Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

By examining the respective contributions of Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn to the philosophy of science, the author highlights some prevailing problems in this article with the methods of so-called scientific research in education. The author enumerates a number of reasons why such research, in spite of its limited tangible return, continues to gain institutional momentum in colleges and faculties of education Furthermore, the author argues that the various identified problems, when considered collectively, effectively reduce many claims emerging from scientifically designed education research to the realm of logically invalid hypotheses and questionable circumstantial evidence insulated from academic criticism by various professional and institutional interests.

Keywords

scientific research falsification verificationism Popper Kuhn

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Educational Research Association. ( 2001). V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Ayer, A.J. ( 1952). Language, truth and logic. New York : Dover.

Bacon, F. ( 1878). Novum Organum. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.

Barnes, B. ( 1982). T. S. Kuhn and social science. New York: Columbia University Press.

Brown, C. ( 2002). Baye’s theorem and the philosophy of science. Unpublished paper retrieved September 25, 2008, from http://www.trinity.edu/cbrown/science/bayes.pdf.

Dewey, J. ( 1916). Democracy and education. New York : Free Press.

Egan, K. ( 2002). Getting it wrong from the beginning: Our progressivist inheritance from Herbert Spencer, Jean Dewey and Jean Piaget. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Gould, S. ( 1996). The mismeasure of man. New York: Norton.

Harrison, F.R. ( 1989). Logic and rational thought. New York : West Publishing.

10.

Hyslop-Margison, E.J. , & Naseem, A. ( 2007). Scientism and education: Empirical research as neo-liberal ideology. New York: Springer.

11.

Kuhn, T. ( 1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

12.

Louch, A.R. ( 1966). Explanation and human action. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

13.

McClintock, R. ( 2007). Education research. Teachers College Record. Retrieved July 15, 2008, from http://www.tcrecord.org .

14.

Miller, R.W. ( 1991). Fact and method in the social sciences. In R. Boyd , P. Gasper , & J. D. Trout (Eds.), Philosophy of science. Cambridge: MIT Press .

15.

National Research Council. (2005). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academics Press.

16.

Popper, K. ( 1963). Science as falsification. In T. Schick (Ed.), Readings in the philosophy of science. Boston: Routledge Keagan Paul.

17.

Postman, N. ( 1996). The end of education: Redefining the value of school . New York: Knopf.

18.

Smedslund, J. ( 1979). Between the analytic and the arbitrary: A case study of psychological research. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology , 20, 129-140.

19.

U.S. Department of Education. (2002). No Child Left Behind. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

20.

Weber, M. ( 1991). Value Judgments in the Social Science. In R. Boyd , P. Gasper , & J. D. Trout (Eds.), Philosophy of science. Cambridge: MIT Press .

21.

Woolfolk, A. , Winne, P. , & Perry, N. ( 2005). Educational psychology. Toronto, Ontario , Canada: Pearson Education.

Scientific Paradigms and Falsification

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References