Interpret in context: Generalizing from the single case in evaluation
Helen Simons University of Southampton, UK Abstract This article presents an argument for how to generalize from a single case study evaluation of a social programme or policy, focusing on two essential elements of case study – context and particularity. Taking an interpretivist perspective and drawing on artistic and humanistic ways of understanding, it examines both different ways of generalizing from the case that retain a connection with the context in which they first arose and how we generalize by direct encounter with the particular. This argument is not new. It has its origins in earlier centuries and, in contemporary evaluation, dating back to the 1970s. However, in a political climate that privileges evaluation approaches stemming from large sample studies and experimental designs, it seems timely to restate the value of generalizing from the single case. Grounded in the reality of programme experience and retaining that connection with context and particulars in the case facilitates the use of evaluation knowledge. Simons, H. (2015). Interpret in context: Generalizing from the single case in evaluation. Evaluation, 21(2), 173–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389015577512
Interpreting findings strictly within their real-world environment is what makes qualitative inquiry so rich and valuable! Connecting data back to specific environmental variables prevents over-generalization while highlighting key situational nuances. Do you find that Stake's constructivist approach to naturalistic generalization yields clearer insights than Yin's positivist protocols for evaluation? For researchers drafting complex academic papers, referring to a well-structured case study methodology or case study writing guide helps clarify how to maintain contextual validity during data analysis.