Isolating Science from the Humanities: The Third Dogma of Educational Research
The demand for scientifically-based educational research has fostered a new methodological orthodoxy exemplified by documents such as the National Research Council's Scientific Research in Education and Advancing Scientific Research in Education and American Educational Research Association...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Qualitative inquiry 2009-04, Vol.15 (4), p.766-784 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 784 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 766 |
container_title | Qualitative inquiry |
container_volume | 15 |
creator | Howe, Kenneth R. |
description | The demand for scientifically-based educational research has fostered a new methodological orthodoxy exemplified by documents such as the National Research Council's Scientific Research in Education and Advancing Scientific Research in Education and American Educational Research Association's Standards for Reporting on Empirical Social Science Research in AERA Journals. This article criticizes the new orthodoxy as being a throwback to positivist reductionism and the “two dogmas” of educational research: the quantitative/ qualitative incompatibility thesis and fact/value dichotomy. It then criticizes the new orthodoxy for fostering a “third dogma” of educational research cut from the same cloth as the first two: the empirical science/humanities dualism. The article advances the view that no fundamental epistemological dividing line can be drawn between the empirical sciences and the humanities and that, accordingly, empirical research in education should not be cordoned off from the humanities, particularly their focus on values. It concludes with several observations about the problems and prospects for interdisciplinary research in education across the empirical science/humanities divide. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/1077800408318302 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_61775983</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ845894</ericid><sage_id>10.1177_1077800408318302</sage_id><sourcerecordid>37112169</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-7696b4b7f8a1cf6dae16d69d19e78a30b7b4ebd2a215a08c9108f07243e22b4a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM1Lw0AQxRdRsFbvHjwEQW_R2e_NUUq1lYIH9Rw2m0lNSZO6mxz8790SURDEuczA-703zBByTuGGUq1vKWhtAAQYTg0HdkAmVEqWaqnkYZyjnO71Y3ISwgZiGRATcrUMXWP7ul0nz67G1mFS-W6b9G-YLIatbeu-xnBKjirbBDz76lPyej9_mS3S1dPDcna3Sh0Xok-1ylQhCl0ZS12lSotUlSoraYbaWA6FLgQWJbOMSgvGZRRMBZoJjowVwvIpuR5zd757HzD0-bYODpvGttgNIVfxUpkZ_i_INaWMqiyCl7_ATTf4Nh6RswhIkFpFCEbI-S4Ej1W-8_XW-o-cQr7_bv77u9FyMVrQ1-4bnz8aIU0mopyOcrBr_Fn5Z9wn7CJ_0A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>221650576</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Isolating Science from the Humanities: The Third Dogma of Educational Research</title><source>SAGE Complete</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Howe, Kenneth R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Howe, Kenneth R.</creatorcontrib><description>The demand for scientifically-based educational research has fostered a new methodological orthodoxy exemplified by documents such as the National Research Council's Scientific Research in Education and Advancing Scientific Research in Education and American Educational Research Association's Standards for Reporting on Empirical Social Science Research in AERA Journals. This article criticizes the new orthodoxy as being a throwback to positivist reductionism and the “two dogmas” of educational research: the quantitative/ qualitative incompatibility thesis and fact/value dichotomy. It then criticizes the new orthodoxy for fostering a “third dogma” of educational research cut from the same cloth as the first two: the empirical science/humanities dualism. The article advances the view that no fundamental epistemological dividing line can be drawn between the empirical sciences and the humanities and that, accordingly, empirical research in education should not be cordoned off from the humanities, particularly their focus on values. It concludes with several observations about the problems and prospects for interdisciplinary research in education across the empirical science/humanities divide.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1077-8004</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-7565</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1077800408318302</identifier><identifier>CODEN: QUINFS</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Dualism ; Education ; Educational Research ; Empirical research ; Epistemology ; Humanities ; Interdisciplinary Approach ; Interdisciplinary research ; Methodology (Data Collection) ; Qualitative Research ; Science ; Scientific Methodology ; Scientific Research ; Social Science Education ; Social Science Research ; Statistical Analysis</subject><ispartof>Qualitative inquiry, 2009-04, Vol.15 (4), p.766-784</ispartof><rights>Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Apr 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-7696b4b7f8a1cf6dae16d69d19e78a30b7b4ebd2a215a08c9108f07243e22b4a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1077800408318302$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1077800408318302$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21799,27903,27904,33753,33754,43600,43601</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ845894$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Howe, Kenneth R.