Research goes on in laboratories and libraries, in jungles and ocean depths, in caves and in outer space.

It stands behind every new technology, product, or scientific discovery—and most of the old ones.
Research is in fact the world’s biggest industry. Those who cannot reliably do research or evaluate the
research of others will find themselves on the sidelines in a world that increasingly depends on sound
ideas based on good information produced by trustworthy inquiry.

you find a topic that you care about, ask a question that you want to answer, your project can have the
fascination of a mystery whose solution rewards your efforts in finding it. Nothing contributes more to a
1995

Educational Research
In education, research is necessary in order to assess the effects of major changes. On
the basis of such assessment, educational planners provide policy advice so that post
productive courses of action can be consolidated and extended, while existing practices
that are damaging and wasteful can be intercepted and terminated. There are various
types of educational research studies and they can be classified in a number of ways.

Studies may be classified according to topic, with the particular phenomena under
investigation used to group the studies. Studies can also be divided into exploratory and
confirmatory. A researcher undertakes an exploratory study when there is not enough
understanding about a phenomena and he or she can only make a conjecture about key
variables, their relationships, and causal linkages. By contrast, a researcher employs a
confirmatory study when he or she has generated a theoretical model, which is based
on theory, detailed observation, or previous research findings, and needs to test it by
gathering and analyzing field data.

The types of educational research can also be defined according to the kinds of
information they provide. Historical research describes and sometimes attempts to
explain conditions, situations, and events that occurred in the past. As part of
descriptive research, information about conditions, situations, and events occurring in
the present is provided. Correlational research uses various measures of statistical
association to find relationships between variables.

Causal research observes existing phenomena in order to suggest causal linkages

between variables then searches back through available data to identify plausible
relationships. Experimental research is employed in settings where a researcher can
manipulate variables defining one or more 'causes' in a systematic fashion so that one
can discern 'effects' on other variables. Case study research in general refers to two
different research approaches. As part of the first approach, a particular student,
classroom, or school are studied in depth in order to produce a nuanced description of
the pervading cultural setting that has an impact on education, as well as an account of
the interactions taking place between students and other relevant persons.
The second approach to case study research consists of the application of quantitative
research methods to non-probability samples. The results of such research are not
necessarily designed in a way that they can be used for the generalization of wider
populations. Ethnographic research generally involves a description of events occurring
within the life of a group, in particular referring to the interaction of individuals in the
context of the sociocultural norms, rituals, and beliefs shared by the group.

Research and development research is different from the other types of research
because instead of bringing new information to light, it studies the interaction between
research and the production and evaluation of a new product. Such research can be
'formative' as part of which evaluative information about the products is being collected
while it is being developed and such information is designed to be used for the
modification and improvement of the development process. It can also be 'summative'
and evaluate the worth of the final product, in comparison to some other competing
product, in particular.

There are a number of sequential stages in the research process. First, the research
issues should be identified in terms of general and specific questions. Then a review of
previous studies in the field should be made. A researcher should then decide whether
to adopt an experimental design or a survey design for the study on the basis of the
specific research questions. Then operation definition of key variables should be
constructed and instruments, such as tests, questionnaires, observation schedules, to
be employed while measuring these variables should be selected and prepared.

A researcher should conduct a pilot testing of instruments and data collection and
record the procedures and techniques. The results should be used to revise instruments
and to refine the data collection procedures. Then the data should be collected and
prepared before its main analysis. Once the data is summarized and tabulated, a
research report or reports are written.

There are three types of research reports. The technical report is written in great detail
and shows all of the research details, usually read by other researchers. The second
report is in the form of an executive summary and reports the major findings and their
implications for future action or policy. The third general report presents the results in an
easily understood form for interested members of the public, teachers, and university
people.
https://www.questia.com/library/education/curriculum-and-instruction/educational-research

The Moral Foundations of Educational Research: Knowledge,

Inquiry, and ValuesBy Pat Sikes; Jon Nixon; Wilfred CarrOpen University Press, 2003
Re-presenting Research
Pat takes the view that the ways in which researchers write about their work and how they present their
findings is never a neutral or objective matter. In recent years social scientists have begun to use a range
of creative approaches, including narrative, fiction, poetics, and performance and Pat is personally
involved in exploring, developing, using and making the case for, alternative forms of research writing.

