In Defense of Positivist Research Paradigms
Francis Schrag
Abstract
Francis Schrag
Abstract
Although positivism means different things to different people, it is not difficult to identify research paradigms that would be clearly identified as positivist by friends and foes of positivism alike. I briefly describe one such paradigm and identify its principal features. I argue that even outspoken critics of positivist research–such as Elliot Eisner, Frederick Erickson, Henry Giroux, and Thomas Popkewitz–are logically committed to propositions that can be tested only by means of positivist research paradigms.
OpenAlex reports 21 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Although positivism means different things to different people, it is not difficult to identify research paradigms that would be clearly identified as positivist by friends and foes of positivism alike. I briefly describe one such paradigm and identify its principal features. I argue that even outspoken critics of positivist research–such as Elliot Eisner, Frederick Erickson, Henry Giroux, and Thomas Popkewitz–are logically committed to propositions that can be tested only by means of positivist research paradigms.
Key concepts: Positivism, Epistemology, Sociology, Principal (computer security), Philosophy, Computer science, Operating system