</creatorcontrib><title>Isolating Science from the Humanities: The Third Dogma of Educational Research</title><title>Qualitative inquiry</title><description>The demand for scientifically-based educational research has fostered a new methodological orthodoxy exemplified by documents such as the National Research Council's Scientific Research in Education and Advancing Scientific Research in Education and American Educational Research Association's Standards for Reporting on Empirical Social Science Research in AERA Journals. This article criticizes the new orthodoxy as being a throwback to positivist reductionism and the “two dogmas” of educational research: the quantitative/ qualitative incompatibility thesis and fact/value dichotomy. It then criticizes the new orthodoxy for fostering a “third dogma” of educational research cut from the same cloth as the first two: the empirical science/humanities dualism. The article advances the view that no fundamental epistemological dividing line can be drawn between the empirical sciences and the humanities and that, accordingly, empirical research in education should not be cordoned off from the humanities, particularly their focus on values. It concludes with several observations about the problems and prospects for interdisciplinary research in education across the empirical science/humanities divide.</description><subject>Dualism</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Educational Research</subject><subject>Empirical research</subject><subject>Epistemology</subject><subject>Humanities</subject><subject>Interdisciplinary Approach</subject><subject>Interdisciplinary research</subject><subject>Methodology (Data Collection)</subject><subject>Qualitative Research</subject><subject>Science</subject><subject>Scientific Methodology</subject><subject>Scientific Research</subject><subject>Social Science Education</subject><subject>Social Science Research</subject><subject>Statistical Analysis</subject><issn>1077-8004</issn><issn>1552-7565</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkM1Lw0AQxRdRsFbvHjwEQW_R2e_NUUq1lYIH9Rw2m0lNSZO6mxz8790SURDEuczA-703zBByTuGGUq1vKWhtAAQYTg0HdkAmVEqWaqnkYZyjnO71Y3ISwgZiGRATcrUMXWP7ul0nz67G1mFS-W6b9G-YLIatbeu-xnBKjirbBDz76lPyej9_mS3S1dPDcna3Sh0Xok-1ylQhCl0ZS12lSotUlSoraYbaWA6FLgQWJbOMSgvGZRRMBZoJjowVwvIpuR5zd757HzD0-bYODpvGttgNIVfxUpkZ_i_INaWMqiyCl7_ATTf4Nh6RswhIkFpFCEbI-S4Ej1W-8_XW-o-cQr7_bv77u9FyMVrQ1-4bnz8aIU0mopyOcrBr_Fn5Z9wn7CJ_0A</recordid><startdate>20090401</startdate><enddate>20090401</enddate><creator>Howe, Kenneth R.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090401</creationdate><title>Isolating Science from the Humanities</title><author>Howe, Kenneth R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-7696b4b7f8a1cf6dae16d69d19e78a30b7b4ebd2a215a08c9108f07243e22b4a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Dualism</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Educational Research</topic><topic>Empirical research</topic><topic>Epistemology</topic><topic>Humanities</topic><topic>Interdisciplinary Approach</topic><topic>Interdisciplinary research</topic><topic>Methodology (Data Collection)</topic><topic>Qualitative Research</topic><topic>Science</topic><topic>Scientific Methodology</topic><topic>Scientific Research</topic><topic>Social Science Education</topic><topic>Social Science Research</topic><topic>Statistical Analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Howe, Kenneth R.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Qualitative inquiry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Howe, Kenneth R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ845894</ericid><atitle>Isolating Science from the Humanities: The Third Dogma of Educational Research</atitle><jtitle>Qualitative inquiry</jtitle><date>2009-04-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>766</spage><epage>784</epage><pages>766-784</pages><issn>1077-8004</issn><eissn>1552-7565</eissn><coden>QUINFS</coden><abstract>The demand for scientifically-based educational research has fostered a new methodological orthodoxy exemplified by documents such as the National Research Council's Scientific Research in Education and Advancing Scientific Research in Education and American Educational Research Association's Standards for Reporting on Empirical Social Science Research in AERA Journals. This article criticizes the new orthodoxy as being a throwback to positivist reductionism and the “two dogmas” of educational research: the quantitative/ qualitative incompatibility thesis and fact/value dichotomy. It then criticizes the new orthodoxy for fostering a “third dogma” of educational research cut from the same cloth as the first two: the empirical science/humanities dualism. The article advances the view that no fundamental epistemological dividing line can be drawn between the empirical sciences and the humanities and that, accordingly, empirical research in education should not be cordoned off from the humanities, particularly their focus on values. It concludes with several observations about the problems and prospects for interdisciplinary research in education across the empirical science/humanities divide.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/1077800408318302</doi><tpages>19</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1077-8004 |
ispartof | Qualitative inquiry, 2009-04, Vol.15 (4), p.766-784 |
issn | 1077-8004 1552-7565 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_61775983 |
source | SAGE Complete; Sociological Abstracts |
subjects | Dualism Education Educational Research Empirical research Epistemology Humanities Interdisciplinary Approach Interdisciplinary research Methodology (Data Collection) Qualitative Research Science Scientific Methodology Scientific Research Social Science Education Social Science Research Statistical Analysis |
title | Isolating Science from the Humanities: The Third Dogma of Educational Research |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-24T14%3A33%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Isolating%20Science%20from%20the%20Humanities:%20The%20Third%20Dogma%20of%20Educational%20Research&rft.jtitle=Qualitative%20inquiry&rft.au=Howe,%20Kenneth%20R.&rft.date=2009-04-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=766&rft.epage=784&rft.pages=766-784&rft.issn=1077-8004&rft.eissn=1552-7565&rft.coden=QUINFS&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1077800408318302&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E37112169%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=221650576&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ845894&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1077800408318302&rfr_iscdi=true |