Pesquisa em Educação: aspectos históricos e teórico-metodológicos

Referebces

Guest editorial: Improving the interpretation and reporting of quantitative research

A vision for the next phase of JRST

References

This article develops a way to conceptualize the complementarity of quantitative and qualitative research in science education. The differing sets of metaphysical presuppositions that give rise to the two approaches are systematically examined by using Stephen Pepper's “world hypotheses”: it is argued and demonstrated that quantitative research is formist/ mechanist in its metaphysical preoccupation, while qualitative research is contextualist/organicist. The vehicle for demonstrating how these metaphysical systems actually influence science education research is Stephen Toulmin's “argument pattern.” It is demonstrated through analysis of examples that quantitative and qualitatitive research reports follow the same pattern of argument, even though the metaphysical roots behind the approaches, which control their differing methodologies and other features, are obviously different. Given the emergence of qualitative research styles, implications are explored for the development of science education research as a total enterprise. Special attention is paid to the problems of appraising the quality of qualitative research reports and to the need for a comprehensive view of what constitutes legitimate research in science education.

Acknowledgements ... iv List of Contributors ... v Introduction ... 1 Pamela Barnhouse Walters and Annette Lareau Part I: Call for Rigor ... 22 first set of reprinted documents below traces the development of the charges that education research is low quality and of limited usefulness. second set highlights the key elements of the federal reforms to improve education research. final set provides examples of some of the major responses from the education research community. *The Problem Carl F. Kaestle, The Awful Reputation of Education Research. ... 23 Grover J. (Russ) Whitehurst, Wine, New Bottles. Address at the annual meeting of the American Educational Association... 30 Selection from Request for Proposals for Predoctoral Interdisciplinary Training Programs in the Education Sciences, Issued by the Institute of Education Sciences in 2004 ... 43 *Remedies for Improvement Definition of Scientifically Based Research in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 ... 46 Definitions of Scientific Validity in the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 ... 48 Mission and Functions of the Institute of Education Sciences, as Detailed in Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 ... 50 What Works Clearinghouse for Evaluating Existing Studies of Education ... 52 * *Reactions from the Education Community ... 53 A selection from the 2002 report from the National Council, Scientific in Education... 54 Margaret Eisenhart and Lisa Towne, Contestation and Change in National Policy on 'Scientifically Based' Education Research. ... 64 American Educational Association's Standards for Reporting on Empirical Social Science in AERA Publications. ... 72 Part II: Politics of Knowledge ... 87 *The Politics of Science: Battles for Scientific Authority in the Field of Education ... 88 Pamela Barnhouse Walters Walters argues that the current debates about the quality of education research and the best ways to improve it do not turn only on issues of the scientific merits of competing positions. debates are part of political and social struggles between groups of scientific experts, and between policymakers and scientific experts, over who gets to decide what counts as science and to claim scientific legitimacy within the research field. *A History of Efforts to Improve the Quality of Federal Education Research: From Gardner's Task Force to the Institute of Education Sciences ... 142 Maris Vinovskis Vinovskis shows that the current critique of the quality of education research is related in important ways to recurring dissatisfaction on the part of federal lawmakers and bureaucrats with the decisions and priorities of the federal agencies that provide the bulk of federal funding for education research. Part III: Seeking Rigor Finding Rigor ... 191 *Assessing Quality in Educational Journals ... 192 Barbara Schneider Schneider addresses the question of whether the quality of education research is as bad as its critics charge by comparing the scientific standards and processes in place at major education journals with the standards and processes in place in journals in other fields generally considered to be more scientific. She finds the education journals to be comparably rigorous. *Can Non-Randomized Studies Provide Evidence of Causal Effects? A Case Study Using the Regression Discontinuity Design ... 228 Larry V. Hedges and Jennifer Hanis While in sympathy with the call to make education research more rigorous, Hedges and Hanis show that randomized controlled trials are not the only way to rigorously assess causal relationships about education. They illustrate the usefulness of regression discontinuity models for assessing causality in conditions in which random assignment is not possible. *Blending Quality and Utility: Lessons Learned From the Quality Debates ... 260 Sheri Ranis Ranis shows that the debates about the quality of education research have been propelled by and conflated with debates about the utility of education research in ways often unacknowledged. She demonstrates that research utility became a resonant problematic that provided a powerful justification for the movement to improve the quality of education research. Part IV: Toward a More Comprehensive Understanding of Science ... 286 *Narrow Questions, Narrow Answers: Need to Broaden the Methodological Scope of Education ... 287 Annette Lareau Lareau argues that the education sciences movement has misapplied the medical model to education research. She suggests there is a need for more attention to a broader array of questions about meaning, process, and interactional dynamics and greater attention to issues of implementation. *A Quixotic Quest? Philosophical Issues in Assessing the Quality of Education ... 289 Denis C. Phillips Philips demonstrates that the current drive to establish a single model of scientific research in education takes an overly-simplistic view of the nature of science, in the process ignoring the complexities inherent in studying the intrinsically social and cultural dynamics of schooling. He calls the search for a single model of scientific research a quixotic quest.

