Something to think about (and then some)

Some people say that educational research is weak and theoretical and that it does not address substantive and important problems in rigorous ways.

There is a multitude of research paradigms that have been utilised for educational research: positivist; interpretivist; critical; post-modern and participatory. Each of these paradigms have their own strengths and weaknesses.

It could be argued that traditional positivist approaches to educational research are primarily theoretical in nature. Such researchers pride themselves on their rigour. However, depending on your own axiological perspective you might argue that such approaches are weak in that they may not necessarily address substantive and important problems in education, just problems that the researchers themselves deem to be important. In fact, the majority of educational research paradigms and problems, being researcher-selected and directed may suffer from consideration of the substantiveness of the problem under consideration.

On the other hand, all educational research paradigms can demonstrate strong theoretical linkages and rigorous research approaches. In this, educational research is no different to any other form of research.

One research paradigm that addresses the type of criticism often leveled at educational research is the Participatory research paradigm as espoused by Herron & Reason (1979) and Guba & Lincoln (2005). Using Participatory Action Research, substantive and important educational problems and issues in an extant workplace are collaboratively agreed between participants in the workplace, including (but not limited to) the researcher. The researcher in this paradigm acts more as a research facilitator and reporter. Using a cyclic process of 'investigate, reflect then act' it is the collaborative team that undertakes the research, analyses (and even more importantly) implements the research outcomes. Participatory Action Research can consider theoretical perspectives at any stage of its cycle. Whilst interpretivist in nature, the rigour of the process is assured by the collaboration and negotiated agreements required for the research to process.

In considering the issue of just what is meant by 'educational' research, I reflected on some discourse I have been having with a student in another unit. We were discussing the meaning of the word Pedagogy. I had always taken this to mean the art and science of teaching and learning. However, Dr.Dr.Dr. pointed out that due to the Greek root of the word, Pedagogy relates purely to the teaching of children and Andragogy is the correct word for the teaching of adults. I bring this up in the context of theory and practice in relation to educational research. Should I expect to be able to discern differences in research problems and issues depending on the educational sector being researched? I had asked the question "What is the correct word that encompasses teaching (researching?) both the educational needs of children and adults?" Is it 'Education' or is there another more appropriate word? I am still awaiting an answer.

I now reflect on just what are the various educational sectors? Traditionally we have spoken of Primary, Secondary and Tertiary education - are different research approaches require, depending on the sector, or is educational research practice sector independent?

Does Pedagogy encompasses both Primary and Secondary school education?

Is Andragogy equally applicable to higher (university level) education as to the VET sector and life-long learning?

Does learning, knowledge construction and researching via the Internet and the WWW need to be considered from a different perspective or paradigm?