Research Ethics
Pat is interested in issues around research ethics; ethics and auto/biographical research; ethical review
and research governance; and research ethics in the internationalised university.

"Research paper." What image comes into mind as you hear those words:
working with stacks of articles and books, hunting the "treasure" of others'
thoughts? Whatever image you create, it's a sure bet that you're envisioning
sources of information--articles, books, people, artworks. Yet a research
paper is more than the sum of your sources, more than a collection of different
pieces of information about a topic, and more than a review of the literature
in a field. A research paper analyzes a perspective  or argues a point.
Regardless of the type of research paper you are writing, your finished
research paper should present your own thinking backed up by others' ideas
and information. 

To draw a parallel, a lawyer researches and reads about many cases and
uses them to support their own case. A scientist reads many case studies to
support an idea about a scientific principle. In the same way, a history student
writing about the Vietnam War might read newspaper articles and books and
interview veterans to develop and/or confirm a viewpoint and support it with
evidence. 

A research paper is an expanded essay that presents your own interpretation

or evaluation or argument. When you write an essay, you use everything that
you personally know and have thought about a subject. When you write a
research paper you build upon what you know about the subject and make a
deliberate attempt to find out what experts know. A research paper involves
surveying a field of knowledge in order to find the best possible information in
that field. And that survey can be orderly and focused, if you know how to
approach it. Don't worry--you won't get lost in a sea of sources. 

In fact, this guide is designed to help you navigate the research voyage,
through developing a research question and thesis, doing the research,
writing the paper, and correctly documenting your sources.
https://www.esc.edu/online-writing-center/resources/research/research-paper/

sunny empire state college UK

Contributors:Jack Raymond Baker, Allen Brizee, Ashley Velázquez
Last Edited: 2011-03-30 09:06:38

Research: What it is.

A research paper is the culmination and final product of an involved process of research, critical
thinking, source evaluation, organization, and composition. It is, perhaps, helpful to think of the
research paper as a living thing, which grows and changes as the student explores, interprets, and
evaluates sources related to a specific topic. Primary and secondary sources are the heart of a
research paper, and provide its nourishment; without the support of and interaction with these
sources, the research paper would morph into a different genre of writing (e.g., an encyclopedic
article). The research paper serves not only to further the field in which it is written, but also to
provide the student with an exceptional opportunity to increase her knowledge in that field. It is also
possible to identify a research paper by what it is not.

Research: What it is not.

A research paper is not simply an informed summary of a topic by means of primary and secondary
sources. It is neither a book report nor an opinion piece nor an expository essay consisting solely of
one's interpretation of a text nor an overview of a particular topic. Instead, it is a genre that requires
one to spend time investigating and evaluating sources with the intent to offer interpretations of the
texts, and not unconscious regurgitations of those sources. The goal of a research paper is not to
inform the reader what others have to say about a topic, but to draw on what others have to say
about a topic and engage the sources in order to thoughtfully offer a unique perspective on the issue
at hand. This is accomplished through two major types of research papers.

Two major types of research papers.

Argumentative research paper:

The argumentative research paper consists of an introduction in which the writer clearly introduces the
topic and informs his audience exactly which stance he intends to take; this stance is often identified
as the thesis statement. An important goal of the argumentative research paper is persuasion, which
means the topic chosen should be debatable or controversial. For example, it would be difficult for a
student to successfully argue in favor of the following stance.

Cigarette smoking poses medical dangers and may lead to cancer for both the smoker and those who experience

secondhand smoke.

Perhaps 25 years ago this topic would have been debatable; however, today, it is assumed that
smoking cigarettes is, indeed, harmful to one's health. A better thesis would be the following.

