from previous literature ( Pautasso, 2013 ).

Definitions of key terms and concepts; standard terms to appear in the research and special concepts which are not formally provided by previous scholars. The definitions must be logic and derived from scientifically recognized sources.

Review of previous studies; focusing on identifying several issues, namely, the most important dimensions and variables of the research problem (the causes of the problem; why the problem has emerged or aggravated; the most important consequences of this problem on the human and/or physical environment); the methods used to deal with the problem; the latest findings of previous studies and the various approaches/solutions suggested to deal with the problem.

Contextual aspects of the investigated development situation; including a review of relevant characteristics of the researched environment (its basic dimensions and elements) as found in previous studies. Contextual aspects may be classified into physical and human components; or into environmental, functional, aesthetic, structural, economic and social design determinants; or into demographic, planning, regulatory, economic, social, environmental sectors or other classifications.

Preliminary review of literature should be indexed, from reliable scholarly sources; categorized or documented according to standard classification system; employed, used wisely to achieve a desired purpose; up to date, recent, however, in topics which address chronological development or evolutionary aspects references could be recent and old; and related, relevant to the study problem ( Hart, 1998 ).

2.2.11 Research methodology

Data collection methods including office methods used to collect secondary data from previous literature and case studies as well as field methods used to gather original data through field visits, surveying, questionnaires, interviews with stakeholders, etc.

Data analysis methods including methods used to analyse both the secondary and primary information collected from office and the field surveys such as Statistical Analysis, Environmental Scanning (SWOT), Development Components Analysis, etc.

Data synthesis methods including methods used to compile, synthesize the analysis and develop appropriate alternative scenarios or solutions to deal with the problem.

Data presentation methods including methods to present the research process and findings such as scientific research paper containing narratives, tables, figures, forms, maps, results and recommendations as well as final visual presentation to review panel to get remarks and write the last version of the TP.

Research methodology should be appropriate, aligned with the purpose/s in which they will be used; achievable, within the reach of the researcher; effective, achieving the purpose fast and with high quality; reliable, previously tested, applied and approved in similar cases; and precise, accurate and specific.

2.2.12 Research structure and timeline

This is a brief statement of the main sections of the master's/doctoral thesis with tentative dates for completing the various stages of the research. Careful preparation of research structure and timeline ensures the effectiveness and integrity of the plan of actions towards the completion of the study ( Kivunja, 2016 ). It is also a criterion to judge the achieved progress and seriousness of the researcher.

Research structure and timeline should be sequential, arranged according to a standard scientific research process; logical, proportionate to the total period available for completion; and balanced, distributing time properly among various stages.

2.2.13 The list of references

This is a list which contains a reasonable number of relevant references on the topic which were actually cited in the TP ( Kornuta and Germaine, 2019 ). Including a list of the references about the topic demonstrates that the researcher is familiar with the basic and latest knowledge on his/her problem.

The list of references should be relevant, closely related to the investigated subject; up to date, recent yet containing old and new according the topic and context; and reliable, published in dependable vessels.

2.3 Extracting the success rules

Based on the above definitions and attributes provided for each of the 13 TP components, the authors were able to extract a number of success rules that took the form of equations, each of which describes an equality function between each component and its counterpart component/s as shown in Table 1 . For instance, rule #1 shows that “research title” is equal to “the general aim of the research” and is equal to “the negative wording of the research problem”.

3. Assessing the Successful TP Conception from students' viewpoints

They better understood the meanings of each component (97% agree and strongly agree and 3% neutral).

They better understood the attributes of each component (94% agree and strongly agree and 6% neutral).

They better understood the rules which control the relations between the various components of the TP (87% agree and strongly agree and 13% neutral).

The process of writing the proposal has become easier and more convenient (100% agree and strongly agree).

The effort, cost and time spent in submitting the proposal have been substantially saved (87% agree and strongly and 12% neutral).

The relationship with academic advisor has improved (87% agree and strongly agree and 12% neutral).

The students' confidence in advancing their own learning abilities has improved (93% agree and strongly agree and 7% neutral).

The students' abilities to address the strengths and weaknesses of their personal skills have improved (93% agree and strongly agree and 7% neutral).

The students' abilities to manage their learning process more independently have improved (90% agree and strongly agree, 7% neutral and 3% disagree).

The students have created a clearer and better mutual understanding with their academic advisors (90% agree and strongly agree and 10% neutral).

The students have reduced their distraction from the original target set out in the proposal (81% agree and strongly agree, 16% neutral and 3% disagree).

The students have been able to finish their research on time (78% agree and strongly agree, 19% neutral and 3% disagree).

They gained better analytical skills (87% agree and strongly agree, 10% neutral and 3% disagree).

They gained better problem-solving skills (87% agree and strongly agree, 10% neutral and 3% disagree).

They gained better critical thinking skills (87% agree and strongly agree, 10% neutral and 3% disagree).

4. Verifying the Successful TP Conception based on experts' viewpoints

Having proposed, applied and assessed the Successful TP Conception, it becomes important to validate it using the insights of experienced academics from Architectural and Planning schools worldwide. This part summarizes the results of the experts' inquiry survey conducted in November 2019 to February 2020. It shows the characteristics of experts and their viewpoints and remarks on the originally proposed definitions, attributes and success rules.

4.1 Experts' characteristics

They were from nine countries, namely, the United States of America, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain.

About 75% of the experts were males and 25% were females. About 5% were 35–45 years old, 20% were 45–55 years, 55% were 55–65 years and 20% were 65 years and over.

About 5% were Assistant Professors, 10% Associate Professors and the majority (85%) were Professors.

The experts had teaching experiences in undergraduate and graduate levels (masters, doctoral, diploma, postdoctoral and continuing professional development).

The general specialization of 70% of the experts was Architecture and 30% of experts were specialized in Urban Planning. They taught in several built environment fields (Architecture, Interior Design, Building Technology, Urban Design, Landscape Architecture and Urban and Regional Planning).

The experts had several focus areas, namely, Architecture, History and Theories of Architecture, Assessment of Designed Environments, Design Methods, Pedagogy, Architecture and Digital Technologies, Heritage Conservation, Middle East Architecture and Cities, Construction Project Management, Urban Design, Spatial Development Planning, Landscape, Built Environment and Behaviour, Urban Studies, Techniques and Quantitative Methods of Urban Planning, Urban Conflict, Urban Justice, Community Development, Environmental Management and Planning and Development Approaches.

About 10% of the experts supervised 5 theses, 5% supervised 6–10 theses, 50% supervised 11–20 theses and 35% supervised more than 20 theses.

4.2 Experts' viewpoints and remarks

Concerning the proposed definitions of the TP components, the experts expressed their agreement which ranged between 73 and 96%. Some experts provided additional remarks to help improve the definitions. Table 2 presents the originally proposed definitions, the percentages of agreed experts and their additional remarks.

Regarding the attributes of each component of the TP, the original conception proposed 38 attributes, the experts added 18 attributes resulting in a total of 56 attributes. Table 3 presents a matrix showing the percentages of experts' agreement of the originally proposed attributes as well as the added attributes. The lowest agreement percentage was 59% and the highest was 96%.

Concerning the proposed success rules which were called “equations” in the originally proposed conception, the experts suggested to change the expression into “rules”; which is more appropriate for subjective contents than mathematical expression. Table 4 presents the final 19 success rules for the components/sub-components of a TP and the percentage of experts' agreement which ranged between 57 and 95%.

5. Conclusion

Based on their experience in preparing and supervising masters and doctoral theses and after a thorough review of the literature on preparing thesis proposals, the authors drafted a conception of a successful thesis proposal comprising specific definitions, attributes and rules for each of the 13 components of a standard TP. The conception had been applied over a duration of 15 years (2005–2020) on several batches of master and doctoral students in IAU, KSA. Through an online survey, the majority of students (78–100%) have indicated that understanding and applying the conception helped them improve their performances and outputs during the TP development process and beyond.

The conception was then validated by getting the insights of 39 experienced academics from worldwide architectural schools. The experts accepted the proposed definitions with (73–96%) agreement rate. The experts also accepted the proposed attributes with (59–96%) agreement rate. As for the success rules, the experts' agreed as well with an acceptance rate ranging from (57–95%). The experts suggested constructive remarks which were considered in writing the final version of the conception.

The extracted success rules combine the definitions and attributes of each component of the TP and present them in a concise statement which defines the component and, where applicable, exemplifies its relationship to another corresponding or counterpart component of the TP. For example, rule #1 shows that “research title” should reflect “the general aim and scope of the research” and should also reflect “the negative wording of the research problem”. Extracted also is rule #14 which indicates that “the whole thesis proposal” written in future tenses, should resemble “the introduction of the final thesis” written in past tenses.

A directive tool that assists the researcher in writing a sound TP. Combining the last three tables (2, 3 and 4) into a comprehensive checklist would aid the students in preparing their TP's; enhancing the quality of their performance and outputs.

An evaluative tool that helps in assessing the validity and integrity of the submitted TP's that can be used by the researcher for self-assessment, or by the academic advisor, or by an examiner/evaluator before sending the proposal to higher authorities for approval.

The findings of this paper could be useful not only in evaluating thesis proposals, but also, with proper modifications, in assessing various scientific research documents, including scientific thesis, research papers and others; which is another research topic that will be addressed in the future.

The stages of developing the successful thesis proposal conception

Proposed list of success rules for the TP components

An extracted list of success rules for thesis proposals

Source(s) : Prepared by the authors based on the above analysis and the results of expert inquiry

Abdellatif , M. ( 2015 ), The Simplifying-Integrating Approach to Deal with Contemporary Design, Planning and Urban Development Problems , Scientific Publication Center, Imam Abdulrahman bin Faisal University , Dammam .

Abdellatif , M. and Abdellatif , R. ( 2005 ), Scientific Research Methods and Techniques in Architecture and Urban Planning , Unpublished Textbook for Graduate Students in Abdulrahman bin Faisal University , Dammam .

Abdulai , R.T. and Owusu-Ansah , A. ( 2014 ), “ Essential ingredients of a good research proposal for undergraduate and postgraduate students in the social sciences ”, SAGE Open , Vol. 4 No. 3 , pp. 1 - 15 .

Afful , J.B. ( 2008 ), “ Research proposal and thesis writing: narrative of a recently graduated researcher in applied linguistics ”, Nebula , Vol. 5 No. 4 , pp. 193 - 211 .

Axelrod , B. and Windell , J. ( 2012 ), Dissertation Solutions: A Concise Guide to Planning, Implementing, and Surviving the Dissertation Process , Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. , Plymouth .

Babbie , E. ( 2014 ), The Basics of Social Research , 6th ed. , Wadsworth Cengage Learning , Belmont, CA .

Balakumar , P. , Inamdar , M. and Jagadeesh , G. ( 2013 ), “ The critical steps for successful research: the research proposal and scientific writing ”, Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics , Vol. 4 No. 2 , pp. 130 - 138 .

Blaxter , L. , Hughes , C. and Tight , M. ( 2010 ), How to Research , Open University Press MaGraw-Hill Education , New York, NY .

Davies , W.M. ( 2011 ), Study Skills for International Postgraduate Students , Palgrave, MacMillan , Basingstoke .

Donohue , M. ( 2018 ), “ Research proposal toolkit: design tools for developing multi-stakeholder research proposals ”, available at: https://repository.library.northeastern.edu/files/neu:m044c6541 ( accessed 24 October 2019 ).

Doran , G.T. ( 1981 ), “ There's, a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives ”, Management Review , Vol. 70 No. 11 , pp. 35 - 36 .

Dorst , K. ( 2011 ), “ The core of “design thinking” and its application ”, Design Studies , Vol. 32 No. 6 , pp. 521 - 532 .

Dunleavy , P. ( 2003 ), Authoring a PhD: How to Plan, Draft, Write and Finish a Doctoral Thesis or Dissertation , Macmillan International Higher Education , Hampshire .