Previous articleNext article No AccessA New Use of Randomization in Experimental Curriculum EvaluationHerbert J. Walberg and Wayne W. WelchHerbert J. Walberg Search for more articles by this author and Wayne W. Welch Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Volume 75, Number 4Winter, 1967 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/442821 Views: 3Total views on this site Citations: 26Citations are reported from Crossref Journal History This article was published in The School Review (1893-1979), which is continued by the American Journal of Education (1979-present). Copyright 1967 University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Joy Cumming, Adrian Coulston, John Elkins Planning for incomplete data collection in educational research, Research Papers in Education 2, no.11 (Jul 2006): 31–46.https://doi.org/10.1080/0267152870020103Barry J. Fraser Learning environment in curriculum evaluation: A review, Evaluation in Education 5, no.11 (Jan 1981): 1–93.https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-765X(81)90014-8VICTOR L. WILLSON Research Techniques in AERJ Articles: 1969 to 1978, Educational Researcher 9, no.66 (Jul 2016): 5–10.https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X009006005Frances Lawrenz The stability of student perception of the classroom learning environment, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 14, no.11 (Jan 1977): 77–81.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660140113Frances Lawrenz Student perception of the classroom learning environment in biology, chemistry, and physics courses, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 13, no.44 (Jul 1976): 315–323.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660130405William H. Ward A test of the association of class size to students' attitudes toward science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 13, no.22 (Mar 1976): 137–143.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660130206Frances Lawrenz The relationship between science teacher characteristics and student achievement and attitude, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 12, no.44 (Oct 1975): 433–437.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660120415Wayne W. Welch The process of evaluation, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 11, no.33 (Sep 1974): 175–184.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660110303Wayne W. Welch Review of the research and evaluation program of harvard project physics, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 10, no.44 (Dec 1973): 365–378.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660100411Wayne W. Welch, Arlen R. Gullickson A Strategy for Evaluating the NSF Comprehensive Program for Teacher Education, School Science and Mathematics 73, no.99 (Dec 1973): 759–767.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1973.tb09166.xBikkar S. Randhawa, Lewis L. W. Fu Assessment and Effect of Some Classroom Environment Variables, Review of Educational Research 43, no.33 (Jun 2016): 303–321.https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543043003303Wayne W. Welch, Herbert J. Walberg A National Experiment in Curriculum Evaluation, American Educational Research Journal 9, no.33 (Jun 2016): 373–383.https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312009003373Gary J. Anderson Effects of Course Content and Teacher Sex on the Social Climate of Learning, American Educational Research Journal 8, no.44 (Jun 2016): 649–663.https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312008004649Wayne W. Welch, Herbert J Walberg Pretest and Sensitization Effects in Curriculum Evaluation, American Educational Research Journal 7, no.44 (Jun 2016): 605–614.https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312007004605Gary J. Anderson Effects of Classroom Social Climate on Individual Learning, American Educational Research Journal 7, no.22 (Jun 2016): 135–152.https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312007002135Herbert J. Walberg, Andrew Ahlgren Predictors of the Social Environment of Learning, American Educational Research Journal 7, no.22 (Jun 2016): 153–167.https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312007002153Herbert J. Walberg Predicting Class Learning An Approach to the Class as a Social System, American Educational Research Journal 6, no.44 (Jun 2016): 529–542.https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312006004529Herbert J. Walberg Class Size and the Social Environment of Learning, Human Relations 22, no.55 (Oct 1969): 465–475.https://doi.org/10.1177/001872676902200507Wayne W. Welch 4: Curriculum Evaluation, Review of Educational Research 39, no.44 (Jun 2016): 429–443.https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543039004429Herbert J. Walberg, Wayne W. Welch, Arthur I. Rothman Teacher heterosexuality and student learning, Psychology in the Schools 6, no.33 (Jul 1969): 258–266.https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6807(196907)6:3<258::AID-PITS2310060307>3.0.CO;2-KRobert L. Baker 4: Curriculum Evaluation, Review of Educational Research 39, no.33 (Jun 2016): 339–358.https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543039003339Gary J. Anderson, Herbert J. Walberg, Wayne W. Welch Curriculum Effects on the Social Climate of Learning: A New Representation of Discriminant Functions, American Educational Research Journal 6, no.33 (Jun 2016): 315–328.https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312006003315Wayne W. Welch Correlates of courses satisfaction in high school physics, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 6, no.11 (Mar 1969): 54–58.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660060112Wayne W. Welch, Herbert J. Walberg, Andrew Ahlgren The Selection of a National Random Sample of Teachers for Experimental Curriculum Evaluation, School Science and Mathematics 69, no.33 (Mar 2010): 210–216.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1969.tb08443.xHERBERT J. WALBERG, GARY J. ANDERSON The Achievement-Creativity Dimension and Classroom Climate*, The Journal of Creative Behavior 2, no.44 (Dec 2011): 281–291.https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1968.tb00118.xWayne W. Welch, Robert G. Bridgham Physics Achievement Gains as a Function of Teaching Duration*, School Science and Mathematics 68, no.55 (Mar 2010): 449–454.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1968.tb15413.x

