Criticism of Education Research

Oancea (2005: 167) lists some common criticism of (some) educational research:

“Educational research was deemed non-reliable and inconclusive. Much of this was charged to flaws of empirical research, especially qualitative —

lack of triangulation,

sampling bias,

purposeful distortion,

ideological bias,

etc.;

but also to flaws of non-empirical research, such as,

contentiousness,

superficial literature review,

logical incoherence,

excessive reliance upon secondary sources,

adulation of great thinkers.”

Oancea suggests:

“Among other possible sources of criticism,

the fragmentation of the researchers’ community and of the research process according to the different philosophical and methodological positions adopted

and the failure of inter-paradigmatic communication (sometimes manifested as anger or intolerance) were often referred to, sometimes in relation to conflicting political and social ideologies.” (p.164)

Oancea, A. (2005). Criticisms of educational research: key topics and levels of analysis. British Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 157 - 183.

If we acknowledge that educational research has diverse foci in terms of the nature of what is enquired into (ontology) and the kinds of knowledge it is reasonable to seek in different cases (epistemology) then we can understand how different paradigmatic positions can naturally co-exist without this being a source of antagonism between researchers.

Index of topics