Eco , U. ( 2015 ), How to Write a Thesis , MIT Press, ProQuest Ebook Central , Cambridge .

Experts_Survey ( 2019 ), “ Opinion poll on definitions, attributes and equations of the successful thesis proposal ”, available at: https://www.questionpro.com/t/AOkM7ZdeXy ( accessed 01 November 2019 ).

Glatthorn , A.A. and Randy , L.J. ( 2018 ), Writing the Winning Thesis or Dissertation; a Step-by-step Guide , Corwin , Thousand Oaks, CA .

Goetz , S.J. , Shortle , J.S. and Bergstrom , J.C. ( 2005 ), Land Use Problems and Conflict: Causes, Consequences and Solutions , Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group , London .

Gonzalez , A.M. ( 2007 ), Shaping the Thesis and Dissertation: Case Studies of Writers across the Curriculum , Texas Christian University, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing , Fort Worth, TX .

Grix , J. ( 2001 ), Demystifying Postgraduate Research from MA to PhD , University of Birmingram Press , Birmingham .

Groat , L. and Wang , D. ( 2013 ), Architectural Research Methods , Wiley & Sons, Inc. , Hoboken, NJ .

Hart , C. ( 1998 ), Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination , Sage Publications , London .

Hofstee , E. ( 2006 ), Constructing a Good Dissertation: A Practical Guide to Finishing a Master's, MBA or PhD on Schedule , EPE , Sandton .

Kamler , B. and Thomson , P. ( 2008 ), “ The failure of dissertation advice books: toward alternative' ”, Educational Researcher , Vol. 37 No. 8 , pp. 507 - 514 .

Kivunja , C. ( 2016 ), “ How to write an effective research proposal for higher degree research in higher education ”, International Journal of Higher Education , Vol. 5 No. 2 , pp. 163 - 172 .

Koopman , P. ( 1997 ), “ How to write an abstract ”, available at: http://users.ece.cmu.edu/∼koopman/essays/abstract.html ( accessed October 2019 ).

Kornuta , H.M. and Germaine , R.W. ( 2019 ), A Concise Guide to Writing a Thesis or Dissertation Educational Research and beyond , Routledge , New York, NY .

Lamanauskas , V. ( 2019 ), “ Scientific article preparation: title, abstract and keywords ”, Problems in Education in the 21st Century , Vol. 77 No. 4 , pp. 456 - 462 .

Leo , S. ( 2019 ), “ Pitfalls of tourism graduate students in presenting the ingredients of research proposals ”, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sports and Tourism Education , Vol. 24 , pp. 178 - 189 .

Mack , C. ( 2012 ), “ How to write a good scientific paper: title, abstract, and keywords ”, Journal of Micro/Nanolithography, MEMS, and MOEMS , Vol. 11 No. 2 , pp. 1 - 5 .

Ostler , E. ( 1996 ), Guidelines for Writing Research Proposals, Reports, Theses, and Dissertations , The Educational Resources Information Center (Eric) , Washington, DC .

Paltridge , B. and Starfield , S. ( 2007 ), Thesis and Dissertation Writing in a Second Language: A Handbook for Supervisors , Routledge , London .

Pautasso , M. ( 2013 ), “ Ten simple rules for writing a literature review ”, PLoS Computational Biology , Vol. 9 No. 7 , pp. 1 - 4 .

Reddy , C.D. ( 2019 ), “ Thinking through a research proposal: a question approach ”, in 18th European Conference on Research Methodology for Business and Management Studies , Academic Conferences International Limited , Johannesburg , pp. 271 - 277 .

Salama , A.M. ( 2019 ), “ Methodological research in architecture and allied disciplines: philosophical positions, frames of reference, and spheres of inquiry ”, Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research , Vol. 13 No. 1 , pp. 8 - 24 .

Simpson , D.D. and Turner , L.W. ( 2004 ), “ Guide for preparing a thesis or dissertation ”, American Journal of Health Behavior , Vol. 28 No. 5 , pp. 477 - 478 .

Students_Survey ( 2020 ), “ Implication of the successful thesis proposal conception on the students' performance and output ”, available at: https://www.questionpro.com/t/AOkM7ZgieG ( accessed 02 February 2020 ).

Thomas , D. ( 2016 ), The PhD Writing Handbook , Palgrave, Macmillan Publisher Limited , New York, NY .

Walliman , N. ( 2017 ), Research Methods: The Basics , Routledge , New York, NY .

Zhou , A.A. ( 2004 ), Writing the Dissertation Proposal: A Comparative Case Study of Four Nonnative- and Two Native -English -speaking Doctoral Students of Education , University of Toronto, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing , Toronto .

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the sincere assistance provided by the team of experts from several Architectural Schools worldwide to verify and improve the TP Conception. Appreciation is also extended to the post graduate students of the College of Architecture and Planning, IAU, who have positively responded to the students' opinion survey.

Corresponding author

About the authors.

Mahmoud Abdellatif is a Professor of Urban and Regional Planning, College of Architecture and Planning, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IAU), Dammam, Saudi Arabia. He received an MSc from Assuit University, Egypt in 1977 and another MSc from Iowa State University in 1981 and a PhD degree from Texas A&M University in 1985. He has taught and practiced Architecture and Urban Planning for more than 45 years in Egypt, United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. His main research focus is on research methods, strategic planning and design and development approaches. He is currently the adviser of IAU Vice President for Studies, Development and Community Services. His last book (published in Arabic) entitled The Simplifying-Integrating Approach to Contemporary Design, Planning and Urban Development articulates his own problem-solving approach. He is the principle editor of the Strategic Plan of Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University 2018–2025.

Reham Abdellatif is an Assistant Professor in Architecture, College of Design, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IAU), Dammam, Saudi Arabia. She obtained an MSc degree from Assiut University in 2003 and a PhD degree from Newcastle University, UK, in 2012. She has taught and practiced Architecture and Interior Design for more than 22 years in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Her main research focus is on Architectural Education and Curriculum Development, Analysing Design Learning Activities, Distant/Online Learning, Communication and Computation, VR and Information Technologies in Architecture. She ran the interior design curriculum development committee in Assiut University and in IAU.

Related articles

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

Architecture Student Chronicles

How to conduct a Case Study?

When students begin studying  Architecture at a University, the first thing that they are supposed to become excellent at, is doing a documentation or a case study . It could be a case study of a small village, town, a villa, a bus-stop, or a high-rise commercial or residential building. A case study is an in-depth investigation of a single individual, group, incident, or community. Other ways include experiments, surveys , or analysis of archival information

What is the purpose of conducting a Case Study?

As the term Case Study suggests, it is the study of a particular case that is similar to your topic of design project. Doing a case study will help you understand the various aspects that you have to consider while designing.

Literature Case study

Before you start with your live case studies, first of all do a complete literature case study. Literature case study consists of reading everything you can find on the subject. You can refer books in a library, use Google to look up research papers, check out Standard Code books and statutory laws or from technical journals.

A literature case study would give you a vague idea about your topic. There will be various questions arising in your mind after you are done with your literature case study. To find the answers to those questions, you will have to go for minimum two live case studies….

Always possibly go for more than two different case studies, because a comparative case study of two or more different cases is very important and helpful.

• While you are doing your first case study, say a Villa, go for a smaller Villa first so that you can figure out the basic minimum requirements.
• In your second case study, go for an extremely lavish Villa so that you are aware of the maximum requirements you could give.

(Being able to provide maximum or minimum requirements in your design is very important)

If there are some requirements that you haven’t come across while doing your case studies but you went through it while you were doing a literature case study, then try implementing those requirements  in your design.

Eleven most important things to analyze in any Case Study

• Environment and micro-climate Analyzing the surrounding environment and the micro-climate of that place will help understand the reason of the orientation of the structure, the kind of roof chosen and the materials used in its construction.
• User behavior and requirements Studying the functioning of a particular place, say a Hospital, is very important; without which you will not be able to figure out the requirements and the area that should be allotted for each of the requirements.Talking to people working at that place (Hospital), will help you figure out if the requirements that are provided are adequate and he area that is allotted is sufficient for its efficient working.
• Utility and space enhancement Study of Utilitarian facilities of a particular case is also important. Various measures taken to enhance a particular space should be analyzed.
• Form and Function Analyzing the reason behind the form of that particular building…and how it merges with the surrounding environment. Form and Function go hand in hand. The form of the building should be able to convey the function of the building. A lot of Architects say “Form follows Function”.As an example, an institutional building should not end up looking like a museum or a disco.Some other Architects might disagree with that philosophy. They’d say that the function of a structure keeps changing but changing the form of the building everytime its function changes is not possible. They say, Adopt a “Universal Design Scheme”.
• Horizontal and vertical circulation Horizontal circulation consists of elements such as the corridors and lobbies. Vertical circulation includes elevators, staircases, ramps etc. The efficiency of the placement of these services should be analyzed.
• Site Planning and Landscape detailing Refer to the Article on the blog “ A Guide to Site Planning “, which deals with different aspects considered in site planning in greater detail.
• Structural details such as Column and Beam Design, Steel  and Composite structures Understanding and analyzing the structural details is also important. For example, large span structures such as Auditoriums use trusses or heavy I-section steel beams and sometimes shell-roofing that involve construction of Ring beams whereas in small span structures, RCC construction is used.
• Building Services such as Fire Alarm system, HVAC, Water supply systems The working of Fire Alarm system, HVAC and Water supply systems should be examined and their space requirements are to be analyzed.
• Design detailing considering the Barrier-free environment Implementation of the Barrier-free architecture for comfortable access to disabled people. Most public buildings have mandatory accessibility systems for the disabled. Check out Guidelines to the Disability Standards for Access to Premises 200X. (Australian law)
• Socio-economic profile of user group It might also be important to find out the socio-economic profile of the people using the services so as to determine their requirements and available resources.
• Parking details and standards Measure the allotted parking area on site, say for ten cars, then calculate the average area for each car and compare it with the areas specified in TSS (Time Savers Standards).

Conducting a case study is hard work. Sometimes, it is so small, it could be done in days, but on other occasions, it takes weeks to document and compile all the data. It involves going on-site, meeting and taking to people, lots of traveling, plenty of photography, and some fun. It is the most important of assignments you might get as an architectural students.

This is where you learn from reality, actual stuff, as opposed to only theoretical knowledge. When I was learning law I took every chance I could get to learn from people actually doing the work I was aiming for, yes I did “donate” many hours to Winters & Yonker, P.A. , but in the end is was worth every minute. Looking at places first hand  and documenting information would give you many insights and ideas and let you peek into the minds of professional architects and designers who have used years of experience and improvisation to design and create incredible structures.

Case studies of some of the famous Structures mentioned below:

 SPA – Delhi

VNIT – Nagpur

Thiagaraj Convention Center

TKM College of Engineering (Chennai)

42 thoughts on “How to conduct a Case Study?”

We want to design an oldage home how u can help

You live in Delhi and I am in Hyderabad, so I might not be of much help, unless you want my father (Architect Javed – http://www.architectjaved.com/ ) to design it for you.

If you want more info on Old age homes, see http://www.architecture-student.com/design-guide/guide-to-designing-old-age-homes/

The hardest part is looking for related literature especially when your research topic is new. It may be that difficult but it is surely unique when done and published.

I’m an attorney and when studying law we spent the bulk of the time reading what is called caselaw which is existing decisions that forms our law. We are to find cases that support our clients’ fact scenario so that the decision is our clients’ favour.

The parallel with architecture is uncanny as architects use existing structures and environments to form the basis for a new project. As the saying goes, “no need to reinvent the wheel” but it’s good to evolve from existing structures. Likewise, the law evolves.

Case Study is itself a very necessary work to be done before appearing to anything to be done. It’s just a sample report before appearing for any cases to get it solved properly.

A good blog to read on and to be shared amongst all…..