Although it has been proven that cigarette smoking may lead to sundry health problems in the smoker, the social

acceptance of smoking in public places demonstrates that many still do not consider secondhand smoke as dangerous

to one's health as firsthand smoke.

In this sentence, the writer is not challenging the current accepted stance that both firsthand and
secondhand cigarette smoke is dangerous; rather, she is positing that the social acceptance of the
latter over the former is indicative of a cultural double-standard of sorts. The student would support
this thesis throughout her paper by means of both primary and secondary sources, with the intent to
persuade her audience that her particular interpretation of the situation is viable.

Analytical research paper:

The analytical research paper often begins with the student asking a question (a.k.a. a research
question) on which he has taken no stance. Such a paper is often an exercise in exploration and
evaluation. For example, perhaps one is interested in the Old English poem Beowulf. He has read the
poem intently and desires to offer a fresh reading of the poem to the academic community. His
question may be as follows.

How should one interpret the poem Beowulf?

His research may lead him to the following conclusion.

Beowulf is a poem whose purpose it was to serve as an exemplum of heterodoxy for tenth- and eleventh-century

monastic communities.

Though his topic may be debatable and controversial, it is not the student's intent to persuade the
audience that his ideas are right while those of others are wrong. Instead, his goal is to offer a critical
interpretation of primary and secondary sources throughout the paper--sources that should,
ultimately, buttress his particular analysis of the topic. The following is an example of what his thesis
statement may look like once he has completed his research.

Though Beowulf is often read as a poem that recounts the heroism and supernatural exploits of the protagonist

Beowulf, it may also be read as a poem that served as an exemplum of heterodoxy for tenth- and eleventh-century

monastic communities found in the Danelaw.

This statement does not negate the traditional readings of Beowulf; instead, it offers a fresh and
detailed reading of the poem that will be supported by the student's research.

It is typically not until the student has begun the writing process that his thesis statement begins to
take solid form. In fact, the thesis statement in an analytical paper is often more fluid than the thesis
in an argumentative paper. Such is one of the benefits of approaching the topic without a
predetermined stance.

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/658/02/

purpose-----

THE RESEARCH PAPER A research paper is like an essay, except it usually is longer and uses outside
sources to support your arguments. A research paper has a clearly written thesis statement covering a
topic that is open to debate. A research paper carefully develops each point. When you write a research
paper, you must develop your position by reacting to information from other sources. You must explain
why you agree or disagree with those sources. You must get involved with your topic. Remember: The
main purpose of a research paper is to give your ideas and opinions about the topic and to use other
sources to support your position.

http://www.paine.edu/docs/tec/ResearchPapers_StepstoSuccess.pdf

WRITING A RESEARCH PAPER: STEPS TO SUCCESS

Tutorial and Enrichment Center Presented by: Carole Overton Director Dr. Mack Gipson, Jr., Tutorial and
Enrichment Center Gipson Building Paine College

Reasons for Research

When you perform research, you are essentially trying to solve a mystery—
you want to know how something works or why something happened. In
other words, you want to answer a question that you (and other people)
have about the world. This is one of the most basic reasons for performing
research.
But the research process does not end when you have solved your mystery.
Imagine what would happen if a detective collected enough evidence to
solve a criminal case, but she never shared her solution with the
authorities. Presenting what you have learned from research can be just as
important as performing the research. Research results can be presented in
a variety of ways, but one of the most popular—and effective—presentation
forms is the research paper. A research paper presents an original thesis, or
purpose statement, about a topic and develops that thesis with information
gathered from a variety of sources.
If you are curious about the possibility of life on Mars, for example, you
might choose to research the topic. What will you do, though, when your
research is complete? You will need a way to put your thoughts together in
a logical, coherent manner. You may want to use the facts you have learned
to create a narrative or to support an argument. And you may want to show
the results of your research to your friends, your teachers, or even the
editors of magazines and journals. Writing a research paper is an ideal way
to organize thoughts, craft narratives or make arguments based on
research, and share your newfound knowledge with the world.
http://open.lib.umn.edu/writingforsuccess/chapter/11-1-the-purpose-of-research-writing/
his is a derivative of WRITING FOR SUCCESS by a publisher who has requested that they and
the original author not receive attribution, originally released and is used under CC BY-NC-SA.
This work, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-
NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Focus on a problem or issue, make a logical argument

