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

Abstract

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.