For me, Case Study is really important on anything you are planning in order to have a well planned and a successful outcome. Doing a Case Study on anything gives you an idea for the pro’s and con’s of that. I’m glad there’s such an article like this!

Case studies are a great way to plan lots of things, not just architectural projects. It’s almost like doing the work without actually doing the work, so you can identify sticking points, potential problems and lots more.

thank you that really helped….!! im a first year b.arch student….

Hello Nanda, We are glad our site has been of help to you. Do keep visiting. We wish you all the best for your future!

will do 🙂 thanku 🙂

it’s really helpful!! thx a lot!

i am beginning my thesis in B. arch. n so m requiring a hypothetical site of about 3 acres here in india with the climate warm and humid. topic is performing arts centre in kerala. how do i find and fix a hypothetical site?

Hello Resbi, The best way to find an appropriate site for your project could be done by using Google Earth.

i would like to know the steps and what case studies to do about for a multispeciality hospital

As im in 2nd year of b.arch

I have not much studed about much detailed

Like casestudy,site analysis’

It will help me

Thanks u again

U can see our 1st year architecture 1st month exibition video on youtube

hi !!!I’m a 1st year b.arch and v hav 2 do a case study on an architect’s firm . cud u tell me wat all i shud include in my case study???v hav to do a case study on a bungalow also…

Hello Joan,

The following links will be of help to you.

Guide for conducting a casestudy for a villa

Also check out: Cafeteria Design

i am a first year b.arch student..i have got a case study to do..can u please guide me by teling how many sheets should i present..please guide me..as soon as posible..ur site helpd me to knw how to do case study but i also want to know how many sheets should it include..please guide me..

tanx for this good work.pls do continue.

Number of sheets doesn’t matter until you pin down your inferences correctly …… for a first year student i guess a max of 1 or 2 A1 sheets or a ppt of less than 20 slides should be enough in terms of quantity …. make sure you put the point across 🙂 🙂

This was really helpful. Thank you very much. Just about to go for a case study on 2 schools.

What r all things I should see for bedroom attached bathroom casestudy.

Thank you for some other wonderful article. The place else could anyone get that type of information in such an ideal manner of writing? I’ve a presentation next week, and I am on the search for such information.

this really helped alot Thankyou

love your articles ,wld love to b part of this, was just surfing the net and found this…….good work to u guys

Hey, this really helped I’m goin for a case study on resorts tmrw Would appreciate any pointers to observe there thanq ????

hello,i am second year b.arch student,i have to do case study on luxury primary school . cud you please tell me what all should i include in my case study ???and also case study for the kids school…………

For a project like that, you should visit a minimum of two schools. One would be a high profile school and the other one could be a private low budget school or a government school. After you casestudies you will be able to draw comparisons between the two and that should help you come up with your list of requirements. let me know if you have any other questions.

I am doing by 3rd year b arch n this time our project is based on housing for artist Wht all shld I keep in mind while designing for artist n der family member who are non artist

Hello Monisha, I recommend you to read this article: http://www.architecture-student.com/case-studies/design-of-an-artist%E2%80%99s-house-guide-for-conducting-a-casestudy-of-a-villa/

Nice bolg. Thank you. I am barch student. I would like to know how to do comparison study of any two building. Now I have done with case study of a gallery (ngma Bangalore). I have done sub case study as well as literature study. But I want to know how exactly should I do comparitive study. More than write up comparison, How well can I present it

I am doing thesis on Orphan children and oldage home combining both generations together so as to create marvelous socially conceptual design. Help me with bestest case study from which I can learn alot to create spaces for both.

I am final year in srm rampuram school od architecture and doing thesis on township. So could anyone help with sum reference for case study and literature study as soon as possible

Hello Revathy,

When you say township… what kind of township. Give us some description of your thesis project so that we could give suggestions as to how you could proceed.

thanks a lot it is great information has answered some of my questions

hello.i have taken up the topic EMBASSY(any country) Design for my final year thesis. i was wondering if you could help me out with the plans for casestudies,since i hear it will be quite a problem with all the security.

It is not an excellent topic for design. You should have chosen something that would let you explore your ideas. Embassy building would look like a commercial block…nothing interesting… this is not something people havent seen. I do not think you will get permission for a livecasestudy of any embassy. No one would let you in. So if you still have time, i would suggest you choose a more design oriented topic.

hey i am doing thesis on low cost building materials and technology.i wanna do commercial project on this topic. can you suggest me project name or case study on this topic.

I have taken service apartment complex for tourist as my final year thesis. Help me to find the best case study for thesis.

Hello. Im studying b.arch 4th year. Im supposed to do a thesis case study, on Automobile industry i.e a car manufacturing plant. Can you please help me regarding this, as what all i should include and what steps i need to follow to complete my case study. Please reply me asap. Thank you.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Explore Thesis projects from the Class of 2021

Review Book:  https://issuu.com/mitarchitecture/docs/20-01-05_marchthesisbookletsqsinglep  

Master of Architecture (M.Arch) Website:  https://www.mitmarchthesis.com/theses

Post -arium Arditha Auriyane Advisor: Mariana Ibanez

Priced Out of Paradise :  Reconsidering cooperatives in response to climate gentrification in Miami’s communities of color Adiel Alexis Benitez Advisor: Miho Mazereeuw

To Know is to Empower :  Chagos Institute of Environmental Humanities Chen Chu Advisor: Miho Mazereew

Reclaiming the Estranged :  Reimagining the Architecture of the Excess Sydney Cinalli Advisor: Brandon Clifford, Deborah Garcia

Ferrous Futures :  Scenario Planning for Global Steel Charlotte D'Acierno, Clarence Lee, Jaehun Woo Advisor: Mariana Ibanez

Seven Ways of Reading The House of the Seven Gables Isadora Dannin Advisor: Mark Jarzombek

Gardens of Resistance Nynika Jhaveri Advisor: Azra Aksamija

After Aura :  Authorship, Automation, Authenticity Kailin J. Jones Advisor: Azra Aksamija

The Factory of Coexistence Melika Konjicanin Advisor: Cristina Parreño Alonso

Screen Time Jeffrey Landman Advisor: Rania Ghosn

Architecture for Revision Emma Pfeiffer Advisor: Rosalyne Shieh

Thorough David Allen White Advisor: Mark Jarzombek

Spring 2021

Review Book:  https://issuu.com/mitarchitecture/docs/21-05-21_allthesisbookletpages

Master of Architecture (M.Arch) Website:  https://mit-march-sp21.com/

The Houseful(l)ness of Public Space Xio Alvarez (M.Arch & MCP) Advisor: Miho Mazereeuw, Larry Vale

Still Standing :  Cooperative strategies for the renovation of Soviet mass housing Ben Hoyle, Eytan Levi (M.Arch & MSRED) Advisor: Ana Miljački

Concetividad Alegal :  Remaking and Resilience in the bay of Havana        Lucas Igarzabal, Marissa Concetta Waddle Advisor: Hans Tursack

M.I.celium mexicanus :  Rejecting Modernity through Zapotec Futurism Lynced Torres Advisor: Sheila Kennedy View project site here!

Heirlooms :  In Search of the Fifth Ecology Erin Wong Advisor: Sheila Kennedy

Building / Unbuilding   Andrew Younker Advisor: Azra Akšamija

Space of Mind :  The Hidden Architecture in the Time of Pandemic Ziyu Xu Advisor: Axel Killian

Master of Science in Architecture Studies (SMArchS)

SMArchS Architecture + Urbanism

Third Landscape Dries Carmeliet Advisor: Rania Ghosn

Mediating Chana :  Seeding Synergies Between Doves and Development Eakapob Huangthanapan Advisor: Miho Mazereeuw

Mokumitsu Districts in Tokyo :  Urban Renewal by Housing Cooperatives against Disaster Risk Ryuhei Ichikura Advisor: Miho Mazereeuw

To Build Home and To Live In (U)Hygge Wuyahuang Li Advisor: Mark Jarzombek

Collecting Ideals :  Re-Envisioning Ejidos as Climate-Action Platforms Luis Alberto Meouchi Velez Advisor: Lorena Bello Gomez, Nicholas de Monchaux

Made in Rural China Siyuan Sheng Advisor: Brent Ryan

Generative Urban Design toward Thermal Synergy :  Inspire sustainable urban configuration under distributive heating & cooling schemes Qianqian Wan Advisor: Caitlin Mueller

SMArchS Architecture Design

Velvet Garage :  Narratives of an Education in Architecture Marianna Gonzalez-Cervantes Advisor: Liam O'Brien

Nightrise :  Through the Valley of Jabal ‘Amil’s Shadow Mohamad Nahleh Advisor: Sheila Kennedy

SMArchS Building Technology

Mass Balance :  Design Strategies for Lightweight, Thermally Massive Construction Systems Eduardo Gascón Alvarez Advisor: Caitlin Mueller

Evaluating Overheating Preventative Measures in Residential Buildings and Passive Survivability Yesufu Oladipo Advisor: Les Norford

SMArchS Computation

A Machine Learning Model for Understanding How Users Value Designs :  Applications for Designers and Consumers Jeremy Bilotti (SMArchS Computation & SM in CS) Advisor: Terry Knight

The Untold Narratives Rania Sameh Kaadan Advisor: Terry Knight

Sonic Others :  Metaphorical Sonification of Collective Events Wonki Kang Advisor: Axel Killian

Networking Knowledge and Experience :  An Instrumental System for the Personal Development of Individual Designers Bowen Lu Advisor: George Stiny

Sonic Urban Transformations :  A Computational Model to Study and Represent Temporal Changes in the Walking Experience Elina Oikonomaki Advisor: Terry Knight

Monstrous Space :  Architectural Production in an Age of Algorithms Alexandra Waller Advisor: Larry Sass

Investigating Design Intentions :  Use of Eye Tracking and Machine Leearning to Study Perception of Architecture Xiaoyun Zhang Advisor: Takehiko Nagakura

SMArchS History, Theory & Criticism

"A Great Civilizing Agent" :  Architecture at MIT, Drawing Education, and Boston's Cultural Elite, 1865-1881 Katherine Dubbs Advisor: Arindam Dutta

Surveilling Sin :  Locating Sodomy in the Early Modern Florentine Bathhouse Aidan Flynn Advisor: Kristel Smentek, Jodi Cranston

SMArchS Aga Khan Program

Fractured and Dissolved, Architecture Ablaze :  Towards an Understanding of Ayeneh-Kari in Iranian Palaces Reza Daftarian Advisor: Nasser Rabbat

Scripting Inclusion Amanda Merzaban Advisor: Renee Green

Master of Science in Building Technolgy (SMBT)

Using Urban Building Energy Modeling to Meet Carbon Emission Targets :  A Case Study of Oshkosh, Wisconsin Zachary Berzolla Advisor: Christoph Reinhart

Early Design Stage Building Lifecycle Analysis (LCA) of Cost & Carbon Impact :  A Seamless Addition to the Conceptual Design Process Jingyi Liu Advisor: Jeremy Gregory, Randy Kirchain, Les Norford

Machine Learning for Human Design :  Developing Next Generation Sketch-Based Tools Bryan Ong Wen Xi (SMBT & MEng in CEE) Advisor: Caitlin Mueller

On the Relationship Between Spatial-Temporal Outdoor Thermal Comfort Simulations and Bike Ridership Elizabeth Young Advisor: Christoph Reinhart

Bachelor of Science in Art and Design (BSAD)

Digital Narratives for Self-Therapy Rachel Seo Yeon Kwak Advisor: Lee Moreau

Digital Communities x Collaborative Storytelling Clare Liut (BSAD & SB in 2A) Advisor: Mikael Jakobsson

Concrete Alternatives for Large Scale Additive Manufacturing Chloe Nelson-Arzuaga Advisor: Skylar Tibbits

Image Credits:

