Introduction:

The research in history is often considered and investigated as an isolated venture,

a pursuit for facts through an impartial disposition. Historical writing tends to sum up a
grand narrative, one that illuminates the events of the past without agents or designers of
knowledge; the positivistic language usually structure such historical writing.
Historiography exposes the frames and parameters of historical writing in order to further
one’s understanding of the circumstances of the past. Historiography offers a method of
intervention in the comprehension of and living in socio-cultural political events. It is the
careful study of historical writing and the ways in which historians interpret the past
through various theoretical lenses and methodologies.

Educational research enjoys an important role because it is conducted in order to provide

reliable information regarding educational problems and their solutions. There are many
things that need to be considered when looking at what educational research is for
example some thought needs to be put into looking at current paradigms, what counts as
evidence in educational research, maintaining quality, and the role of peer review in
validating new knowledge in educational research.

There are many different approaches to educational research which are shaped by many
different research paradigms. Koul (2008) states that “the various research paradigms
have different criteria for ontology and epistemology to maintain quality standards. The
ontology and epistemology of a research paradigm influence researchers applying the
quality standards, methodology and methods.

What is Educational Research:

“Research is a combination of both experience and reasoning and must be regarded as

the most successful approach to the discovery of truth” (Borg, 1963, as cited in Cohan,
Manion, & Morrison, 2000).

Educational research can be defined as a ‘purposeful and systematic’ enquiry ‘to solve a
problem, illuminate a situation or add to our knowledge’ (Mutch, 2005, pp. 14) ‘by the
discovery of non-trivial facts and insights’ (Howard & Sharp, 1983, as cited in Bell, 2005,
pp. 2) ‘in relation to the improvement of education policy and practices, with a commitment
to broader dissemination of research findings beyond publication in high status,
international, refereed journals’ (Lingard & Gale, 2010, pp. 31).

In order to define educational research we must first look at what research is. Research
is a combination of both experience and reasoning and must be regarded as the most
successful approach to the discovery of truth, particularly as far as the natural sciences
are concerned (Borg, 1963, as cited in Cohan, Manion, & Morrison, 2000). Therefore
Educational Research can be defined as a `purposeful and systematic enquiry to solve a
problem, illuminate a situation or add to our knowledge’ (Mutch, 2005, pp. 14) `by the
discovery of non-trivial facts and insights’ (Howard & Sharp, 1983, as cited in Bell, 2005,
pp. 2) `in relation to the improvement of education policy and practices, with a
commitment to broader dissemination of research findings beyond publication in high
status, international, refereed journals’ (Lingard & Gale, 2010, pp. 31).

Anderson and Arsenault, (1998) suggest that there are “ten characteristics of educational
research that can be grouped into three main categories; the purpose of research, the
procedures of research and the role of researcher” (p. 7). They go on to explain that the
purpose of research is to solve the problems and develop knowledge, the procedure
involves “collecting or generating data with accurate observation, objective interpretation,
and verification. It also involves carefully designed procedures and rigorous analysis”
(Anderson and Arsenault, 1998 pp. 7), and finally the role of researchers is to be patient
and careful in every step of the researcher’s procedures, and be experts in their area of
study, which requires them to use research data to develop solutions and increase
knowledge.

What is a Paradigm:

The use of this fashionable word came about from the philosopher of science, Thomas
Kuhn. The word comes from the Greek work paradeigma which translates literally as
‘pattern’. It is used in social science to describe an entire way of looking at the world
(Davidson & Tolich, 1999). It can be viewed as a basic set of beliefs held by an individual
that represent a worldview which defines “the nature of the “world”, the individual’s place
in it and the range of possible relationships to that world and its parts” (Denzin & Lincoln,
1998, pp. 200) A paradigm relates to a particular set of philosophical assumptions about
what the world is made of and how it works. One way to consider a paradigm is as a
collection of ontological and epistemological assumptions (Davidson & Tolich, 1999).

Inquiry paradigms define for inquirers what it is they are about, and what falls within and
outside the limits of legitimate inquiry. (http://prk.dreamwidth.org/60977.html)

Examining paradigms define for inquirers what paradigms are about and what fall within
in and outside the limits of that paradigm?

Denzin and Lincon (1998) state that there are three fundamental questions that need to
be addressed in order to complete research. These questions are; the epistemological
question, the ontological question, and the methodological question it is important to note
that however one answers a question it effects how they answer the other two.

The Epistemological Question:

Epistemology is “the study of the nature of knowledge.” Epistemology raises the questions
of how we know what we know, and what is knowledge. It encompasses the debate on if
knowledge can be obtained through experience (Empiricism) or by the use of reasoning
(rationalism).

The epistemological question is asking what the form and nature of reality is and, what
can be known about it? Denzin and Lincoln (1998) uses the example of if a ‘real’ world is
assumed, then what can be known about it are “how things really are” or “how things
really work” where as other questions like matters of aesthetic or moral significance, fall
outside the realm of legitimate scientific inquiry. (pp. 201)

The Ontological Question:

Ontology is defined as
What is the nature of the relationship between the knower or would be knower and what
can be known? Denzin & Lincoln (1998) continue with their example of reality being
assumed because one has already answered the epistolocial question the posture of the
knower must be one of objective detachment or value freedom in order to discover these
thing…..