and assert a position. You do not simply want to
describe a topic, but critically give thoughts and
opinions about it. Clearly state your paper's thesis—
the main idea put forth. While drawing on ideas and
theories from others in the field who have written
about the topic, the purpose should revolve around
giving new perspective.

Purpose of Writing a Research Paper

https://penandthepad.com/purpose-writing-research-paper-6537385.html
Cheryl Thompson Updated July 20, 2017

Paradigm

Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. Sociological Paradigms and

Organizational Analysis, Heinemann, 1979, 1-37

Summary

In this introduction the authors develop a 2x2 matrix scheme to

help classify and understand existing sociological theories
based on four major paradigms.

The matrix is based on four main debates in sociology:

  * is reality given or a product of the mind?
 * must one experience something to understand it?
 * do humans have "free will", or are they determined by
their environment?
 * is understanding best achieved through the scientific
method or through direct experience?

The authors coalesce these debates into two fundamental issues

that form the axes of the 2x2 matrix:

 * social theories emphasizing regulation and stability vs

those emphasizing radical change
 * subjective (individualistic) theories vs objective
(structural) theories

The four paradigms represented by the quadrants of the matrix

are:

Functionalist Paradigm (objective-regulation)

This has been the primary paradigm for organizational study. It

assumes rational human action and believes one can understand
organizational behavior through hypothesis testing.

Interpretive Paradigm (subjective-regulation)

This paradigm "seeks to explain the stability of behavior from

the individual's viewpoint". Researchers in this paradigm try
to observe "on-going processes" to better understand individual
behavior and the "spiritual nature of the world".

Radical Humanist Paradigm (subjective-radical change)

Theorists in this paradigm are mainly concerned with releasing

social constraints that limit human potential. They see the
current dominant ideologies as separating people from their
"true selves". They use this paradigm to justify desire for
revolutionary change. It's largely anti-organization in scope.

Radical Structuralist Paradigm (objective-radical change)

Based on this paradigm, theorists see inherent structural
conflicts within society that generate constant change through
political and economic crises. This has been the fundamental
paradigm of Marx, Engles, and Lenin.

Notes

1. Assumptions about the Nature of Social Science

This exerpt focuses more on the basic sociological questions

that underlie the various theories of organizations.

The first set of assumptions are ontological -- is reality

external from conscious or a product of individual
conciousnesses. Is reality given or a product of the mind?

The second set of assumptions is epistemological -- what forms

of knowledge can be obtained, how to sort truth from falsehood.
Can knowledge be acquired, or must it be experienced?

A third set are assumptions of human nature. Are humans

determined by their environment, or do humans create their
environment? (Determinism vs voluntarism)

Each of the assumptions have important methodological

implications. Two camps are objectivist and subjectivist.
Obejectivists examine relationships and regularities between
the elements. They search for concepts and universal laws to
explain reality. Subjectivists focus on how individuals create,
modify, and interpret the world, and see things as more
relativistic.

There are four main socio-philisophical debates:

Nominalism vs Realism : The Ontological Debate

Nominalism assumes that social reality is relative, and the

social world is mainly names, concepts, and labels that help
the individual structure reality. These labels are artificial
creations.

Realism assumes that the real world has hard, intangible

structures that exist irrespective of our labels. The social
world exists separate from the individuals perception of it.
The social world exists as strongly as the physical world.

Anti-Positivism - Positivism: The Epistemological Debate

Positivists believe that one can seek to explain and predict

what happens in the social world by searching for patterns and
relationships between people. They believe one can develop
hypotheses and test them, and that knowledge is a cumulative
process.