01. Ferrous Futures. Courtesy of Charlotte D’Acierno, Clarence Lee and Jaehun Woo (MArch).

02. Space of Mind. Courtesy of Ziyu Xu (MArch).

03. Nightrise. Courtesy of Mohamad Nahleh (SMArchS Architecture Design)

04. Untold Narratives. Courtesy of Rania Kaadan (SMArchS Computation).

05. Mediating Chana. Courtesy of Eakapob Huangthanapan (SMArchS Urbanism).

06. To Build Home and To Live In (U)Hygge. Courtesy of Wuyahuang Li (SMArchS Urbanism).

07. Concetividad Alegal. Courtesy of Lucas Igarzabal and Marissa Concetta Waddle (MArch).

08. The Houseful(l)ness of Public Space. Courtesy of Xio Alvarez (MArch + MCP).

09. Mass Balance. Courtesy of Eduardo Gascón Alvarez (SMArchS Building Technology).

10. Early Design Stage Building Lifecycle Analysis (LCA) of Cost & Carbon Impact. Courtesy of Jingyi Liu (SMBT).

Published July 1, 2021

Developing the PhD thesis project in relation to individual contexts: a multiple case study of five doctoral researchers

• Open access
• Published: 17 June 2022
• Volume 85 , pages 1143–1160, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Kelsey Inouye   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3961-3811 1  

5294 Accesses

2 Citations

4 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

The early phase of doctoral education is a critical yet under-researched period in PhD programs, when doctoral researchers must solidify their thesis projects prior to embarking on data collection. What makes this time particularly challenging is that new doctoral researchers synthesize their research thinking while they are still learning the expectations and nature of PhD research. This study draws on Emirbayer and Mische’s ( 1998 ) chordal triad of agency to explore how PhD researchers’ goals and experiences (individual contexts) influence how they approach doctoral research and develop their thesis projects during the first year of the PhD. The results of this small-scale longitudinal multiple case study of five first-year UK PhD social science researchers suggest that there are at least three approaches PhD researchers may adopt in developing their research projects, influenced by personal histories and post-PhD goals—pragmatic/strategic, idealistic, and realistic. In turn, these approaches may change over time as PhD researchers acquire experience and encounter critical events. Implications include the need for attention to a diversity of PhD researchers’ needs and goals, which may necessitate additional support or training in tailored areas, and a call for questioning the capacity of PhD researchers to contribute to/stretch the structures surrounding thesis writing.

Similar content being viewed by others

A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis

David Byrne

Mixed methods research: what it is and what it could be

Rob Timans, Paul Wouters & Johan Heilbron

What is Qualitative in Research

Patrik Aspers & Ugo Corte

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

This study focuses on the individual experiences of five first-year social science PhD researchers at a UK university. In the UK as elsewhere, doctoral education has been recognized as central to the growing knowledge economy (Department for Education, 2017 ). The structure of UK doctoral programs has moved on from the apprenticeship model predominant in the 1980s to address concerns about attrition and career preparedness. It now includes integrated research training courses, graduate schools, research training courses, graduate schools, doctoral colleges, and doctoral training centers or partnerships (UK Council for Graduate Education, 2015 ). Alongside changes in training, the doctoral degree has diversified to include professional doctorates and thesis formats other than the traditional monograph—for instance, thesis by publication or integration. Current UK policy outlined in the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) Characteristics Statement declares that “All UK doctorates, regardless of their form, continue to require the main focus of the candidate's work to demonstrate an original contribution to knowledge” (QAA, 2020 , p. 3) and that doctoral graduates should be able to “think critically about problems to produce innovative solutions” as well as synthesize large bodies of information and communicate with diverse audiences (QAA, 2020 , p. 3). This policy statement sets the backdrop against which all UK doctorates should be assessed.

Transitioning into a doctoral program can be challenging, as PhD researchers must make the shift from consuming and analyzing knowledge to producing it (Lovitts, 2005 ; McPherson, et al., 2018 ). For those in the humanities and social sciences, engaging in a substantial piece of research also means a level of self-direction and isolation for which many PhD researchers do not feel prepared (Gardner, 2008 ). As such, doctoral education is often described as a transition from dependence to independence, associated with developing and taking on a new identity as a researcher (e.g., Green, 2005 ) and becoming part of the academic and disciplinary discourse community.

Existing research on the early stages of doctoral programs, meaning the phases prior to thesis data collection and writing, suggest that challenges of transitioning into the PhD include establishing a sense of belonging, learning the expectations of the disciplinary field, developing research and writing skills, gaining ownership over the work, and understanding the nature of the doctorate (Chatterjee-Padmanabhan & Nielson, 2018 ; Creely & Laletas, 2019 ; Fisher et al., 2020 ). At the same time, PhD researchers do not have identical experiences; variations in PhD researcher transitions can be attributed to diversity in prior educational and cultural experiences and ways of thinking (see analytical vs. practical intelligence, Lovitts, 2008 ), highlighting the importance of individual/personal factors in understanding how new doctoral researchers adapt to the PhD.

Given the often challenging and individual nature of PhD researcher transitions, this study aimed to explore how personal contexts and goals influence the experiences of five first-year PhD researchers in the UK, as they designed their social science thesis projects over the course of 1 year. At the institution in which this study took place, plans for the PhD research project are synthesized in a document (hereafter “Upgrade document”) that is submitted alongside institutional documents (e.g., ethics forms) and orally examined by two internal assessors in a process referred to as Upgrade, which typically takes place at the end of the first year. The content of the Upgrade document varies slightly by department but generally includes the questions, theoretical framework, literature, and methods guiding the thesis research.

It is important to note that in the UK, doctoral programs vary in structure across institutions and departments. The goal of this study is therefore to provide insight into the individual experiences of the participants at a single university and disciplinary cluster as they conceived of and composed their Upgrade documents in the first year of the doctorate. The research question guiding this study was:

How do first-year PhD researchers in the social sciences (at a single UK institution) shape and negotiate their Upgrade documents over time and in relation to their prior experiences and goals?

Doctoral writing and supervisor feedback

Research suggests that writing is a challenge for many doctoral researchers (Aitchison & Lee, 2007 ; Cameron, et al., 2009 ; Cotterall, 2011 ; Lee & Aitchison, 2009 ), particularly in the early stages of the PhD (Caffarella & Barnett, 2000 ). What makes PhD writing difficult is that it not only requires an understanding of the expectations and nuances of the thesis and other academic genres, but also necessitates the synthesis of disciplinary and methodological knowledge; writing is both an expression of and tool for thinking (Bazerman & Prior, 2004 ; Klein, 1999 ; Yore, et al., 2004 , 2006 ).

Although variation in writing practices and writing structures exist across disciplines (Carter, 2007 ), in general, research writing requires the writer to draw from and analyze multiple sources and concepts to create new knowledge in a process of meaning-making (Ivanic, 1998 ) that extends from the literature review through the writing up of results (Kamler & Thomson, 2014 ). In many ways, the writing process and the research process are intimately related, suggesting that researchers use writing to construct and present knowledge, vacillating between data collection, writing, analysis, and inquiry (Yore, et al., 2006 , p. 116). At the same time, many doctoral writers struggle to articulate—or legitimize—their personal voices within the web of academic writing structures (Naomi, 2021 ).

Supervisors support the doctoral researcher’s thesis research and writing, ideally guiding them towards becoming independent researchers and experts in their relevant fields (Pearson & Brew, 2002 ). Although PhD researcher experience is influenced by a network of personal and professional relationships (Hopwood, 2010 ), the supervisory relationship is perhaps the most critical in the PhD context, often influencing the overall experience of the program (Cotterall, 2015 ; Pyhalto et al., 2015 ).

The primary pedagogical approach utilized in supervision is that of feedback, a dialogic process providing information about disciplinary and institutional expectations and facilitating critical discussion (Anderson, et al., 2008 ; McAlpine & McKinnon, 2012 ). Argument, logic, language, and genre are common foci of supervisor comments (Basturkmen, et al., 2014 ; Can & Walker, 2014 ; Xu, 2017 ). Several studies focused primarily on international graduate students have examined how doctoral students interpret and respond to supervisor feedback (e.g., Wang & Li, 2011 ; Xu, 2017 ; Xu & Hu, 2020 ), finding that PhD researchers’ prior experience is linked to supervision needs and feedback responses. For instance, PhD researchers in the early stages of their research tend to require more support, preferring “directive, specific and consistent feedback” and are more likely to respond negatively to criticism (Wang & Li, 2011 ). In contrast, PhD researchers with greater confidence and stronger ownership of their work exhibit more positive attitudes towards challenging or critical feedback (Wang & Li, 2011 ). Graduate students may also resist feedback out of a desire to promote their “own agendas” (Vehviläinen, 2009 , p. 197) or a belief that changes are unnecessary (Xu, 2017 ), suggesting that responses to feedback may be linked to individual goals and provide evidence of agency.

PhD contexts and goals

Doctoral researchers bring their individual histories and goals for the future to their PhD study. Understanding how prior experience and goals influence perspectives of and approaches to doctoral research is important, and existing studies suggests that biographical factors may affect the extent to which PhD researchers can access disciplinary and research training cultures (Deem & Brehony, 2000 ), as well as how they cope with challenges (Hockey, 1994 ) and respond to supervisor feedback (Inouye & McAlpine, 2017 ). International PhD researchers, in particular, may have more difficulty accessing academic research cultures due to differences in language, cultural norms, higher education systems, and expectations for doctoral study (Deem & Brehony, 2000 ). For instance, case studies and self-studies on international PhD researchers suggest that doctoral researchers from non-Anglophone contexts (e.g., China/East Asia) may experience disparities between their earlier education experiences and the expectations of their PhD programs in English-speaking countries (Li, 2018 ; Soong, et al., 2015 ). Challenges may include taking ownership over the thesis and displaying typically Eurocentric “critical thinking” (Wu & Hu, 2020 ; Xu & Grant, 2017 ). Further, PhD researchers from Confucian-influenced cultures may be more reluctant to disagree with or “push” their supervisors for additional feedback due to differing expectations of supervisory relationships (Nguyen & Robertson, 2020 ). Likewise, they may focus on gaining deep understanding of expert texts rather than critiquing them (Chang & Strauss, 2010 ; Xu & Grant, 2017 ), reflecting differences in academic practices and varying forms of critical thought (see Chang & Strauss, 2010 ; Paton, 2005 ).

Motivations for undertaking PhD work and career goals may also influence how PhD researchers experience doctoral research. Interview-based research on motivations for undertaking PhD work (Brailsford, 2010 ; Gill & Hoppe, 2009 ; Guerin, et al., 2015 ; Leonard, et al., 2005 ; Skakni, 2018 ; Taylor, 2007 ) indicate that preconceived notions of the PhD and goals/motivations may fall into several categories, including career considerations, professional development, and personal and intellectual fulfillment. Evidence suggests that motivation influences the strategies used to approach the PhD as well as supervision preferences (Skakni, 2018 ; Taylor, 2007 ). For example, PhD researchers motivated by career aspirations were strategic and pragmatic about the PhD, concerned with quick progress and desiring supervisors who could guide them through the institutional requirements and facilitate work opportunities (Skakni, 2018 ).

PhD researcher agency: individual goals and contexts

This study draws on Emirbayer and Mische’s chordal triad of agency (1988) to examine how PhD researchers make decisions about how to develop their Upgrade documents in relation to the personal, institutional, and disciplinary contexts that influence their experiences of early-stage doctoral research and, more specifically, the Upgrade document. In social science, agency is typically understood as the capacity of individuals to act independently and has been theorized in different ways depending on the extent to which social structure is believed to facilitate or constrain that capacity. Aldrich ( 1999 ) succinctly described the problem of agency as “how much scope…people have for independence and creativity in the face of social structural constraints on their understanding and behavior” (p. 23). Research on PhD researchers’ agency has explored how PhD researchers exercise agency to develop their scholarly identity-trajectories (McAlpine, et al., 2014 ) and address academic and cultural hurdles through establishing and drawing on relationships (Cotterall, 2015 ; Hopwood, 2010 ), sharing their research (Nguyen & Robertson, 2020 ), and negotiating supervisory relationships and supervisor feedback (Inouye & McAlpine, 2017 ). Such studies provide a counter-narrative to traditional framings of PhD education that position doctoral researchers as undergoing a one-way socialization process into the institution and relevant discipline (see Hopwood, 2010 ).

