Praxis

Conceptual Overview and Discussion

As one will readily acknowledge, the choice of any research methodology is both epistemological (how one views knowledge and knowing) and ontological (how one views the world). In general, case study research can emerge from (or be implemented within) positivist, interpretivist, or critical research frameworks. When taken together with the word praxis, however, the case study is likely to emerge from, and be informed by, a theoretical framework based in critical theory. Positivistic and interpretivist research tend to be more descriptive and seldom strive to challenge or change status quo practices. On the other hand, because a main focus of critical theory is on power, research informed by this framework tends to study the effects of power in the form of marginalization, regulation, and reproduction in the world. If one views the world as consisting of socially unjust structures and orientations, then research will be geared toward social action and change.

The concept of praxis can merge quite seamlessly with case study research, because case study method has political roots. According to Carol Mullen, case study praxis necessarily goes beyond data collection and interpretation and into the realm of activism for change. As a defining feature, she describes case studies as fusing theory with practice to embody a “knowledge-in-action”—a way of bridging theory and practice, testing theoretical knowledge, and [Page 726]viewing issues from different perspectives. One can readily see then that case study research functions reflectively, proactively, and dialectically with the various contextual and constraining factors of the case study unit being studied.

Because social science research seeks, in general, to produce new theory as well as test existing theories through practitioner research, case study research characterized by praxis has the potential to take the relationship between theory and practice to a whole new critical and action-oriented level. The concept of praxis acknowledges that the ground between theory and practice, between thought and action, between how we think about what we want to achieve (the ends) and how we might achieve that (the means) is always, and only, on shifting ground. Praxis seeks to create not a contentious dichotomy between theory and practice but instead a dialogic, dialectic relationship that highlights a continual interplay between them.

Application

In terms of the application of praxis-oriented case study research one must ask the question of what key ingredients are necessary in order to be true to the philosophy of praxis. According to Patti Lather, one important focus is on the consideration and inclusion of reciprocity in research. A praxis-oriented case study must build in reciprocity, reflexivity, and interactivity throughout the research process. Although it is a property of traditional research to incorporate member-checking processes of interview transcript data, this is not enough for praxis-oriented research: Research participants must also be involved in the negotiation of meaning in the data, in the reflection on its significance in their lives, and in the dialogic construction of theory to reflect the practical. Patti Lather warns researchers that the central dangers of praxis-oriented research are researcher imposition and reification; however, when the processes of reciprocal reflexivity and critique are built into praxis-oriented research these dangers can be reduced. In addition to reciprocity, Lather also presents the interwoven issues of dialectical theory-building and validity that she believes emancipatory researchers should consider in their research design.

...