Anti-positivists reject that observing behavior can help one

understand it. One must experience it directly. They reject
that social science can create true objective knowledge of any
kind.

Voluntarism vs Determinism : The Human Nature Debate

Are humans determined by their environment, or do they have

"free will"

Ideographic vs Nomothetic Theory: The Methodological Debate

Ideographic inquiry focuses on "getting inside" a subject and

exploring their detailed background and life history. They
involve themselves with people's normal lives, and look at
diaries, biographies, observation.

Nomothetic relies more on the scientific method, and hypothesis

testing. They use quantitative tests like surveys, personality
tests, and standardized research tools.
 

Major Assumptions About Social Science

There have been two major intellectual traditions. The first is

"sociological positivism", that applies models and methods from
the natural sciences to social affairs. The second is "German
idealism", which sees reality in the "spirit" or "idea",
rejects the scientific methodology to understanding behavior.

2. Assmuptions About the Nature of Society

Order-Conflict Debate

This old debate is around approaches that characterize the

stabilizing effects of social order, versus those approaches
focused more on change. Now most people see both as embedded in
each other.

Traditionally, the prominent sociologists of Durkheim, Weber,

and Pareto were concerned with social order, while Marx was
concerned with social change.

Dahrendorf sees the order-conflict debate centered around two

camps, one emphasizing stability, integration, functional co-
ordination, and consensus, and the other emphasizing change,
conflict, disintegration, and coercion. In reality this
dichotomy is more a continium.

Each of these opposite word-pairs is open to much

interpretation, and each is not completely accurate in
describing the debate and can cause misinterpretation.

The authors put forth another way of descibing this debate as

"regulation" vs "radical change". Regulation theories explore
socities unity and cohesiveness. Radical change theories
emphasize structural conflict, domination, and structural
contradiction. It often focuses on the deprivation of man and
potential changes.

3. Two Dimensions: Four Paradigms

The authors then claim that one can understand the range of
current sociological debate by mapping theories on a two-
dimensional map, with the subjective-objective debate on one
axis and the regulation-radical change on th other. Each
quadrant corresponds to a particular paradigm in sociology.
Most reseachers stay in one paradigm.

Functionalist paradigm (objective - regulation)

This is the dominant paradigm for organizational study. It

seeks to provide rational explanations of human affairs. It's
pragmatic and deeply rooten in sociological positivism.
Relationships are concrete and can be identified studied and
measured via science. This paradigm has been mildly influenced
by idealist and Marxist thought too.

Interpretive Paradigm (subjective-regulation)

It seeks to explain the stability of behavior from the

individual's viewpoint. They are most interested in
understanding the subjectively created world "as it is" in
terms of ongoing processes. It emphasizes the spiritual nature
of the world. Philosophers like Kant formed it's basis, and
Weber, Husserl, and Schutz furthered the ideology. This
paradigm has'nt generated much organizational theory.

Radical Humanist (subjective-radical change)

In this view the consciousness of man is dominated by the
ideological superstructures with which he interacts, and these
drive a cognitive wedge between himself and his true
consciousness, which prevents human fulfilment. These theorists
are mainly concerned with releasing ths social constraints that
bind potential. It's philosophers are Kant and Hegel and young
Marx. It was carried on int the 20's at the Frankfurt School,
and in French existentialism. Most of this paradigm is actually
anti-organization.

Radical Structuralist (objective - radical change)

They believe that radical change is built into the nature of

societal structures. "Contemporary society is characterized by
fundamental conflicts which generate radical change through
political and economic crises. It is based on mature Marx,
followed by Engles, Lenin and Bukharin. It has recieved little
attention in the US outside of conflict theory.

http://faculty.babson.edu/krollag/org_site/org_theory/Scott_articles/burrell_morgan.html

QUADRANTS – A POWERFUL TIME MANAGEMENT

ACTIVITY

I have used Quadrants many times to really help my clients and participants focus on what is most
important in their everyday life. I challenge them to live a life hanging out in Quadrant 2.  It appears
this activity was popularized by Stephen Covey and created by Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Number of Participants: Unlimited
Time:  15-30 minutes
Activity Level:  Low
Props:  Quadrants Worksheet
Objective:
To determine what is important, not important, urgent and not urgent.

