This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Doyle, L. H. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Synthesis through meta-ethnography: paradoxes, enhancements, and possibilities

Old Dominion University, USAldoyle{at}odu.edu

Despite theoretical differences and methodological questions, the conversation about synthesizing qualitative research raises interest. Meta-ethnography, as initially described by Noblit and Hare (1988), is a foundation for a methodology to synthesize existing case study; however, there are weaknesses that need to be addressed. Using three stages of meta-ethnography, case selection, analysis, and synthesis, the author discusses these weaknesses and provides enhancements so that meta-ethnography becomes a viable option for qualitative researchers. Examples from application in the study of educational leadership illuminate and validate each enhancement. The author concludes by discussing how, when enhancements are made, meta-ethnography also becomes a methodology with compelling implications for making the research process a more democratic one.

Key Words: case study • democratic practices • meta-ethnography • methodology • synthesis

Qualitative Research, Vol. 3, No. 3, 321-344 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/1468794103033003


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?