The chordal triad of agency developed by Emirbayer and Mische ( 1998 ) builds upon the work of Mead ( 1932 ), defining agency as:

...the temporally constructed engagement by actors of different structural environments—the temporal-relational contexts of action—which, through the interplay of habit, imagination, and judgment, both reproduces and transforms those structures in interactive response to the problems posed by changing historical situations. (1998, p. 970)

Agency is thus expressed through human action in response to a given temporal-relational context. In each act of agency, three elements are at play: iteration, projectivity, and practical-evaluation. Iteration represents the past and is characterized by habitual acts in response to similar situations—schemas for action developed over time. Projectivity represents the future: the person’s plans and desires. As people encounter new situations, they adapt existing schemas in relation to their goals and imagine possible outcomes. Practical-evaluation represents the present, acknowledging the ways in which actions are embedded in the current evolving situation, representing “the capacity of actors to make practical and normative judgments among alternative possible trajectories of action” (p. 971). Most importantly, practical-evaluation provides for reflection, insight into one’s particular circumstances in relation to past and future, which may lead to changes in behavior.

Applied to PhD researchers, the chordal triad lends two key things. First, the iteration and projectivity elements draw attention to how prior experience and imagined futures/goals influence individual PhD researchers’ actions as they shape their plans for their thesis projects. Second, the practical-evaluation element allows for consideration of how PhD researchers’ temporal-relational contexts (e.g., new knowledge, additional feedback, and upcoming deadlines) change over time and influence how they evaluate and gain insight into their particular circumstances, which may potentially lead to changes in behavior: exercising agency to alter one’s contexts. In other words, as PhD researchers learn over time the expectations for the thesis project through supervisor feedback and other relevant interactions and experiences (the temporal-relational context), they adjust their actions in response to the new knowledge and in relation to prior experiences and goals.

This paper draws from a longitudinal (Ployhart & Vandenberg, 2010 ) multiple-case study in which each participant constituted a case. The study involved five participants from three social science departments at a large research-intensive university in the UK. At this institution, social science departments require first-year PhD researchers to submit a written document (“Upgrade document”) for oral assessment by two examiners, usually from the same department. Successful completion of this milestone—hereafter referred to as “Upgrade”—marks the PhD researcher’s transition into the data collection phase of research and confers full doctoral status. Although all academic departments require an Upgrade examination, the specific timings and requirements vary across disciplinary areas—for instance, the Upgrade document in natural science departments tends to be much shorter. In the three social science departments in which this study took place—Education, Geography, and Sociology—Upgrade typically occurs between 8 and 12 months after commencement of the PhD program. The submitted Upgrade document is a lengthy document of roughly 10,000 words, containing a literature review, conceptual framework, research questions, and methodology/research design. Upgrade can result in three possible outcomes, pass, minor corrections, and resubmit, and a PhD researcher has two opportunities to successfully complete Upgrade.

Data collection took place from October 2018 through December 2019. The participants were first-year PhD researchers. Four participants were recruited through email solicitation and one via snowball sampling. This study received ethical approval from the institution. Demographic characteristics of the participants are displayed in Table 1 .

Data included (1) a five-item demographic questionnaire, (2) semi-structured interviews, (3) drafts of the Upgrade document and other related writings, (4) written feedback from supervisors and, if relevant, peers, and (5) recordings of supervision meetings. However, for the purpose of this paper, the results will focus primarily on findings from the participant interviews.

Three types of interviews were conducted: (1) background interviews, (2) Upgrade document process interviews, and (3) concluding interviews. Background interviews, which took place shortly after each participant joined the study, focused on the participant’s prior experiences with writing, feedback, and social science research, as well as their reasons for doing a PhD, perceived challenges, and post-PhD career goals. The purpose of these interviews was to establish each participant’s individual historical context.

Upgrade document process interviews comprised most interview data in this study. These interviews were scheduled every 2 months at a mutually convenient time and place and focused on the participant’s ongoing work in relation to the Upgrade document, using written drafts of the Upgrade document and if relevant, other notes and documents, to provide examples of specific feedback and revisions. Finally, concluding interviews took place following each participant’s successful completion of the Upgrade examination. These interviews focused on the participants’ experience of Upgrade and reflections on the first year of the PhD.

Drafts and supervision recordings

In addition to the interviews, I collected drafts of the participants’ Upgrade documents and recorded supervision meetings with supervisor consent. Each participant was given the option to self-record their supervisions or to have me attend and record the supervisions. All interviews and supervision recordings were manually transcribed. Using MaxQDA 12 software, I created five separate folders, one for each participant. Each folder served to store the collected data, which were chronologically organized. The data were analyzed via a combination of a priori and emergent coding, situated within an overall narrative analysis. Data were analyzed first within-cases to capture variation in individual experience and then across cases to detect emerging patterns.

A priori coding

A priori codes (Saldana, 2013 ) were based on relevant department guidelines for a successful Upgrade and Emirbayer and Mische’s ( 1998 ) chordal triad conceptualization of agency: iteration, projectivity, and practical-evaluation to identify evidence of past, future, and present factors in participants’ decision-making. These codes were applied throughout the dataset for each individual participant.

Emergent coding

Following a priori coding, I analyzed the interview and supervision transcripts via emergent (open) coding. Using the “spiral” approach (Creswell, 2013 ), I began by reading through the entire dataset for each participant, taking notes. I wrote case summaries for each participant 3, 5, and 8 months into the data collection process. To develop codes, I reviewed case summaries and notes to identify possible codes and analyzed the dataset of the individual participant using initial codes and definitions. These codes were refined over several iterations. I repeated this process for each participant, resulting in five sets of emergent codes, one for each participant. Example codes included explanation/justification (for responses to feedback), supervisor feedback (with subcodes including direction, confirmation, suggestion/guidance), and strategies (feedback-seeking, questioning, networking), and Upgrade experience. Throughout the analysis process, the definitions of each code and examples were discussed and verified with colleagues familiar with both qualitative analysis and the topics of writing and doctoral education.

Narrative analysis

The patterns that emerged through coding alongside relevant excerpts from the documents were situated within a narrative analysis that allowed each case to be presented as a linear whole, rich with “thick description” (Riessman, 2008 ). The narrative was supported by the results of the coding and specific examples from the transcripts and documents. Because this study is concerned with what participants say rather than how they say it, in constructing the narratives, I formatted participant quotes by excluding stutters and pauses for clarity.

Cross-case analysis

Having completed within-cases analyses of each participant’s experience, I conducted a cross-case analysis to identify any patterns. I began by re-reading my notes and all five case summaries, taking note of similarities and differences (Eisenhardt, 2002 ). From this process, I identified three key themes: approach to the PhD, compliance with and resistance to supervisor feedback, and the Upgrade exam as significant event. These themes reflected larger patterns in agency characterized by the individual’s considerations of past, present, and future action in relation to their changing contexts.

Participant feedback

Participant feedback, also known as member checking, was used to provide participants with an opportunity to express concerns about anonymity (see Thomas, 2017 ) and identify factual errors. Following their participation in this study, each participant was sent a copy of their draft case summary for feedback on (1) factual accuracy, (2) concerns about identifiability, and (3) opinions on how their experiences were interpreted. Participants were also the given the option of changing their assigned pseudonyms.

The analysis gave rise to two key findings. First, the participants adopted three approaches to navigating the construction of the Upgrade document—pragmatic/strategic, idealistic, and realistic/compromising, each reflecting agentive decision-making influenced by prior educational experiences and perceptions of doctoral education, as well as post-PhD career goals. These approaches were primarily conveyed in how the participants drew upon feedback to create research proposals for Upgrade. Second, the oral Upgrade exam was a critical structuring event that led participants to reassess their practices and, in some cases, alter their approaches to their thesis research. This section begins with brief descriptions of the participants’ relevant individual contexts followed by a discussion of the approaches adopted by each, ending with an exploration of whose approaches shifted over time.

Ben was a first-year doctoral researcher in Education. Prior to the PhD, he completed a Master’s in the USA and worked at a think tank. Although English was his second language—he was born in a non-Anglophone European country—Ben was comfortable writing in English given his experience studying in the USA. In his previous work at the think tank, Ben developed the practice of reaching out to his colleagues for substantive feedback, though he always critically assessed received comments, based in part on the expertise of the person providing the feedback. Following the PhD, Ben planned to pursue a career in policy at an international organization. Ben had three supervisors.

Charlie was a first-year doctoral researcher in Sociology. Prior to the PhD, he did a Master’s in the UK. Charlie was originally from China but had been in the UK since high school and thus felt comfortable writing in English, though he sometimes struggled with reading complex texts. Charlie viewed feedback as generally helpful but viewed “abstract” comments such as “the research question is too broad” as less helpful when not accompanied by details on how to improve. He did not have concrete career plans when he began the PhD but hoped the degree would broaden his employment opportunities and allow him to explore academia. Charlie had two supervisors.

Natalie was a first-year doctoral researcher in Geography from the UK. Prior to the PhD, Natalie completed Master’s degrees in related fields and had worked in several sectors. One of her careers involved writing, and thus Natalie had experience in certain genres of writing but viewed herself as a novice in academic writing. She valued feedback, including criticism, from a range of sources and was concerned that her work involved public outreach. Following the PhD, Natalie hoped to teach at a university and write a book based on her doctoral research. Natalie had one supervisor (an anomaly, as most social science PhD researchers at the institution had two or more supervisors).

Shankar was a first-year doctoral researcher in Education from India. The PhD was Shankar’s first educational experience outside of India, having completed his undergraduate study and a Master’s there. He also spent several years teaching in rural areas of India prior to the doctorate. Shankar considered English his first language as his parents spoke it at home. He had little experience receiving feedback on his work, because his previous Master’s research was largely independent. Following the PhD, Shankar planned to return to India and teach at a university. Shankar had two supervisors.

Ethan was a first-year doctoral researcher in Education from the UK. Prior to the PhD, Ethan taught in primary schools and completed a Master’s degree. He enjoyed writing and viewed himself as a “perfectionist” when he wrote. Ethan embraced critical feedback so long as it was constructive and believed that his positive response to criticism was related to the nature of his supervisory relationships. For instance, he had a good relationship with his Master’s supervisor who “valued the good bits” but would also “happily tear a piece of work to shreds” (November 2018, Interview). Following the PhD, Ethan hoped to work in academia or at a think tank. Ethan had two supervisors.

Pragmatic/strategic

The pragmatic/strategic approach to the PhD, adopted by Ben and Charlie, was characterized by an orientation towards the feasibility or practicality of the research in terms of time to completion, financial constraints, or whatever would most facilitate quick and effective success: the PhD as a means to an end. Both Ben and Charlie expressed their pragmatic/strategic approach through (1) pursuing learning opportunities during the PhD in relation to career objectives and (2) and their assessment and use of feedback.

Ben and Charlie pursued PhDs to further career goals. Ben, who had a clear objective—work at an international organization—believed that doctorate would assist him in developing research skills that would increase his employability. Ben thus framed the PhD as a vehicle for advancing his career. While he wanted to produce a quality thesis, he was not emotionally attached to the work and noted, unlike some of his op-eds and reports, the thesis would not be read by a wide audience. As such, Ben made sure to attend conferences, find research assistant work, and expand his networks: “I think I need to be part of a broader policy debate because that's my aim overall…so I need to go [to conferences]. Everything is part of [an] overall design of me getting better [as a researcher]” (February 2019, Interview). Further, because he was only partially funded, Ben was determined to finish within 3 years and designed his research timeline accordingly.

