Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
| Autor/inn/en | Smith, John K.; Heshusius, Lous |
|---|---|
| Titel | Closing Down the Conversation: The End of the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate among Educational Inquirers. |
| Quelle | (1985), (33 Seiten)
PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei |
| Sprache | englisch |
| Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; online; Monographie |
| Schlagwörter | Stellungnahme; Educational Research; Educational Researchers; Experimenter Characteristics; Literature Reviews; Reliability; Research Design; Research Methodology; Research Problems; Validity |
| Abstract | Educational researchers have claimed that the quantitative and qualitative approaches to educational inquiry are, indeed, compatible. However, it would be unfortunate to discontinue this debate. The quantitative-qualitative debate began with the interpretive approach to social inquiry. Dilthey argued that since cultural/moral sciences differ from natural/physical sciences, the context of the human experimenters' subjectivity, emotions, and values is significant. Concerned by inconsistent research interpretations, Weber unsuccessfully tried to synthesize a compromise between the two perspectives. Still, two distinct perspectives remained: the quantitative, realistic tradition describing independently existing social reality as it really is, and the qualitative, interpretive tradition assuming that social reality is mind-constructed according to internal coherence and social conditioning. More researchers considered the debate: Rist proposed a detente; Guba pursued criteria for qualitative or naturalistic inquiry. LeCompte and Goetz, Miles and Huberman, and Lynch de-emphasized the paradigmatic differences, implying that qualitative research is a procedural variation of quantitative inquiry. There are problems with this trend. Although the two approaches may be combined, each one's differing logic of justification affects the determination of validity. Other intellectual disciplines are also concerned with this debate. (GDC) |
| Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |
Literaturbeschaffung und Bestandsnachweise in Bibliotheken prüfen
Permalink als QR-Code
Inhalt auf sozialen Plattformen teilen (nur vorhanden, wenn Javascript eingeschaltet ist)
Teile diese Seite:
