This article describes the usefulness of a scientific approach to improving knowledge and practice in education. Four approaches to a basis for knowledge in education are described: superstition, folklore, craft, and science. The value of craft and science are presented, and directions for making education a more scientifically based discipline are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BanksJ. A. (1998). The lives and values of researchers: implications for educating citizens in a multicultural society.Educational Researcher, 27(7), 6.
2.
CarnineD. (1997). Bridging the research-to-practice gap.Exceptional Children, 63, 513–521.
3.
CarnineD. (2000, April). Why education experts resist effective practices.Report of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
4.
ChallJ. S. (2000). The academic achievement challenge.New York: Guilford.
5.
CooperH. (1996). Speaking power to truth: Reflections of an educational researcher after 4 years of school board service.Educational Researcher, 25(1), 29–34.
6.
DiamondJ. (1997). Guns, germs, and steel.New York: Norton.
7.
GageN. L. (1991). The obviousness of social and educational research results.Educational Researcher20(1), 10–16.
8.
GerstenR., & BrengelmanS. U. (1996). The quest to translate research into classroom practice: The emerging knowledge base.Remedial and Special Education, 17(2), 67–74.
9.
GerstenR., SchillerE., & VaughnS. (Eds.). (2000). Contemporary special education research: Syntheses of the knowledge base on critical instructional issues.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
10.
GerstenR., VaughnS., DeshlerD., & SchillerE. (1997). What we know about using research findings: Implications for improving special education practice.Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 466–476.
11.
GrossP. R., & LevittN. (1994). The academic left and its quarrels with science.Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
12.
HoltonG. (1993). Science and anti-science.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.
HoweK., & EisenhartM. (1990). Standards for qualitative (and quantitative) research: A prolegomenon.Educational Researcher, 19(4), 2–9.
14.
KauffmanJ. M. (1993). How we might achieve the radical reform of special education.Exceptional Children, 60, 6–16.
15.
LyonG. R. (1999). Statement to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives.
16.
MaloufD. B., & SchillerE. P. (1995). Practice and research in special education.Exceptional Children, 61, 414–424.
17.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health.
18.
PeshkinA. (1988). In search of subjectivity—one's own.Educational Researcher, 17(1), 17–22.
19.
SchummJ. S., & VaughnS. (1991). Making adaptations for mainstreamed students: General classroom teachers' perspectives.Remedial and Special Education, 12(4), 18–27.
20.
ShermerM. (1997). Why people believe weird things.New York: Freeman.
21.
SmithJ. K., & HeshusiusL. (1986). Closing down the conversation: The end of the quantitative-qualitative debate among educational inquirers.Educational Researcher, 15(1), 4–12.
22.
StanovichK. E. (1994). Romance and reality.Reading Teacher, 47, 280–291.
23.
StanovichK. E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading.New York: Guilford.
24.
WalbergH. J. (1998). Foreword. In ToppingK., & EhlyS. (Eds.), Peer-assisted learning.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
