THE UNVERSITY OF ZAMBIA

INSTITUTE OF DISTANCE EDUCATION

DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY EDUCATION

NAME :Maureen Chinyata

COMPUTER NUMBER : 16058266

COURSE :Bed (Primary)

COURSE CODE : EPS 9001

LECTURE : Mr. Mambwe

TASK :Assignment 1

DUE DATE :13 March, 2020.

QUESTION
I. Explain the ontological positions argued by the positivism and interpretivism theoretical
research paradigms.
II. Clearly explain the fundamental differences between qualitative and quantitative research
strategies in terms of the following:
 The research methods and the data collection tools used
 Principal orientation to the role of theory in relation to research
 Epistemological orientation and
 Ontological orientation.

0|Page
Interpretivism and positivism are two popular research paradigms that are used in a research.
These paradigms lies on the foundation construct of ontology, epistemology and methodology.
This paper seeks to explain the ontological positions argued by the positivism and Interpretivism
theoretical research paradigms. The essay will also clearly explain the fundamental differences
between qualitative and quantitative research strategies in terms; the research methods and the
data collection tools used, principal orientation to the role of theory in relation to research,
epistemological and ontological orientation.

A research is defined as a systematic and controlled enquiry and method through which data are
collected, analysed and interpreted to eliminate difficulties and improve conditions (Cohen et al,
2011). Research is therefore a detailed study into a specific problem, concern, or issue using the
scientific method.

Another term to define is a paradigm. Kuhn (1996) defines a paradigm as an integrated cluster of
substantive concepts, variables and problems attached with corresponding methodological
approaches and tools that gathers into itself a community of investigators.

Therefore, a research paradigm can be defined as a cluster of beliefs and dictates which for
scientists in a particular discipline influence what should be studied, how research should be
done, how results should be interpreted (Bryman, 1992). Research paradigm in this manner is a
specific way of perceiving the world (a worldview) that shape how we seek answers to research
questions.

Ontology and epistemology are other terms to define. Ontology is an area of philosophy that
deals with the nature of being, or what exists. It is concerned with reality and is often presented
with questions such as ‘what is the meaning of being?’ or ‘what can be said to exist?’ Ontology
is concerned with identifying the overall nature of existence of a particular phenomenon.

On the other hand, epistemology is an area of philosophy that is concerned with the creation of
knowledge, focusing on how knowledge is obtained and investigating the most valid ways to
reach the truth.

Carson et al (2001) define epistemology as the relationship between the researcher and the reality
or how this reality is captured or known (Carson et al., 2001). Epistemology essentially

1|Page
determines the relationship between the researcher and reality and is rooted in the ontological
assumptions.

Positivism is a terminology that appeared in Francis Bacon's writings in the 16th century though
August Comte is considered its founder. It is based on the universality of laws and emphasizes
the existence of common reality on which people can agree. Positivism contends that these
realities are meaningful as long as they are observable, replicable and verifiable (Anderson,
1998). Positivists believe society shapes the individual and use quantitative methods.

With regards to the ontological position, positivism pertains to the existence of independent
realities outside the mind (Crotty, 1998). Objectivism is the term generally used to describe the
ontological stance of positivism.

Moreover, the ontological position in this paradigm looks at researchers as ones that remain
detached from the participants of the research by creating a distance, which is important in
remaining emotionally neutral to make clear distinctions between reason and feeling (Carson et
al., 2001). They also maintain a clear distinction between science and personal experience and
fact and value judgement.

Positivism claims that researchers in social science should consider concepts as objective and
'real' so that they can be deemed verifiable (Cohen et al, 2011). The other ontological position of
positivism is that in which positivists claim that the researcher seeks to explain the reality by
means of objective observation, verification and measurement (Anderson, 1998). The ontological
position in positivism as a research paradigm stands on external, objective and independent
factors.

Positivists begin their research process by formulating hypotheses which are tentative
suppositions derived from previous theories. Hypotheses inform congruent data collection
methods and analysis to check whether findings confirm or contradict that theory.

Carson at al (2001) asserted that, positivism stares at ontology as a unit of existence that has a
well-ordered approach in conducting research by classifying a clear research topic and problem
and by adopting a suitable research methodology. This is the reason why ontology seeks to
answer questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist.

2|Page
In addition, the positivist ontology believes that the world is external (Carson et al., 1988) and
that there is a single objective reality to any research phenomenon or situation regardless of the
researcher’s perspective or belief (Hudson and Ozanne, 1988). Thus, they take a controlled and
structural approach in conducting research by identifying a clear research topic, constructing
appropriate hypotheses and by adopting a suitable research methodology.

Within the research paradigm of interpretivism, the ontological stance of interpretivism views
reality as multiple and relative (Hudson and Ozanne, 1988). Lincoln and Guba (1985) explain
that these numerous realities depend on other structures for meanings, which make it even more
difficult to interpret in terms of fixed realities.