Description:
For those who are not familiar with quadrants, here is a picture and a brief overview.

 In Quadrant 1 (top left) we have important, urgent items – items that need to be dealt with
immediately.
 In Quadrant 2 (top right) we have important, but not urgent items – items that are important
but do not require your immediate attention, and need to be planned for.
 In Quadrant 3 (bottom left) we have urgent, but unimportant items – items which should be
minimized or eliminated. These are the time sucks, the “poor planning on your part does
not constitute an emergency on my part” variety of tasks.
 In Quadrant 4 (bottom right) we have unimportant and also not urgent items – items that
don’t have to be done anytime soon, perhaps add little to no value and also should be
minimized or eliminated.

Have the participants fill in the Quadrants one at a time as you give them examples for each square.
Really dig deep to define which areas of their life fall into different Quadrants. This activity goes
perfectly with other time management initiatives that help the participants really break down the
things they do on an everyday basis.

Variations:
 1. Instead of this being a time-management activity, make it a budgeting activity. What are
some items that we purchase that are in Quadrant 1 (replacing water heaters, medical bills,
etc.)? Quadrant 2 (Savings, Vacation Planning, College Fund)? Quadrant 3 (overdue bills,
interest charges)? Quadrant 4 (Video Games, Things from Sky Mall)?

Questions for Discussion:

1. What are some things you can eliminate from your schedule (Quadrant 4) immediately?
2. How do some things from Quadrant 3 keep you from being productive?
3. Can you name the times when you felt most productive? What Quadrant were you in?

Facilitator Notes:

Be prepared with examples for each quadrant and really help each participant brainstorm. This has
several practical applications if the participant will truly focus on staying in Quadrant 2.

Have you used this activity? How would you implement it into your program?

Ryan Eller
Founder, Paradigm Shift
ryan@myparadigmshift.org

http://paradigmshiftleadership.com/quadrants-a-powerful-time-management-activity/