Like Ben, Charlie viewed the PhD as improving his career opportunities. However, Charlie was uncertain about his future and hoped the PhD would allow him to explore possibilities. Charlie was also self-funding and therefore applied for various scholarships and internships alongside his PhD work. New to sociology, Charlie spent the first few months of the PhD program gathering information towards the goal of understanding what was expected of him:

[W]hen I [am] doing my PhD how do I structure my research, how do I progress...how do I develop my ideas? And...in general, how [do] we develop theory, [and] use the theory to explain things in data?...I try to find out the answer by auditing lectures…[and reading] books. (December 2018, Interview)

Charlie thus focused on understanding his discipline and the nature of PhD research while figuring out what “can be asked and answered in a PhD thesis” (October 2018, Email to supervisor). At the same time, he consulted peers for emotional support and enrolled in additional research training courses to further his learning and improve his employment prospects.

Ben and Charlie also expressed their pragmatic/strategic approach to the PhD in how they assessed and used feedback on their Upgrade documents. Ben, who had a clear vision for his project and prior knowledge of the topic, maintained the critical stance towards feedback developed before the PhD:

You need to be really convincing for me to change what I’ve written because in the end it’s going to be my name. But I will say that I’m quite open to accept feedback from people who know [more] than me about a topic. (November 2018, Interview)

Because Ben viewed his supervisors as knowledgeable in their fields but lacking expertise in his specific topic, he relied on them for literature recommendations and to discuss his overall research design and the Upgrade process, using only suggestions that he believed furthered his goal of successful Upgrade and timely thesis completion. However, for substantive feedback on his methods and subject matter, he approached others, including post-docs in relevant departments, and often went long stretches without seeing his supervisors, preferring to work on his own and receive feedback on complete drafts of his work.

In contrast, because of his lack of experience in sociology, Charlie positioned his supervisors as experts who were best placed to guide him through the thesis and, specifically, the Upgrade phase of the PhD. Charlie thus tended to adopt all feedback his supervisors offered. Upon reflection, Charlie noted that he always agreed with his supervisors’ suggestions (“we think similarly”—July 2019, Interview), explaining the intent behind his choices to implement feedback; he believed adopting feedback benefitted the project or Upgrade document. Thus, both Ben and Charlie assessed and used feedback in ways they believed furthered their Upgrade documents—and ultimately their PhDs—in most efficient ways.

This approach was characterized by a romanticized, optimistic framing of the research process, including a preoccupation with “big” ideas and the desire to create a deeply impactful or meaningful project, closely tied to personal passions or philosophies. Shankar and Natalie, who adopted an idealistic approach, expressed this orientation through (1) their perceptions of research/the PhD and (2) tendencies to resist traditional genre conventions of the Upgrade document.

Both Shankar’s and Natalie’s research projects grew from personal experience, and it was apparent in supervisions and interviews that they were passionate and intellectually engaged with their topics to the extent that narrowing the scope of their interests to a feasible doctorate was a significant challenge—both participants had a tendency to think and talk about their projects in broad ways, exploring avenues of inquiry that connected elements of history, philosophy, language, and politics. Natalie also insisted that her project take an ethnographic approach in which research questions emerge from the fieldwork and thus was hesitant to narrow her topic too early—a desire supported by her supervisor (but cautioned against by her course instructors). As a compromise, Natalie constructed three broad research questions that indicated her areas of interest. For example, “Are cities the agrarian worlds of the future?” (Upgrade document draft).

Shankar and Natalie were creative in how they structured their Upgrade documents; Natalie’s Upgrade document was organized by themes rather than discrete sections for literature review, method, etc., and Shankar used “metaphorical signposting,” adding subtitles to each of his sections that corresponded to parts of a tree—for instance, the literature review was called “the seeds” (Upgrade document draft). Although he appreciated critical comments, Shankar struggled to implement supervisor feedback on defining terms in relation to existing literature and following citation practices. He tried to negotiate comments on his Upgrade document and incorporate aspects of feedback towards the goal of finding his own writing style. Shankar acknowledged that his writing was a “little bit of this, little bit of that,” an “amalgam of the kind of quality of writing which would be appreciated in India” that included anecdotal evidence (April 2019, Interview). These writing and research choices stretched the boundaries of the expected Upgrade document genre and reflected Natalie and Shankar’s personal preferences for writing and self-expression, indicative of an idealistic view of doctoral writing. However, both needed to re-evaluate their practices when they were asked to resubmit their Upgrade document after the initial Upgrade exam. This is elaborated upon later.

Realistic/compromising

The realistic approach lay between the pragmatic/strategic and idealistic approaches, characterized by compromise and accommodation: passion for the topic and desire for it to be impactful on a larger scale, while also being cognizant of institutional expectations and willing to shape the project accordingly. Ethan adopted the realistic approach, which was evident in his assessment and use of feedback.

Ethan worked to strike a balance between creating a project he was passionate about and crafting a document that satisfied his supervisors:

There’s been varying points this year where I thought, am I doing the right thing? Would I be better off doing other research?...I think it’s the first time where, I’m very cognizant of this is all mine [so] that’s been quite a big defining feature of it. The independence. (November 2019, Interview)

Ethan’s understanding of the need to manage his goals with supervisor approval may be linked to his previous Master’s experience, specifically his familiarity with the research process and supervisor feedback. Indeed, though Shankar and Natalie had completed Master’s in their fields, both described the experience as involving little supervisory contact.

What Ethan most appreciated about his supervisors was their shared interest in school policy and their shared experiences as teachers, which allowed him to speak openly about his concerns about education and engage in critical discussion. In such supervisory discussions—and in early drafts of his Upgrade document—Ethan expressed political views that were tied to his teaching experience and the inception of his thesis, revealing Ethan’s desire for impact and change. At the same time, he acknowledged the “authority” of his supervisors and gladly incorporated their feedback, which helped him to define a feasible research topic and demonstrated an understanding of the PhD as requiring negotiation between the desire to shape a large and important study and the need to meet institutional standards. Further, both of Ethan’s supervisors were careful to explain the reasoning behind their feedback while also being explicit about examiner expectations, which may have contributed to his willingness to compromise.

Ethan’s greatest struggle was his self-described “flowery” writing style. His supervisors referred to his writing as “journalistic” and “rhetorically beautiful” but not appropriate for the Upgrade document genre. Beautiful writing was of personal value to Ethan, and he initially hoped to reach a compromise and find “the line” defining the extent to which he could write descriptively—though, he acknowledged, “[my supervisors and I] may or may not agree where that line is” (June 2019, Interview). For Ethan, writing became a matter of “trial and error” (June 2019, Interview) in which he continually refined his style over several drafts, a process facilitated by the pruning down of his document prior to Upgrade. Later, Ethan noted that the improvement in his writing was the most concrete change from the first year of his PhD. The realistic/compromising approach therefore reflects an understanding of genre, disciplinary, and institutional requirements and the need to negotiate and adapt for the purposes of the Upgrade document.

Changes in approach over time

The approaches discussed above were not clear-cut categories; rather, each given approach reflected the general overarching way in which the participants structured their actions and communicated their thinking about their research, writing, and the PhD. These approaches were driven primarily by the iterative element of agency—patterns of behavior acquired over time from prior education and work experience, particularly in regard to responses to feedback. At the same time, participant approaches were not static; success or lack thereof at the Upgrade milestone either reinforced successful participants’ approaches or significantly changed the approaches of those who were unsuccessful.

For Natalie and Shankar, who were asked to revise and resubmit their Upgrade documents, Upgrade prompted reflection on PhD expectations and the research process, which led them to move from an idealistic to a pragmatic/strategic approach. Natalie, for instance, remarked that she had been “naïve” about doctoral work and following the Upgrade exam began to view the PhD as a “box-ticking exercise” she needed to work through in order to pass (pragmatic approach). Similarly, Shankar noted that the Upgrade exam highlighted gaps between his former schooling and the expectations of his PhD university, leading him to alter his Upgrade document in accordance with examiner feedback and conform to institutional expectations, which he described as putting on “clothes in a wardrobe”:

...it seems to me that the, what this whole program is about, or at least my experience of it [is] a particular way of...relating to knowledge. It’s a particular way of...looking at it and interpreting it and presenting it. (June 2019, Interview)

For Shankar, the way the examiners expected his literature review to be presented and the depth of detail required in the methods section conflicted with his prior experiences of writing and structuring arguments. Despite prior conversations with his supervisors about the purpose of the Upgrade document, the high-stakes nature of the Upgrade exam was a significant experience that catalyzed a shift in his approach to the Upgrade document—and his thesis research generally.

In contrast, for Charlie and Ethan, passing the Upgrade exam reinforced their preexisting pragmatic/strategic and realistic approaches, as success indicated that their previous strategies were effective. Ben, the outlier, did not alter his view of the PhD or approach to research and writing despite a revise and resubmit result; rather, he attributed this outcome to ineffective or late supervisor feedback, consistent with his belief that his supervisors were not experts in his particular field and methodology. Further, Ben was not emotionally affected by the result, viewing it as an inconvenience and choosing to comply with examiner feedback and resubmit quickly; he did not want to alter his timeline for data collection, in keeping with his pragmatic outlook.

Thus, the Upgrade exam was a critical structuring event capable of transforming or reinforcing how the participants understood PhD research and writing expectations, demonstrating how evolving temporal-relational contexts (Upgrade results) may affect agentive decision-making. Importantly, successful Upgrade required participants to negotiate their prior expectations and experiences and future goals with institutional and disciplinary conventions, showing the need for clarity around genre-based expectations for doctoral education and the extent to which PhD researchers can work within those boundaries.

This longitudinal multiple case study employed Emirbayer and Mische’s ( 1998 ) chordal triad of agency to examine how five first-year social science PhD researchers created their Upgrade documents towards the goal of successful Upgrade. According to the chordal triad, the individual, as agent, (re)acts in a temporal-relational context, with three elements at play: the past (acting in response to similar situations developed over time), the future (adapting existing schemas in relation to goals and imagined outcomes), and the present (making judgments among alternative possible actions in light of the current evolving situation). The approaches the participants used to create their Upgrade documents—pragmatic/strategic, idealistic, and realistic—represent three possible ways in which PhD researchers may navigate the doctoral thesis in relation to individual contexts. What this research contributes is (1) new insight into the role of agency in PhD researchers’ behaviors, (2) the importance of significant milestones (like Upgrade) in influencing/altering thinking and behaviors, and (3) the value of a longitudinal perspective in examining PhD researcher development.

Results suggest that a projective (future) orientation motivated participants to think about larger PhD and post-PhD goals, contributing to how they initially conceptualized the PhD and approached their research (and Upgrade documents), consistent with prior interview-based studies (Brailsford, 2010 ; Gill & Hoppe, 2009 ; Guerin et al., 2015 ; Leonard, et al., 2005 ; Skakni, 2018 ). What this study adds is an empirical account of how both goals (projectivity), prior contexts and experience (iteration), and the present situation (practical-evaluation) influence how doctoral researchers view the PhD and subsequently tackle the Upgrade documents, respond to feedback, and employ strategies in relation to their overarching purposes and perceptions of the doctorate.

Concurrently, the iterative (past) element provided the underlying writing, feedback, and disciplinary knowledge drawn upon to do the work. For instance, Shankar’s educational history influenced his writing choices, echoing studies finding disparities between international PhD researchers’ prior educational contexts and PhD expectations (Li, 2018 ; Soong, et al., 2015 ; Wu & Hu, 2020 ; Xu & Grant, 2017 ). Further, in preparing their Upgrade documents, all five participants used previously developed strategies to respond to feedback. Ben, for example, continued to seek feedback from a range of sources and critically assessed the usefulness of comments, while Charlie and Natalie accepted all supervisor feedback in line with their self-positioning as novices in the field and previous practices.

