The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The New Paradigm Wars: Is There Room for Rigorous Practitioner Knowledge in Schools and Universities?
Abstract
ccording to Schon (1995) new scholarship implies a kind of action research with norms of its own, which will conflict with the norms of technical rationality-the prevailing epistemology built into the research universities (p. 27). The battle of snails that Schon refers to echoes the wars among positivists, interpretivists, and critical theorists, satirically described by Gage (1989) in the pages of Educational Researcher. While we believe that practitioner research cannot be subsumed under any of Gage's three paradigms without doing it damage, our purpose in this article is not to argue for separate paradigm status. Nevertheless, we believe that the insider status of the researcher, the centrality of action, the requirement of spiraling self-reflection on action, and the intimate, dialectical relationship of research to practice, all make practitioner research alien (and often suspect) to researchers who work out of Gage's three academic paradigms. If anything, academic traditions of feminist and poststructural research might be more compatible with these characteristics. It is interesting to speculate on why metaphors of war and battles are evoked to discuss these epistemological debates. While it could be attributed to the academic version
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Tightening the Iron Cage: Concertive Control in Self-Managing Teams
Barker, J. R. (1993) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393374 · Cited by 2,305
The Place of Story in the Study of Teaching and Teacher Education
CARTER, K. (1993) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x022001005 · Cited by 935
Knowing-In-Action: The New Scholarship Requires a New Epistemology
Schön, D. A. (1995) · Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning · doi:10.1080/00091383.1995.10544673 · Cited by 861
Cited by
Baum, F., MacDougall, C., & Smith, D. (2006) · Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health · doi:10.1136/jech.2004.028662 · Cited by 2,420
Validity in qualitative research revisited
Cho, J., & Trent, A. (2006) · Qualitative Research · doi:10.1177/1468794106065006 · Cited by 1,037
The Teacher Research Movement: A Decade Later
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x028007015 · Cited by 1,139
More Than Words? Delving Into the Substantive Meaning(s) of “Social Justice” in Education
North, C. E. (2006) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543076004507 · Cited by 373
The Relationship Between Theory and Practice in Teacher Education
Korthagen, F. A. J. (2010) · International Encyclopedia of Education · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-044894-7.00638-2 · Cited by 127
Metadata
- Authors
- Anderson, G. L., & Herr, K.
- Venue
- Educational Researcher
- Published
- 1999-06
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 12
- ISSN
- 0013-189X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2034822595
- Cited by
- 526
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 130.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.