Researchers, historians, and philosophers of science debated the nature of scientific research in education for more than 100 years. Recent enthusiasm for evidence-based policy and practice in educationa now codified in the federal law that authorizes the bulk of elementary and secondary education programsa have brought a new sense of urgency to understanding the ways in which the basic tenets of science manifest in the study of teaching, learning, and schooling. Scientific Research in Education describes the similarities and differences between scientific inquiry in education and scientific inquiry in other fields and disciplines and provides a number of examples to illustrate these ideas. Its main argument is that all scientific endeavors share a common set of principles, and that each fielda including education researcha develops a specialization that accounts for the particulars of what is being studied. The book also provides suggestions for how the federal government can best support high-quality scientific research in education.

Guest Editorial: Science education in the developing world: Issues and considerations

موقف المجلات التربویة العربیة من بعض القضایا الخاصة بدور کلیات التربیة فی مجال محو الأمیة وتعلیم الکبار فی الفترة من 1991-2010 م دراسة تحلیلیة

Social network analysis (SNA) is becoming a prevalent method in education research and practice. But criticism has been voiced against the heavy reliance on quantification within SNA. Recent work suggests combining quantitative and qualitative approaches in SNA—mixed methods social network analysis (MMSNA)—as a remedy. MMSNA is helpful for addressing research questions related to the formal or structural side of relationships and networks, but it also attends to more qualitative questions such as the meaning of interactions or the variability of social relationships. In this chapter, we describe how researchers have applied and presented MMSNA in publications from the perspective of general mixed methods research. Based on a systematic review, we summarize the different applications within the field of education and learning research, point to potential shortcomings of the methods and its presentation, and develop an agenda to support researchers in conducting future MMSNA research.

Contents: D. Williams, A Framework for Thinking About Research in Mathematics and Science Education. R. Zevenbergen, Ethnography in the Mathematics and Science Classrooms. J.S. Schaller, K. Tobin, Establishing Credibility and Authenticity in Ethnographic Studies. J. Truran, K. Truran, Using Clinical Interviews in Qualitative Research. R. Bleicher, Classroom Interactions: Using Interactional Sociolinguistics to Make Sense of Recorded Classroom Talk. P. Taylor, V. Dawson, Critical Reflections on a Problematic Student-Supervisor Relationship. G. Leder, H. Forgasz, J. Landvogt, Higher Degree Supervision: Why It Worked. L. White, Teacher, Researcher, Collaborator, Student: Multiple Roles and Multiple Dilemmas. F.E. Crawley, Guiding Collaborative Action Research in Science Education Contexts. J.A. Malone, On Supervising and Being Supervised at a Distance. W-M. Roth, M.K. McGinn, Legitimate Peripheral Participation in the Training of Researchers in Science and Mathematics Education. A. Begg, B. Bell, V. Compton, E.A. McKinley, Supervision in a Graduate Centre. T. Cooper, A.R. Baturo, L. Harris, Scholarly Writing in Mathematics and Science Education Higher-Degree Courses. J. Hourcade, H. Anderson, Writing for Publication. D. Squires, The Impact of New Developments in Information Technology on Postgraduation Research and Supervision. P. Rillero, B. Gallegos, Databases: A Gateway to Research in Mathematics and Science Education Research.

The demand for scientifically-based educational research has fostered a new methodological orthodoxy exemplified by documents such as the National Research Council's Scientific Research in Education and Advancing Scientific Research in Education and American Educational Research Association's Standards for Reporting on Empirical Social Science Research in AERA Journals. This article criticizes the new orthodoxy as being a throwback to positivist reductionism and the “two dogmas” of educational research: the quantitative/ qualitative incompatibility thesis and fact/value dichotomy. It then criticizes the new orthodoxy for fostering a “third dogma” of educational research cut from the same cloth as the first two: the empirical science/humanities dualism. The article advances the view that no fundamental epistemological dividing line can be drawn between the empirical sciences and the humanities and that, accordingly, empirical research in education should not be cordoned off from the humanities, particularly their focus on values. It concludes with several observations about the problems and prospects for interdisciplinary research in education across the empirical science/humanities divide.

Since the eighth curriculum reform of basic education started in 2001 in Mainland China, many changes and innovations have occurred in science education practice and research. This chapter presented the status of science education research (SER) in Mainland China. In order to provide an overview of SER, four Chinese core journals that focused on physics education, chemistry education, biology education, and geography education, respectively, were selected to review and analysis the papers in 2011 and 2012; the results showed the affiliation of researchers and research topics. Moreover, this chapter introduces SER in Mainland China from research fields such as curriculum and textbook, science teaching, science learning, teachers’ professional development, scientific inquiry, and learning progressions and students’ domain-specific cognitive development. In the research fields, the representative studies in physics, chemistry, and biology education were reviewed, because the SER in Mainland China is closely integrated with separate science subjects.

METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH