Time for some out-of-the-box thinking! Charles Ragin makes a highly relevant comment pertaining to your research as well as mine. It's worth looking for more of Ragin's material.
The two main problems social scientists face as empirical researchers are the equivocal nature of the theoretical realm and the complexity of the empirical realm. As researchers our primary goal is to link the empirical and the theoretical -to use theory to make sense of evidence and to use evidence to sharpen and refine theory. This interplay helps us to produce theoretically structured descriptions of the empirical world that are both meaningful and useful. Casing is an essential part of this process; cases are invoked to make the linking of ideas and evidence possible." (Ragin & Becker, 1992)
In this chapter from Ragin and Becker's edited work on social research, Ragin establishes that a case is built on interactive "casing" components that are characterized by various levels of abstraction. Think of "casings" as frameworks that establish a case study or an ethnographic study. At the very highest level of abstraction we have theory. We all know that a theoretical basis will provide us with a framework for our research, but it doesn't establish an empirical basis. In good research, both qualitative and quantitative, we can observe a logical interplay between the more abstract theoretical constructs and the observable empirical data. I always think of my dad and my son who are both professional engineers. They constantly create connections between the theoretical basis of a mechanical structure or process and its empirical basis in nature. As educators, we do this, too. There is a constant interplay between learning theory and what happens to our students because of our lessons. Between theory and empirical data, however, there are several other levels of abstraction that might be considered as you practice "casing" for your review of the literature and your action research. For the teacher-researcher, some useful insights can be gained. I'll illustrate with an example from my own theoretical framework.
One of my research interests is to understand how teachers learn about technology. In establishing my theoretical framework, I look at things in a fairly broad context, a social context. My first casing involves that of social policy. Why? Because there's legislation in place that says that teachers need to know how to use technology. Where did this legislation come from? What social conditions existed beforehand that determined a need for legislation that establishes that teachers need to use technology? The changing nature of knowledge acquisition determines some of this need, but the demands of business and industry probably establish the need in a more pragmatic sense. So, my first casing concerns a broad category of social policy and how it is influenced by social and industrial needs. A second level can be derived from the first. That is, school reform is an issue that needs to be studied in relation to teachers and technology for reasons that are connected with the role of the school which, in reference to the first casing, is played out in a context of social policy. So, now you can see two levels of abstraction, the second casing being more specific than the first, yet they interact. The third casing concerns technology. This is more specific, but it has much to do with school reform, the second casing mentioned above. Technology needs a definition, so in my review of the literature, I'll establish what I mean by this. I'll also study what is NOT technology. This will establish technology as a casing that is derived from school and curriculum reform efforts. The fourth casing will certainly involve the technologically integrated curriculum. What do we mean by that? That will need to be defined from a theoretical basis but also refined as the research progresses. As the fourth casing is clarified, a fifth level comes into play that forces a sample selection. The fifth casing will refer to teachers learning technology. This casing will require careful selection as it provides empirical evidence -a non-theoretical basis- that interplays with the theoretical nature of an earlier established casing. The final casing will emerge from the data. The data collected from interviews, observations and documents will, through careful analysis, provide some emergent themes. One of those has been located already. The sixth casing concerns access. This casing, a construct that is induced from empirical observations, will be explored in the most structured manner in an effort to determine its effect on the way teachers learn technology. It will interplay throughout the various casings provided here. Of course, there will be other empirical constructs that emerge from the data that will be analyzed carefully as well. Always, the effort and focus is on how teachers learn technology. As data is gathered (a continuous process in qualitative research) we revisit the various casings and determine logical associations that make our research meaningful and useful to others.
Take a look at your research topics and your in-progress literature reviews. Think about "casing" as frameworks. They establish a dynamic flow from broad ideas to specific constructs. Establish the casings you see and write them down. Someone might want to ask you about them.
Ragin, Charles C. (1992). "Casing" and the process of social inquiry, in Ragin and Becker, (Eds.). What is a case" London: Cambridge University Press.