For interpretivism, ontology position lies in the knowledge that is acquired and socially
constructed rather than objectively determined and perceived. Ontological positivist looks at the
interpretivist researcher as one who enters the field with some sort of prior insight of the research
context but assumes that this is insufficient in developing a fixed research design due to
complex, multiple and unpredictable nature of what is perceived as reality (Hudson and Ozanne,
1988). Further, the researcher remains open to new knowledge throughout the study and lets it
develop with the help of informants.

Having looked at the ontological position in the two paradigms, the essay will now discuss the
difference between qualitative and quantitative research in terms of methods and other parts to be
discussed.

To begin with, quantitative research is used to quantify the problem by way of generating
numerical data or data that can be transformed into usable statistics. It is used to quantify
attitudes, opinions, behaviors, and other defined variables – and generalize results from a larger
sample population.

Quantitative research on the other hand uses measurable data to formulate facts and uncover
patterns in research. Quantitative data collection methods are much more structured than
Qualitative data collection methods.

Quantitative data collection methods include in-depth interviews, various forms of surveys,
online surveys, paper surveys, mobile surveys and kiosk surveys, face-to-face interviews,

3|Page
telephone interviews, longitudinal studies, website interceptors, online polls, and systematic
observations.

In short, quantitative uses non-structure techniques while qualitative uses structured techniques
such as questionnaires and observations. Qualitative research is exploratory. As opposed to
quantitative research which is conclusive.

With regards to principal orientation to the role of theory quantitative study’s enquiry is based on
testing a theory made up of variables that are in statistical form that determines the correctively
of the theory. Quantitative believes that the study of the theory in a research is done before the
study and the research should vindicate the applicability of the theory.

On the other hand, a qualitative study aims at understanding the social phenomena through
investigations and interpretations of the meanings attached to it. The primary objective is to
make sense of the social world which helps develop a theory during and after the study is
conducted through the process of induction (Creswell, 2003).

In quantitative research epistemology asserts that the investigator and the investigated are
independent entities and, therefore, the investigator can study a phenomenon without influencing
it or being influenced by it while in quantitative research, the investigator and the investigated
subjects are interdependent or interactively connected (Guba & Lincoln, 1994).

Furthermore, in view of the above, epistemology in qualitative research requires that the
researcher be much closer to the situation and interpret life through the human experience. They
contend that the scientific process is really an engagement between the researcher and
participant.

Quantitative research in epistemology looks into issues of trustworthiness and credibility, on the
other hand, qualitative research that aims to explore, discover, and understand in order to judge
research quality and outcomes. From the qualitative view, the nature of inquiry is interpretive
and the purpose of inquiry is to understand a particular phenomenon, not to generalize to a
population (Farzanfar, 2005). On the other hand, the researchers who work from this perspective
explains in quantitative terms how variables interact, shape events, and cause outcomes.

4|Page
With regards to ontology, the research findings in qualitative methodology are usually reported
descriptively using words (Mutch, 2005). The qualitative research methodology treats people as
research participants and not as objects as in the positivist research approach. On the other hand,
qualitative research treats the findings in statistical manner.

With regards to individual investigations; qualitative researchers conduct a study with the intent
of reporting these multiple realities. Crotty (1998) on the contrary, quantitative approach does
not subscribe to concept of multiple realities as the objective is usually to find out whether or not
the hypothesis meets the general theory.

In conclusion, the essay has looked at the ontological position argued by the positivism and
interpretivism theoretical research paradigms. It has explained the meaning of a research
paradigm and also the ontological position in positivism and interpretivism. The essay has
further explained the fundamental differences between qualitative and quantitative research
strategies in terms the research methods and the data collection tools used, the principal
orientation to the role of theory in relation to research, epistemological and ontological
orientations. In a nut shell, ontological position in positivism is centred on direct access to the
real world and single external reality while in interpretivism it is conditional upon human
experience and that reality is dependent on human interpretation.

5|Page
 REFERENCE

Bryman, A. (2012) “Social Research Methods” 4th edition, Oxford University Press.

Carson, D., Gilmore, A., Perry, C., and Gronhaug, K. (2001). Qualitative Marketing Research.
London: Sage.

Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, (2000). Research Methods in Education (5th ed.). London:
Routledge Falmer.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th Edition).
London: Routledge.

Stuart, Alan (1962) Basic Ideas of Scientific Sampling, Hafner Publishing Company, New York

Crotty, M. (1998). The foundation of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research
process. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Farzanfar, R. (2005). Using Qualitative Research Methods to Evaluate Automated Health

Promotion/Disease Prevention Technologies: A Procedures’ Manual. Boston University.

Guba, E. E. and Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and

emerging confluences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Lincoln, Y. S. and Guba, E. G. (2005). Paradigms and perspectives in contention. In N. Denzin

and Y. Lincoln (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Guba, E. and Linclon, Y. (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Ulin, P. R., Robinson, E. T. and Tolley E. E. (2004). Qualitative Methods in Public Health: A
Field Guide for Applied Research. Sanfransisco: Jossey-Bass.

6|Page