Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Can Education Research Be "Scientific"? What's "Scientific"? (was "in Defense of. . . .")

Expand Messages
  • David P. Dillard
    . . Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 12:56:38 -0700 From: Richard Hake Reply-To: (AERA SIG Teaching Educational Psychology Forum)
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 1, 2012
      .

      .


      Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 12:56:38 -0700
      From: Richard Hake <rrhake@...>
      Reply-To: "(AERA SIG Teaching Educational Psychology Forum)"
      <AERA_TEP_SIG128-FORUM@...>
      To: AERA_TEP_SIG128-FORUM@...
      Subject: Can Education Research Be "Scientific"? What's "Scientific"? (was
      "in Defense of. . . .")

      .

      .


      Some subscribers to TeachEdPsych might be interested in a recent post "Can
      Education Research Be 'Scientific'? What's 'Scientific'? (was 'in Defense of. .
      . .') " [Hake (2012)]. The abstract reads:

      .

      .


      ************************************************

      .

      ABSTRACT: In response to my post "In Defense of the NRC's 'Scientific Research
      in Education' " [Hake (2012a)] at <http://bit.ly/VtXvAV> [response by Greeno
      at <http://bit.ly/TXbnID>], PhysLrnR's Noah Podolefsky (2012) at
      <<http://bit.ly/TMOR56>> (here and below <<. . .>> signifies that access may
      require filling out a form to obtain a Listserv password).

      .

      (a) Pointed to articles (1) "Is the National Research Council Committee's
      Report on Scientific Research in Education Scientific? On Trusting the
      Manifesto" [Popkewitz (2004)] at <http://bit.ly/RqBTpp>.; (2) "Causal
      Explanation, Qualitative Research, and Scientific Inquiry in Education"
      [Maxwell (2004)] at <http://bit.ly/VwWtE9>; and (3) "A Discourse that
      Disciplines, Governs, and Regulates: The National Research Council's Report on
      Scientific Research in Education" [Bloch (2004)] at <http://bit.ly/XFxPoL>;
      stating that "these papers argue that the NRC book is incomplete at best, and
      at worst a cartoonish caricature of science."

      .

      (b) Implied that the NRC's report "Scientific Research in Education" [Shavelson
      & Towne (2002)] at <http://bit.ly/VjrQaV> did not adequately reflect the way
      science works, a topic discussed in a 14-post thread PhysLrnR thread "Should
      the History of Science Be Rated X?" of 9-13 July 2012 at
      <<http://bit.ly/T68VLd>>.

      .

      In this post I:

      .

      A. Argue that Podolefsky's claim that the articles by Popkewitz, Maxwell, and
      Bloch show that the NRC's report is (1)"incomplete" has been addressed by the
      authors of the report, and (2) "at worst a cartoonish caricature of science" is
      an overstatement.

      .

      B. Argue that Podolefsky's apparent implication (please correct me if I'm
      wrong) that the way science *actually works* is contrary to the way it's
      *claimed to work* in the NRC report is incorrect.

      .

      C. Provide a bibliography related to the questions "Can Education Research Be
      'Scientific'?" and "What's 'Scientific'?"

      .

      ************************************************

      .

      To access the complete 75 kB post please click on <http://bit.ly/Ujaogk>.

      .

      .

      .



      Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
      Links to Articles: <http://bit.ly/a6M5y0>
      Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs: <http://bit.ly/9nGd3M>
      Academia: <http://bit.ly/a8ixxm>
      Blog: <http://bit.ly/9yGsXh>
      GooglePlus: <http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE>
      Twitter: <http://bit.ly/juvd52>

      .

      .

      .


      "It is not enough to observe, experiment, theorize, calculate and communicate;
      we must also argue, criticize, debate, expound, summarize, and otherwise
      transform the information that we have obtained individually into reliable,
      well established, public knowledge."
      - John Ziman (1969): "Information, Communication, Knowledge," Nature 224
      (5217): 324 online at <http://bit.ly/cNPB1d>.


      .

      .

      .


      REFERENCES [URL shortened by <http://bit.ly/> and accessed on 01 Nov 2012.]

      .

      .

      .


      Hake, R.R. 2012. "Can Education Research Be 'Scientific'? What's 'Scientific'?
      (was 'in Defense of. . . .') "; online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at
      <http://bit.ly/Ujaogk>. Post of 31 Oct 2012 19:34:16-0700 to AERA-L and
      Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to
      several discussion lists and are also on my blog "Hake'sEdStuff" at
      <http://bit.ly/YrZJUS> with a provision for comments.




      An American Educational Research Association List



      .


      .
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.