FRP 7300 Discussion2
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Concordia University Chicago *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
7300
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
Pages
3
Uploaded by DrNewt2492
When preparing to approach research-based tasks, it is imperative that one has an understanding
of their own beliefs when it comes to the philosophical approach to research and knowledge. The
concept of paradigms is explored throughout various forms of literature and in the week’s lecture
to help guide the navigation of understanding the personal belief system that will drive research
practices. The first step is to explore the various explanations for the term paradigm, in an effort
to solidify comprehension of its meaning. In the lecture, Wozniak defines a paradigm as “set of
assumptions about reality and how to know that reality that members of a scientific community
generate and share, a belief system of research that offers a starting point for understanding what
it means to do research and how it is practiced” (Wozniak, 2016). In the text,
Paradigm Dialog
,
Guba discusses the term as “a basic set of beliefs that guides action, whether of the everyday
garden variety or action taken in connection with a disciplined inquiry” (Guba, 1990). With a
solid foundation for the idea of a paradigm, one can begin to explore the various types and
determine a personal belief system.
Within the four paradigms explored, it would appear that there is a place for each in terms of
defining reality on a personal level. Wozniak mentions positivism as one of the most popular
paradigms and discusses its “aim to offer explanation, prediction and control based on the
verification of a theory”, with this being done through empiricism or strict observation of a
phenomenon that can be investigated using the scientific method” (Wozniak, 2016). When it
comes to “scientific studies” and situations that relate to utilizing quantitative data to gain
information and understanding, positivism is the theory that one would hold belief in. As an
educator, the data from standards-aligned assessments is trusted as accurate depictions of
students ability. In doctoral research, the quantitative data that will be collected from student
achievement and progress monitoring assessments will be seen as objective and a way of simply
confirming or disconfirming that an intervention approach was successful. When it comes to the
positivism paradigm and the focus on quantitative data, the most important takeaway was
possibly present in an article from Firestone which states, “the ideal quantitative researcher is
detached to avoid bias” (Firestone, 1987). Therefore, the positivism theory has its place in one’s
personal belief system but has to have its research truly based on objectivity.
When it comes to post-positivism and constructivism-interpretivism, there are also components
of each that encroach on one’s philosophical outlook of the world, research and knowledge
acquisition. In doctoral research, while quantitative data, that is purely objective, will be
necessary, the topic of
Teachers and Staff Perceptions of MTSS
, will require qualitative
exploration that may be more so subjective. In the
Paradigm Dialog
text, Guba discusses the
importance of multiple sources of data in research, helping to strengthen the post-positivism
belief system. It is stated that “it is essential that the “findings” of an inquiry be based on as
many sources - of data, investigators, theories, and methods -as possible. Further, if objectivity
can never be entirely attained, relying on many different sources makes it less likely that
distorted interpretations will be made” (Guba, 1990). The belief is that there is a place for both
quantitative and qualitative data, especially when doctoral research commences. When
quantitative data is in play, the positivist paradigm and its attributes dominate the belief system.
In qualitative situations, there may be more post-positivism. In the Firestone text, a comparison
is made with a quantitative and qualitative study, each focused on the “relative contributions of
leadership and environment to organizational performance” (Firestone, 1987). This comparison
study helps to understand the goal behind each type of research and can be used to understand
how research procedures would be approached. “The quantitative study must convince the reader
that procedures have been followed faithfully. The qualitative study provides the reader with a
depiction in enough detail to show that the author's conclusion “makes sense”. For that reason,
discussion of procedure is not emphasized. Too much attention to procedure can get in the way
of the narrative line which attempts to build a concrete impression of the phenomenon studied”
(Firestone, 1987). The idea with post-positivism that through research one gets closer to the truth
but that truth can never be determined with one study appears to possess some validity and helps
with the slight belief in that paradigm. With interpretivism, reality is constructed in the mind of
the individual and there are instances where this becomes the belief (Wozniak, 2016). Social
interactions would be a prime area where this example often shows up. The idea that individuals
can belong to different political parties that have severely opposing views on life and lifestyle,
can support the idea that our minds construct what is viewed as reality.
Similar to the other paradigms explored, there are instances where critical theory is viewed as the
appropriate approach to reality. Wozniak discusses the conscious effort to unpackage power
dynamics and take action to emancipate the oppressed (Wozniak, 2016). Systematic racism,
institutional oppression and the idea behind a minority and marginalized group of individuals
supports the conclusion that a portion of reality lies within the concept of critical theory and that
research can be guided by this idea. In Guba’s text, critical theory is discussed with the statement
that “the task of inquiry is, by definition, to raise people (the oppressed) to a level of “true
consciousness”. Once they appreciate how oppressed they are, they can act to transform the
world” (Guba, 1990). In education today, equity, critical race theory, and culturally relevant
instruction based research is significantly explored with the goal to transform practices that in the
past have disproportionately suppressed groups of students.
After consideration, the personal belief system in relation to the various paradigms can be
described as a heterogeneous mixture, dependent on the circumstance and situations that are in
play. In understanding about the world, conducting research and acquiring knowledge, there are
moments where one paradigm will dominate the others and drive actions. It is unknown if this
type of thinking can be deemed as appropriate from a philosophical standpoint, or if one
overwhelming choice has to be determined.
Firestone, W. (1987). Meaning in Method: The Rhetoric of Quantitative and Qualitative
Research.
Educational Researcher.
16 (
7
). 16-21. : http://www.jstor.org/stable/1174685
Guba, E. (1990).
The Paradigm Dialog
. Sage Publications.
Wozniak, K. (2016).
Module 2 History of Paradigms.
https://blackboard.cuchicago.edu/webapps/osv-kaltura-BB5a32b5d33f67b/jsp/viewConte
nt1_Iframe.jsp?entry_id=1_6ndruz54
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help