As in other work on supervision and supervisor feedback, the results suggested that PhD researchers with greater ownership over their work (e.g., Ben) were more likely to resist critical comments that conflicted with their goals (see Vehviläinen, 2009 ). Yet, the participants did not express negative emotional reactions to criticism—they accepted, evaluated, and at times rejected suggestions (see Wang & Li, 2011 ). Where the results diverge from Wang and Li ( 2011 ) is that the participants in this study were in the earliest stages of the PhD, conflicting with Wang and Li’s suggestion that new, less experienced PhD researchers are more likely to respond negatively to critical feedback. This discrepancy reinforces the finding that responses to feedback and ownership over the thesis may be linked not only to research and writing experience, but perhaps more powerfully to individual contexts/goals (see also Inouye & McAlpine, 2017 ).

Practical-evaluation, the element of agency representing the present, was perhaps the most complex but important aspect of agency captured in the participants’ decision-making. Given the nature of the PhD as an ongoing process fraught with information, particularly during the first year, participants were continually assessing their research goals and practices in relation to the new knowledge and feedback they received from texts, instructors, and supervisors—“the demands and contingencies of the present” (Emirbayer & Mische, 1998 , p. 994). For example, assessment of supervisor and other feedback often invoked a combination of practical-evaluation and projectivity as students evaluated comments within the evolving supervisory relationship and stage of their Upgrade documents, choosing to accept or reject changes in relation to what they believed would lead to the best outcome. At the same time, practical-evaluation and iteration co-occurred as students assessed feedback and their own writing and chose to continue accepting supervisor comments or write in a certain way. Importantly, the Upgrade exam, a new context, was the only event that led to substantial changes in the participants’ actions and approaches. These results suggest that experience contributes to a pattern of action that is less likely to change significantly unless the actor encounters a critical incident.

Finally, to revisit Emirbayer and Mische’s definition of agency, agency “both reproduces and transforms those structures in interactive response to the problems posed by changing historical situations” (1998, p. 970). As reflected in the results, Natalie’s and Shankar’s desire to create Upgrade documents that did not strictly conform to typical conventions was unsuccessful in transforming the structure of Upgrade; the examiners failed to recognize their initial documents as fulfilling Upgrade requirements (cf., Naomi, 2021 ). Thus, while the participants developed their Upgrade documents in creative ways, ultimately, the documents they produced—the documents that were eventually approved—reproduced the existing Upgrade document genre. Their experiences raise questions about the extent to which PhD researchers are able to bring creative approaches to their research and research writing and what counts as acceptable doctoral writing.

Limitations

First, this was a small-scale study of five first-year doctoral researchers at one UK university. Therefore, the results are specific to the particular institutional and disciplinary circumstances surrounding their experiences. Given the variation in milestone procedures and expectations across departments and institutions, the findings cannot be generalized to the wider UK PhD population, nor to the social sciences as a whole, or even to the population of PhD researchers within the participants’ specific departments. Rather, the study provides detailed insight into the individual experiences of the participants, providing examples of how agency may manifest in relation to personal contexts. Second, I was unable to capture the full range of data involved in the participants’ creation of the Upgrade document and focused primarily on supervisor feedback, meaning that additional sources of influence—e.g., readings, peer feedback, blogs, and social media—were not explored. Finally, the choice of the chordal triad of agency, while useful in exploring temporal changes in behavior, offered a limited discussion of how agency is developed within one’s larger personal trajectories, which may preclude exploration of how approaches to the doctoral Upgrade document are situated within the participants’ broader lives.

Implications

This study has shown the value of micro-level longitudinal research that encourages us to think biographically through time in relation to the individual’s specific context. Future longitudinal studies on doctoral writing and education, perhaps across disciplines, may be useful in enhancing our knowledge of the relationships between personal factors, disciplinary cultures, supervision, and examination processes and expectations. Studies covering the entire doctoral program would also be helpful in better understanding how PhD researchers’ conceptions of the doctoral research and writing change over time.

Further, academic research cultures are not accessed equally by all doctoral students (Deem & Brehony, 2000 ), and doctoral training does not always address research culture as an additional challenge for PhD researchers entering programs from different contexts. More studies on international and intercultural PhD education are required to better understand the needs and contributions of PhD researchers with diverse experiences.

Doctoral experience varies across individuals. Recognizing the role of personal contexts and goals in shaping doctoral researchers’ perspectives and practices is important, particularly during the early stages of the PhD when they are still developing their understanding of the PhD and their capacity for agency in shaping the research.

References  

Aitchison, C., & Lee, A. (2007). Research writing: Problems and pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education, 11 (3), 265–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510600680574

Article   Google Scholar  

Aldrich, H.E. (1999). Organizations evolving . SAGE.

Anderson, C., Day, K., & McLaughlin, P. (2008). Student perspectives on the dissertation process in a Masters degree concerned with professional practice. Studies in Continuing Education, 30 (1), 33–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/01580370701841531

Basturkmen, H., East, M., & Bitchener, J. (2014). Supervisors’ on-script feedback comments on drafts of dissertations: Socialising students into the academic discourse community. Teaching in Higher Education, 19 (4), 432–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2012.752728

Bazerman, C. & Prior, P. (2004). What writing does and how it does it: An introduction to analyzing texts and textual Practices. Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.

Brailsford, I. (2010). Motives and aspirations for doctoral study: Career, personal, and inter- personal factors in the decision to embark on a history PhD . International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 5 , 015–027. https://doi.org/10.28945/710

Caffarella, R. S., & Barnett, B. G. (2000). Teaching doctoral students to become scholarly writers: The importance of giving and receiving critiques. Studies in Higher Education, 25 (1), 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/030750700116000

Cameron, J., Naim, K., & Higgins, J. (2009). Demystifying academic writing: Reflections on emotions, know-how and academic identity. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 33 (2), 269–284.

Can, G., & Walker, A. (2014). Social science doctoral students’ needs and preferences for written feedback. Higher Education, 68 , 303–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9713-5

Carter, M. (2007). Ways of knowing, doing, and writing in the disciplines. College Composition and Communication, 58 (3), 385–418. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20456952

Chang, C. E., & Strauss, P. (2010). ‘Active agents of change?’ Mandarin-speaking students in New Zealand and the thesis writing process. Language and Education, 24 (5), 415–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500781003789873

Chatterjee-Padmanabhan, M., & Nielsen, W. (2018). Preparing to cross the research proposal threshold: A case study of two international doctoral students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 55 (4), 417–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2016.1251331

Cotterall, S. (2011). Doctoral students writing: Where’s the pedagogy? Teaching in Higher Education, 16 (4), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2011.560381

Cotterall, S. (2015). The rich get richer: International doctoral candidates and scholarly identity. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52 (4), 360–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.839124

Creely, E. & Laletas, S. (2019). Transitions, transformations and finding success. A phenomenological analysis of the experiences of a doctoral student in early candidature. Higher Education Research & Development, 39 (3), 439–453. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1680957

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE.

Deem, R., & Brehony, K. (2000). Doctoral students’ access to research cultures-are some more unequal than others? Studies in Higher Education, 25 (2), 149–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/713696138

Department for Education. (2017). Postgraduate doctoral loans: Government consultation response. Retrieved 1 May 2020. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/597333/Doctoral_response_to_consultation.pdf

Eisenhardt, K. (2002). Building theories from case study research. In A. M. Huberman & M. B. Miles (Eds.), The qualitative researcher's companion (pp. 4–35). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412986274

Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103 (4), 962–1023.

Fisher, R., Brock, C. H., Frahm, T., Van Wig, A., & Gillis, V. R. (2020). Reflections on writing and identity: Exploring the role of qualifying exams in the sociocultural development of doctoral students. Studies in Continuing Education, 42 (3), 365–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2019.1661237

Gardner, S. K. (2008). “What’s too much and what’s too little?”: The process of becoming an independent researcher in doctoral education. The Journal of Higher Education, 79 (3), 326–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2008.11772101

Gill, T. G., & Hoppe, U. (2009). The business professional doctorate as an informing channel: A survey and analysis. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 4, 27–57. http://www.ijds.org/Volume4/IJDSv4p027-057Gill267.pdf

Green, B. (2005). Unfinished business: Subjectivity and supervision. Higher Education Research and Development, 24 , 151–163.

Guerin, C., Jayatilaka, A., & Ranasinghe, D. (2015). Why start a higher degree by research? An exploratory factor analysis of motivations to undertake doctoral studies. Higher Education Research & Development, 34 (1), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934663

Hockey, J. (1994). Establishing boundaries: Problems and solutions in managing the PhD supervisor’s role. Cambridge Journal of Education, 24 , 293–313.

Hopwood, N. (2010). A sociocultural view of doctoral students’ relationships and agency. Studies in Continuing Education, 32 (2), 103–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2010.487482

Inouye, K. S., & McAlpine, L. (2017). Developing scholarly identity: Variation in agentive responses to supervisor feedback. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 14 , 1–31.

Ivanic, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Benjamins.

Kamler, B. & Thomson, P. (2014). Helping doctoral students write: Pedagogies for supervision (2nd ed). Taylor and Francis.

Klein, P. D. (1999). Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn. Educational Psychology Review, 11 (3), 203–270.

Lee, A., & Aitchison, C. (2009). Writing for the doctorate and beyond. In D. Boud & A. Lee (Eds.), Changing practices of doctoral education (pp. 87–99). Routledge.

Google Scholar  

Leonard, D., Becker, R., & Coate, D. (2005). To prove myself at the highest level: The benefits of doctoral study. Higher Education Research & Development, 24 (2), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360500062904

Li, Y. (2018). Rethinking education through self-study: An international doctoral student’s narrative. Reflective Practice, 19 (4), 530–542. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2018.1538946

Lovitts, B. E. (2005). Being a good course-taker is not enough: A theoretical perspective on the transition to independent research. Studies in Higher Education, 30 (2), 137–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500043093

Lovitts, B. E. (2008). The transition to independent research: Who makes it, who doesn’t, and why. The Journal of Higher Education, 79 (3), 296–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2008.11772100

McAlpine, L., & McKinnon, M. (2012). Supervision - the most variable of variables: Student perspectives. Studies in Continuing Education, 35 (3), 265–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2012.746227

McAlpine, A., Amundsen, C., & Turner, G. (2014). Identity-trajectory: Reframing early career academic experience. British Educational Research Journal, 40 (6), 952–969. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3123

McPherson, C., Punch, S., & Graham, S. (2018). Postgraduate transitions from Masters to doctoral study: Managing independence, emotion and support. Stirling International Journal of Postgraduate Research, 4 , 1–24.

Mead, G. H. (1932). The philosophy of the present . University of Chicago Press.

Naomi, S. S. (2021). Writing a doctoral thesis in a non-western voice. In Badenhorst, C., Arnell, B., & Burford, J., (Eds.), Re-imagining Doctoral Writing (pp. 185–199). The WAC Clearinghouse and University Press of Colorado. https://doi.org/10.37514/INT-B.2021.1343.2.09

Nguyen, M. N., & Robertson, M. J. (2020). International students enacting agency in their PhD journey. Teaching in Higher Education . https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1747423

Paton, M. (2005). Is critical analysis foreign to Chinese students? In E. Manalo & G. Wong-Toi (Eds.), Communication skills in university education: The international dimension (pp. 1–11). Pearson Education New Zealand.

Pearson, M., & Brew, A. (2002). Research training and supervision development. Studies in Higher Education, 27 (2), 135–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070220119986c

Ployhart, R. E., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2010). Longitudinal research: The theory, design, and analysis of change. Journal of Management, 36 (1), 94–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309352110

Pyhalto, K., Vekkaila, J., & Keskinen, J. (2015). Fit matters in the supervisory relationship: Doctoral students’ and supervisors’ perceptions about the supervisory activities. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52 (1), 4–16.

Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). (2020). Characteristics statement: Doctoral degree . Retrieved 1 May 2020. https://www.qaa.ac.uk/qualitycode/supporting-resources

Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences . SAGE.