Research paradigm: Critical Realism in Burrell and Morgan quadrants

1. 1. Research paradigm: Critical Realism in Burrell and Morgan quadrants? Laban Bagui 7 th
february 2011
2. 2. Getting into research <ul><li>Looking for meanings </li></ul>Is love more important ?
What is this or what is this all about? Picture extracted from ‘Planet of the Apes’ Charlton
Heston & Linda Harrison (1968)
3. 3. Surprising reality <ul><li>Is this or he or she really doing that? </li></ul>
4. 4. Some research approaches <ul><li>Scientific approaches to introspection (nomothetic vs
ideographic) </li></ul>
5. 5. <ul><li>It is necessity to ground the research in a canvas in order to render it consistent
</li></ul>
6. 6. Research Paradigm <ul><li>“ The identification of the underlying basis that is used to
construct a scientific investigation (Kraus, 2005); </li></ul><ul><li>“ a loose collection of
logically held together assumptions, concepts, and propositions that orientates thinking and
research” (Bogdan & Biklan, 1982). </li></ul><ul><li>“ basic belief system or world view that
guides the investigation” (Guba & Lincoln, 1994: 105). </li></ul>
7. 7. Paradigm components <ul><li>Epistemological debate (anti-positivism vs positivism)
</li></ul><ul><li>Ontological debate (Nominalism vs realism or Constructivism vs
Observation) </li></ul><ul><li>Methodological debate (Nomothetic vs Ideographic)
</li></ul><ul><li>The human nature debate (volontarism vs determinism)
 </li></ul><ul><li>The nature of social science (holistic vs specific) </li></ul><ul><li>The
nature of information science (qualitative vs quantitative) </li></ul><ul><li>Various related
assumptions (Basic accepted belief) </li></ul><ul><li>Other stuff (Generalisability, validity,
value... ) </li></ul>
8. 8. Paradigms in Social research <ul><li>Functionalist Paradigm (objective-regulation)
</li></ul><ul><li>This has been the primary paradigm for organizational study. It assumes
rational human action and believes one can understand organizational behavior through
hypothesis testing. </li></ul><ul><li>Interpretive Paradigm (subjective-regulation)
</li></ul><ul><li>This paradigm &quot;seeks to explain the stability of behavior from the
individual's viewpoint&quot;. Researchers in this paradigm try to observe &quot;on-going
processes&quot; to better understand individual behavior and the &quot;spiritual nature of
the world&quot;. </li></ul><ul><li>Radical Humanist Paradigm (subjective-radical change)
</li></ul><ul><li>Theorists in this paradigm are mainly concerned with releasing social
constraints that limit human potential. They see the current dominant ideologies as
separating people from their &quot;true selves&quot;. They use this paradigm to justify
desire for revolutionary change. It's largely anti-organization in scope.
</li></ul><ul><li>Radical Structuralist Paradigm (objective-radical change)
</li></ul><ul><li>Based on this paradigm, theorists see inherent structural conflicts within
society that generate constant change through political and economic crises. This has been
the fundamental paradigm of Marx, Engles, and Lenin. </li></ul>
9. 9. Four paradigms for the analysis of social theory. (Burrell and Morgan, 1979:22)
SOCIOLOGY OF RADICAL CHANGE SUBJECTIVE Radical humanist Radical structuralist
OBJECTIVE Interpretevist Funtionalist SOCIOLOGY OF REGULATION
10. 10. Critical Realism <ul><li>Meaning making research </li></ul><ul><li>Qualitative and
quantitative as complementary </li></ul><ul><li>Reality is a result of social conditioning and
can not be understood independently of the social actors involved in the knowledge
derivation process </li></ul>
11. 11. Some references <ul><li>Bhaskar, R.1978. A realist theory of science. Hassocks:
Harvester Press. </li></ul><ul><li>Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. 1982. Qualitative research
for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
</li></ul><ul><li>Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. 1979. Sociological Paradigms and Organizational
Analysis. London: Heinemann, 1-37 </li></ul><ul><li>Cronje JC.2006.Paradigms regained:
toward integrating objectivism and constructivism in instructional design and the learning
sciences. ETR&D 54(4) 387-416 </li></ul><ul><li>Guba, E.G and Lincoln, Y.S .1994.
Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Denzin N.K. And Lincoln Y.S (eds).
Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand oaks. CA: Sage. 105-117
</li></ul><ul><li>Egbo, B. 2005. Emergent paradigm: Critical realism and transformative
research in educational administration. McGill journal of education. 40(2). 267-284
</li></ul><ul><li>Krauss, S. T. 2005. Research Paradigms and Meaning Making: A Primer .
The Qualitative Report 10 (4) 758-770 </li></ul>
https://www.slideshare.net/labanbagui/research-paradigm-critical-realism-in-burrell-and-morgan-
quadrants
he research paradigm – methodology,
epistemology and ontology – explained in
simple language
July 15, 2015

59 Comments

195,572 Views

I have put together this post to explain what a research paradigm is, which includes
ontology, epistemology, theoretical framework and methodology, and why it is
important for your research or PhD. It took me a while to understand this properly, and
below is a summary of my understanding of the topic, which I hope will help you. I
suggest you go easy on yourself (I was pulling my hair out on the second day). I would
also love to be corrected if anything below is wrong (though as you are aware, there are
so many disagreements amongst philosophers and epistemologists – there is no one
right answer!). So, let’s get started …

What is a research paradigm?

