Research Paradigm Issues and Reflection on Educational Empirical Research Methods

  • YAO Jihai
Expand
  • Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China

Online published: 2017-05-16

Abstract

That a discipline is called a science lies in its systematic and distinctive educational methodology. In terms of the development of pedagogy's disciplines, research methods determine the scientific property of pedagogy. It will contribute to the improvement of China's educational research by analyzing the employment of basic paradigms of international educational research methods, discussing the problems in our educational empirical research paradigm and exploring its development tendency. Either theoretical paradigm or empirical paradigm enjoy its own methodological status among the educational research methods system. At present, the western system of educational research methods is overwhelmingly characterized by empirical methods. International educational research tends to employ quantitative research, qualitative research and the mixed research by integrating both. However, in China, the problem of simplification remains in the educational research paradigm, and theoretical research is still China's main research method. Empirical research, though, has highlighted, its proportion is much less. Thus, the systematic and normative construction should be reinforced in our educational research methods. We should adopt more empirical research and advocate the diversification of research paradigm. Moreover, it's important to enhance the improved quantitative and qualitative research and explore the mixed research.

Cite this article

YAO Jihai . Research Paradigm Issues and Reflection on Educational Empirical Research Methods[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educational Sciences), 2017 , 35(3) : 64 -71+169+170 . DOI: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2017.03.007

References

鲍同梅. (2008). 教育学方法论的内涵及其研究视角. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),26(1), 27-32.
高耀明, 范围. (2010). 中国高等教育研究方法: 1979-2008——基于CNKI中国引文数据库(新)高等教育专题高被引论文的内容分析.大学教育科学,(3), 18-25.
侯怀银. (2009). 教育研究方法. 北京: 高等教育出版社.
胡中锋, 蒋毅欢. (2008). 教育科学研究中量的研究之反思. 华南师范大学学报(社会科学版), (6), 96-102.
蒋凯. (2004). 涵养科学精神——教育研究方法论的省思. 北京大学学报(哲学社会科学版), (1), 63-70.
李晔, 刘华山. (2006). 问卷调查过程中的常见问题与解决办法. 教育研究与实验, (2), 61-64.
李刚, 王红蕾. (2016). 混合方法研究的方法论与实践尝试: 共识、争议与反思. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), (4), 98-105, 121.
刘良华. (2007). 教育研究方法: 专题与案例. 上海: 华东师范大学出版社.
彭荣础. (2011). 思辨研究方法: 历史、困境与前景. 大学教育科学, (5), 86-88.
仇立平. (2008). 社会研究方法. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社.
唐涌. (2015). 混合方法研究——美国教育研究方法论的新取向. 外国教育研究, 42(2), 12-21.
田虎伟. (2007). 混和方法研究——美国教育研究方法的一种新范式. 比较教育研究, (1), 12-17.
夏世英. (2014). 高校逻辑学教学改革刍议. 教育评论, (7), 114-116.
姚计海, 王喜雪. (2013). 近十年来我国教育研究方法的分析与反思. 教育研究, (3), 20-24.
阎光才. (2014). 对英美等国家基于证据的教育研究取向之评析. 教育研究, (2), 137-143.
袁征. (2014). 教育研究的实证与思辨——从《无声的革命》看教育研究的方法. 华南师范大学学报(社会科学版), (2), 43-47.
张绘. (2012). 混合研究方法的形成、研究设计与应用价值——对"第三种教育研究范式"的探析. 复旦教育论坛, 10(5), 51-57.
郑日昌, 崔丽霞. (2001). 二十年来我国教育研究方法的回顾与反思. 教育研究, (6), 17-21.
朱志勇. (2005). 教育研究方法论范式与方法的反思. 教育研究与实验, (1), 7-12.
Borrego, M., Douglas, E.P. & Amelink, C.T. (2009). Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed research methods in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(1), 53-66.
Capraro, R.M. & Thompson, B. (2008). The educational researcher defined: What will future researchers be trained to do? The Journal of Educational Research. 101(4), 247-253.
Cenci, M. (2014). Design-based research in an educational research context. Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies, (1), 62-75.
Creswell, J.W., Shope, R., Clark, V.L.P. & Green, D.O. (2006). How interpretive qualitative research extends mixed methods research. Research in the School, 13(1), 1-11.
Golding, C. (2013). Must we gather data? A place for the philosophical study of higher education. Higher Education Research and Development, 32(1), 152-155.
Johnson, R.B. & Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2004). Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
Kang, C., Wang, G., Shi, M. & Sun, F. (2014). Research trend on higher education in China for the past ten years. International Journal of Educational Management, 28(3), 319-339.
Kelle, U. (2006). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in research practice: purposes and advantages. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(4), 293-311.
Nancy, L., Leech, N.L. & Onwuegbuzie, A.J. A typology of mixed methods research designs. Quality & Quantity. 2009, 43: 265–275.
Onweugbuzie, A.J. (2002). Why can't we all get along? Towards a framework for unifying research paradigms. Education, 122(3), 518-530.
Vstün, U. & Eryilmaz, A. (2014). A research methodology to conduct effective research syntheses: meta-analysis. Education and Science, 39(174), 1-32.
Walsh, S. (2014). A Mixed Methods Case Study of Early Childhood Professionals' Perception and Motivations of Choosing Self-Directed Learning(EdD dissertation). Uuiversity of La Verne, California.
Whiteman, R.S. (2015). Explicating metatheory for mixed methods research in educational leadership: An application of Habermas's Theory of Communicative Action. International Journal of Educational Management, 29(7), 888-903.
Wiersma, W. & Jurs, S.G. (2004). Research Methods in Education: An Introduction (eighth edition). 北京: 中国轻工业出版社(影印版).
Zandvanian, A. & Daryapoor, E. (2013). Mixed Methods Research: A New Paradigm in Educational Research. Journal of Educational and Management Studies, 3(4), 525-531.
Outlines

/