Saldana, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed). SAGE.

Skakni, I. (2018). Reasons, motives and motivations for completing a PhD: A typology of doctoral studies as a quest. Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education, 9 (2), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.1108/SGPE-D-18-00004

Soong, H., Tran, L. Y., & Hiep, P. H. (2015). Being and becoming an intercultural doctoral student: Reflective autobiographical narratives. Reflective Practice, 16 (4), 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2015.1023276

Taylor, A. (2007). Learning to become researching professionals: The case of the doctorate of education. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19 (2), 154–166.

Thomas, D. R. (2017). Feedback from research participants: Are member checks useful in qualitative research? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 14 (1), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2016.1219435

UK Council for Graduate Education. (2015). Structural changes in doctoral education in the UK: A review of graduate schools and the development of doctoral colleges. Retrieved 1 October 2019. http://www.ukcge.ac.uk/media/download.aspx?MediaId=1436

Vehviläinen, S. (2009). Problems in the research problem: Critical feedback and resistance in academic supervision. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 53 (2), 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830902757592

Wang, T., & Li, L. Y. (2011). ‘Tell me what to do’ vs ‘guide me through it’: Feedback experiences of international doctoral students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 12 (2), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787411402438

Wu, M., & Hu, Y. (2020). Transitioning to an independent researcher: Reconciling the conceptual conflicts in cross-cultural doctoral supervision. Studies in Continuing Education, 42 (3), 333–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2019.1615423

Xu, L. (2017). Written feedback in intercultural doctoral supervision: A case study. Teaching in Higher Education, 22 (2), 239–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1237483

Xu, L., & Grant, B. (2017). International doctoral students’ becoming: A dialogic perspective. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54 (6), 570–579. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2017.1318711

Xu, L., & Hu, J. (2020). Language feedback responses, voices and identity (re)construction: Experiences of Chinese international doctoral students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57 (6), 724–735. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2019.1593214

Yore, L. D., Florence, M. K., Pearson, T. W., & Weaver, A. J. (2006). Written discourse in scientific communities: A conversation with two scientists about their views of science, use of language, role of writing in doing science, and compatibility between their epistemic views and language. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (2–3), 109–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500336601

Yore, L. D., Hand, B. M., & Florence, M. K. (2004). Scientists’ views of science, models of writing, and science writing practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41 (4), 338–369. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20008

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Professor Lynn McAlpine and Dr. Velda Elliott for their support and feedback.

This research was supported by a Clarendon Scholarship from the University of Oxford.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Education, University of Oxford, 15 Norham Gardens, Oxford, OX2 6PY, UK

Kelsey Inouye

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kelsey Inouye .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Inouye, K. Developing the PhD thesis project in relation to individual contexts: a multiple case study of five doctoral researchers. High Educ 85 , 1143–1160 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00882-0

Download citation

Accepted : 25 May 2022

Published : 17 June 2022

Issue Date : May 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00882-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Doctoral writing
• PhD education
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

20 Types of Architecture thesis topics

An architectural thesis is perhaps the most confusing for a student because of the range of typologies of buildings that exist. It also seems intimidating to pick your site program and do all the groundwork on your own. While choosing an architectural thesis topic, it is best to pick something that aligns with your passion and interest as well as one that is feasible. Out of the large range of options, here are 20 architectural thesis topics .

1. Slum Redevelopment (Urban architecture)

Slums are one of the rising problems in cities where overcrowding is pertinent. To account for this problem would be one of great value to the city as well as the inhabitants of the slum. It provides them with better sanitation and well-being and satisfies their needs.

2. Maggie Center (Healthcare architecture)

This particular typology of buildings was coined by a cancer patient,  Margaret Keswick Jencks,   who believed that cancer-treatment centres’ environment could largely improve their health and wellbeing by better design. This led a large number of starchitects to participate and build renowned maggie centres.

3. Urban Sprawl Redesign (Urban design)

The widening of city boundaries to accommodate migrants and overcrowding of cities is very common as of late. To design for the constant urban sprawl would make the city life more convenient and efficient for all its users.

4. Redesigning Spaces Under Elevated Roads and Metros (Urban infrastructure)

A lot of space tends to become dead space under metros or elevated roads. To use these spaces more efficiently and engage them with the public would make it an exciting thesis topic.

5. Urban Parks (Urban landscape)

Urban parks are not only green hubs for the city, which promotes the well-being of the city on a larger level, but they also act as great places for the congregation and bring a community together.

6. Reusing Abandoned Buildings (Adaptive reuse)

All buildings after a point become outdated and old but, what about the current old and abandoned buildings? The best way to respond to these is not by demolishing them; given the amount of effort it takes to do so, but to enhance them by restoring and changing the building to current times.

7. Farming in Cities (Green urban spaces)

With climate change and population on the rise, there is statistical proof that one needs to start providing farming in cities as there is not sufficient fertile land to provide for all. Therefore, this makes a great thesis topic for students to explore.

8. Jails (Civil architecture)

To humanize the function of jails, to make it a place of change and rehabilitation, and break from the stereotypical way of looking at jails. A space that will help society look at prisoners as more than monsters that harm, and as fellow humans that are there to change for everyone’s betterment.

9. Police Academies (Civil architecture)

Academies that train people to be authoritative and protective require spaces for training mentally and physically; focussing on the complexity of the academy and focussing on the user to enhance their experience would work in everyone’s favour.

10. High Court (Civil architecture)

Courtrooms are more often than not looked at as spaces that people fear, given the longevity of court cases. It can be a strenuous space; therefore, understanding the user groups’ state of mind and the problems faced can be solved using good design. 

11. Disaster-resilient structures (Disaster-relief architecture)

Natural disasters are inevitable. Disaster-resilient structures are build suitably for the natural disasters of the region while also incorporating design into it, keeping in mind the climatic nature of the location.

12. Biophilic design (Nature-inspired architecture)

As humans, we have an innate love for nature, and the struggle between integrating nature and architecture is what biophilic design aims towards. To pick a topic where one would see minimal use of natural elements and incorporate biophilic design with it would be very beneficial.

13. Metro stations and Bus terminals (Transportation spaces)

Bus terminals and metro stations are highly functional spaces that often get crowded; and to account for the crowd and the problems that come with it, plus elevate the experience of waiting or moving, would contribute to making it a good thesis topic.

14. Airport design (Transportation spaces)

Airport designing is not very uncommon; however, it is a rather complex program to crack; thereby, choosing this topic provides you with the opportunity to make this space hassle-free and work out the most efficient way to make this conducive for all types of users.

15. Sports Complex (Community architecture)

If your passion lies in sports, this is a go-to option. Each sport is played differently, different materials are used, and the nature of the sport and its audience is rather complicated. However, to combine this and make it a cohesive environment for all kinds of users would make a good thesis topic.

16. Stadium (Community architecture)

Unlike a sports complex, one could also pick one sport and look at the finer details, create the setting, and experience for it; by designing it to curate a nice experience for the players, the public, and the management.

17. Waste-recycling center (Waste management)

Reducing waste is one of the most fundamental things we must do as humans. Spaces where recycling happens must be designed consciously. Just like any other space, it has been given importance over the years, and this would make a good thesis topic to provide the community with.

18. Crematorium (Public architecture)

Cremation of a loved one or anyone for that matter is always a rather painful process and a range of emotions is involved when it comes to this place. Keeping in mind the different types of people and emotions and making your thesis about this would mean to enhance this experience while still keeping the solemnity of it intact.

19. Museums (Community architecture)

Museums are spaces of learning, and the world has so much to offer that one could always come up with different typologies of museums and design according to the topic of one’s interest. Some of the examples would be cultural heritage, modern art, museum of senses, and many more.

20. Interpretation center (Community architecture)

An interpretation center is a type of museum located near a site of historical, cultural, or natural relevance that provides information about the place of interest through various mediums.

References:

• 2022. 68 Thesis topics in 5 minutes . [image] Available at: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NczdOK7oe98&ab_channel=BlessedArch> [Accessed 1 March 2022].
• Bdcnetwork.com. 2022. Biophilic design: What is it? Why it matters? And how do we use it? | Building Design + Construction . [online] Available at: <https://www.bdcnetwork.com/blog/biophilic-design-what-it-why-it-matters-and-how-do-we-use-it> [Accessed 1 March 2022].
• RTF | Rethinking The Future. 2022. 20 Thesis topics related to Sustainable Architecture – RTF | Rethinking The Future . [online] Available at: <https://www.re-thinkingthefuture.com/rtf-fresh-perspectives/a1348-20-thesis-topics-related-to-sustainable-architecture/> [Accessed 1 March 2022].
• Wdassociation.org. 2022. A List Of Impressive Thesis Topic Ideas In Architecture . [online] Available at: <https://www.wdassociation.org/a-list-of-impressive-thesis-topic-ideas-in-architecture.aspx> [Accessed 1 March 2022].

Online Course – The Ultimate Architectural Thesis Guide

Apply Now – Online Course

Flora is a student of architecture, with a passion for psychology and philosophy. She loves merging her interests and drawing parallels to solve and understand design problems. As someone that values growth, she uses writing as a medium to share her learning and perspective.

5 Reasons why your design sheets fail to impress

Wangjing SOHO by Zaha Hadid Architects: Dancing Fans

Related posts.

Future Cities: Imagining and Designing the Urban Landscape of Tomorrow

Creative Placemaking

Changing Roles of Textile in Modern Design

Architectural heterogeneity and exclusion in a city’s culture

Military Architecture Through the Ages

How Greenwashing Affects Sustainability Efforts

• Architectural Community
• Architectural Facts
• RTF Architectural Reviews
• Architectural styles
• City and Architecture
• Fun & Architecture
• History of Architecture
• Design Studio Portfolios
• Designing for typologies
• RTF Design Inspiration
• Architecture News
• Career Advice
• Case Studies
• Construction & Materials
• Covid and Architecture
• Interior Design
• Know Your Architects
• Landscape Architecture
• Materials & Construction
• Product Design
• RTF Fresh Perspectives
• Sustainable Architecture
• Top Architects
• Travel and Architecture
• Rethinking The Future Awards 2022
• RTF Awards 2021 | Results
• GADA 2021 | Results
• RTF Awards 2020 | Results
• ACD Awards 2020 | Results
• GADA 2019 | Results
• ACD Awards 2018 | Results
• GADA 2018 | Results
• RTF Awards 2017 | Results
• RTF Sustainability Awards 2017 | Results
• RTF Sustainability Awards 2016 | Results
• RTF Sustainability Awards 2015 | Results
• RTF Awards 2014 | Results
• RTF Architectural Visualization Competition 2020 – Results
• Architectural Photography Competition 2020 – Results
• Designer’s Days of Quarantine Contest – Results
• Urban Sketching Competition May 2020 – Results
• RTF Essay Writing Competition April 2020 – Results
• Architectural Photography Competition 2019 – Finalists
• The Ultimate Thesis Guide
• Introduction to Landscape Architecture
• Perfect Guide to Architecting Your Career
• How to Design Architecture Portfolio
• How to Design Streets
• Introduction to Urban Design
• Introduction to Product Design
• Complete Guide to Dissertation Writing
• Introduction to Skyscraper Design
• Educational
• Hospitality
• Institutional
• Office Buildings
• Public Building
• Residential
• Sports & Recreation
• Temporary Structure
• Commercial Interior Design
• Corporate Interior Design
• Healthcare Interior Design
• Hospitality Interior Design
• Residential Interior Design
• Sustainability
• Transportation
• Urban Design
• Host your Course with RTF
• Architectural Writing Training Programme | WFH
• Editorial Internship | In-office
• Graphic Design Internship
• Research Internship | WFH
• Research Internship | New Delhi
• RTF | About RTF
• Submit Your Story

Looking for Job/ Internship?

Rtf will connect you with right design studios.