A research paradigm is “the set of common beliefs and agreements shared
between scientists about how problems should be understood and addressed”
(Kuhn, 1962)

According to Guba (1990), research paradigms can be characterised through their:

 ontology – What is reality?
 epistemology – How do you know something?
 methodology – How do you go about finding it out?
The diagram below explains the above terms and the relationship between them:
If the above still doesn’t make things clear, don’t worry. I would now recommend
you watch this video which explains the above in very simple terms, and explains
the two major paradigms: positivism and constructivism.

Why is it important?
Your ontology and epistemology create a holistic view of how knowledge is viewed
and how we can see ourselves in relation to this knowledge, and the
methodological strategies we use to un/discover it. Awareness of philosophical
assumptions will increase quality of research and can contribute to the creativity of
the researcher. Furthermore, you will be asked about it in your viva and are
expected to narrate it when you write up your research findings.

Which research paradigm does my research belong to?

In really simple terms, the three most common paradigms are explained below
(and are shown in this epistemology diagram too, taken from here):
 Positivists believe that there is a single reality, which can be measured and known,
and therefore they are more likely to use quantitative methods to measure and this
reality.
 Constructivists believe that there is no single reality or truth, and therefore reality
needs to be interpreted, and therefore they are more likely to use qualitative methods
to get those multiple realities.
 Pragmatists believe that reality is constantly renegotiated, debated, interpreted,
and therefore the best method to use is the one that solves the problem
The table below (which I created) gives a more detailed overview of each paradigm
(and contains subjectivism and critical too), and your own research paradigm could
very well sit in between one of the paradigms. You could use a top down or a
bottom up approach (Rebecca explains here) to decide where your research sits. In
a bottom up approach, you decide on your research question, then you decide
which methods, methodology, theoretical perspective you will approach your
research from. In reality, I believe its probably neither strictly a top down or bottom
up approach, you probably go back and forth till you find the right fit. I believe each
research project would have a different research paradigm and hence a different
theoretical perspective.
Table adapted from various sources, including Crotty (1998). Crotty left ontology out of
his framework, and also didn’t include Pragmatism and Critical. But the assumptions
underlying every piece of research are both ontological and epistemological.

Where does most social science research sit?

According to Eddie, and quoting directly, most social science sits into the following:
“1. Experimental (Positivist),  with a more realist ontology (i.e. reality is out there), with
an empiricist epistemology (i.e. and I’ll gather sense data to find it);
2. Postmodernist constructivism,  with a less realist ontology (i.e. reality is just a load
of competing claims), and a constructivist epistemology (i.e. and I’ll analyse those
competing accounts to explore it)
Applied, then to social psychology, it is important to understand the tension, throughout
its history, between:
1. A more traditional experimental (quantitative) approach, which sees social reality as a
set of facts to be known for all time by measuring people in the laboratory;
2. A more critical, discursive (qualitative) approach, which sees social reality as mutually
constructed between people in the real world.”
However, I must add that pragmatism (and hence mixed methods research) is also
being increasingly used in social sciences.

What impact will my chosen paradigm have on my research?

It will have a huge impact. Let me give you an example of an interview based
research that is constructivist:

“So as GP trainers, constructivism means that to understand our trainees and their
learning, beliefs or behaviours we have to be aware of their experience and culture
(the historical and cultural contexts) and recognise that they don’t just potentially
see the world differently to us, but experience it differently too.” Source.

Useful reading and references

Texts I found useful:
Crotty, M., 1998. Foundations of social research: Meaning and Perspective in the
Research Process. p.256.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. and Jackson, P.R., 2012. Management Research.
[online] SAGE Publications. Available at:
<https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Management_Research.html?
id=ahbhMb-R7MQC&pgis=1> [Accessed 14 Jul. 2015].
Scotland, J., 2012. Exploring the philosophical underpinnings of research: Relating
ontology and epistemology to the methodology and methods of the scientific,
interpretive, and critical research paradigms. English Language Teaching, 5(9), pp.9–
16.
http://salmapatel.co.uk/academia/the-research-paradigm-methodology-epistemology-and-ontology-
explained-in-simple-language