The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Postpositivism And Educational Research
Abstract
This volume presents in a forthright and lively way, an account of the philosophical position generally identified as 'Postpositivistic' that undergirds much of mainstream research in education and the related social sciences. The discussion throughout is informed by recent developments in philosophy of science. Authors D. C. Phillips and Nicholas C. Burbules cite a number of interesting examples from the educational research and evaluation literature to illustrate the value of a scientific approach. Many educational researchers aspire to carry out rigorous or disciplined inquiry aimed at producing accurate (and generally 'truthful') accounts of educational phenomena and the causal psychological or social processes that lay behind them. However, many recent critics have argued that it is a mistake to believe that research can yield theories, or advance claims that are true, objective, and value-neutral. In other words, that researchers always work within frameworks that embody important (and often questionable) assumptions about values and the nature of human knowledge. This book argues that , while there is much to be learned from recent critiques, traditional scientific values and assumptions are not outmoded. The authors show students how to implement and benefit from the scientific method in ways that take into account recent critiques.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Post-positivist researchers (a spectrum between positivism and interpretivism, Phillips and Burbules (2000)) advocate applying methods and theories that aim to omit biases. Such methods prioritise objectivity and aim to minimise the infl uence of the researcher ' s subjectivity (Olmos-Vega et al., 2022).”
From Quality Criteria: General and Specific Guidelines for Qualitative Approaches in Psychology Research. A Concise Guide for Novice Researchers and Reviewers (2024) · cites this paper as Phillips and Burbules, 2000
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x033007014 · Cited by 11,170
Mobile Health Apps to Facilitate Self-Care: A Qualitative Study of User Experiences
Anderson, K., Burford, O., & Emmerton, L. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0156164 · Cited by 502
Cena, E., Brooks, J., Day, W., Goodman, S., Rousaki, A., Ruby-Granger, V., & Seymour-Smith, S. (2024) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/16094069241282843 · Cited by 49
Metadata
- Authors
- Phillips, D. C., & Burbules, N. C.
- Published
- 2000
- OpenAlex
- W4417379764
- Cited by
- 521
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 50 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 27
- FWCI
- 11.41
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Research and Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational theories and practices
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Education, Philosophy, and Society
- Keywords
- post-positivism, philosophy of science, educational research, scientific method, value-laden research, research assumptions, objectivity, truth and knowledge, research evaluation
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