What is the nature of the relationship between the knower or would be knower and what
can be known? The answer that can be given to this question is constrained by the answer
already given to the ontological question; that is, not just any relationship can now be
postulated. So if, for example, a “real” reality is assumed, then the posture of the knower
must be one of objective detachment or value freedom in order to discover “how things
really are” and “how things really work” (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 201).

The Methodological Question:

Methodology is defined by the free dictionary as “a body of practices, procedures, and

rules used by those who work in a discipline or engage in an inquiry; a set of working
methods”

Therefore the methodological question surrounds how the inquirer goes about finding out
what they believe can be known? Depending on what answers have already been given
to the above questions they will constrain the answer to this one, whether the methods
are qualitative or quantitave. “The methodological question cannot be reduced to a
question of methods; methods must be fitted to a predetermined methodology” (Denzin
& Lincoln, 1998, pp. 201)

How can the inquirer (would be knower) go about finding out whatever he or she believes
can be known? The answer that can be given to this question in constrained by answers
already given to the first two questions; that is, not just any methodology is appropriate.
For example, a “real” reality pursued by an “objective” inquirer mandates control of
possible confounding factors, whether the methods are qualitative (e.g. observational) or
quantitative (e.g. analysis of covariance). The methodological question cannot be
reduced to a question of methods; methods must be fitted to a predetermined
methodology (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 201).

What is Positivism:

“Knowledge is based not on unchallengeable, rock-solid foundations, but rather upon

human conjectures” (Phillips & Burbules, 2000).

Positivism is an epistemological perception which states that only knowledge which is

based on sensory experience and positive verification is authentic knowledge. More
simply worded, positivism is the view that all true knowledge is scientific, and that all
things are ultimately measureable.

Positivism emerged from the success of the scientific approach in natural sciences such
as physics, chemistry, and biology. The impetus for this came from the overwhelming
success of science in understanding and solving problems in the natural world.

The ontology of positivism is realism; an apprehend able reality that is assumed to exist,
driven by immutable natural laws and mechanisms. Knowledge of the “ways things are”
is conventionally summarised in the form of time- and context-free generalizations, some
of which take the form of cause-effect laws. Research can, in principle, converge on the
“true” state of affairs. The basic posture of the paradigm is argued to be both reductionist
and deterministic (Hesse, 1980, cited in Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 204).

The epistemology of positivism is dualist and objectivist; meaning the investigator and the
investigated “object” are assumed to be independent entities, and the investigator to be
capable of studying the object without influencing it or being influenced by it. When
influence in either direction (threats to validity) is recognised, or even suspected, various
strategies are followed to reduce or eliminate it. Inquiry takes place as through a one-way
mirror. Values biases are prevented from influencing outcomes, so long as the prescribed
procedures are rigorously followed. Replicable findings are, in fact, “true” (Denzin &
Lincoln, 1998, pp. 204).
The methodology of positivism is experimental and manipulative. Questions and/or
hypotheses are stated in propositional form and subjected to empirical tests to verify
them; possible confounding conditions must be carefully controlled (manipulated) to
prevent outcomes from being improperly influenced (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 204).

Originally conceptualised by Auguste Comte in the early 19th Century (Pickering, 1993),
positivism has been greatly criticised, including by positivist themselves. A number of the
concerns raised have influenced the epistemological position taken within this research;
particularly that knowledge is a social variable, knowing one is the subject of a study,
changes in one’s behaviour, and the notion of subjectivity and value orientation.

What is Social Construction of Reality/ Post-Positivism:

The Social Construction Reality/ Post-positivism paradigm include the following

paradigms: interpretive, critical, feminist, and postmodern paradigm. I think interpretive
paradigm is the paradigm that most education research is based on at the University of
Waikato.

The social construction of reality assumes that knowledge is subjective and unique
therefore researchers undertake “systematic and painstaking analysis of social episodes”
(Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2007, pp. 19). This is a less reductionist approach to
research recognizing the importance of context and aiming to represent how participants
view their world. Rather than seeking generalisations this paradigm accepts that “reality
is multilayered and complex” (Cohen et al, 2007, pp. 21) therefore data collected are open
to multiple interpretations. This approach is more speculative based on the assumption
that theory is emergent therefore the researcher should not be seeking evidence purely
to support a predetermined hypothesis.

Post-positivism is a meta-theoretical stance that analyses and adjusts positivism in light

of the criticisms which positivism, as a scientific paradigm, has received. Post-positivism
offers primary amendments to the positivist paradigm. Firstly, that the absolute separation
of the knower and the known is not assumed; and secondly, that a single, shared reality
which excludes all others is not assumed to be a true basis for reasoning. It is critical to
note that post-positivism is not a rejection of the scientific paradigm, but seeks to amend
the criticisms associated with positivism (Phillips & Burbules, 2000; Zammito, 2004).

Post-positivism states that knowledge is based not on unchallengeable, rock-solid

foundations, but rather on human conjectures (Phillips & Burbules, 2000; Zammito, 2004).
Epistemologically speaking post-positivism works on the position that facts and law
deduced through research are probably true (Guba & Lincoln, 2005) in light of evidence
provided (Phillips & Burbules, 2000; Zammito, 2004). Post-positivism of this type is
common place in social science for conceptual and practical reasons (Phillips & Burbules,
2000; Zammito, 2004).

What are the differences between the two Meta-Paradigms:

Based on the literature, the most fundamental differences between both paradigms are
how they search for the truth and define validity and reliability. The positivist paradigm
seeks and finds them in a (perceived) value free and objective evidence based world and
the constructivists in a subjective, contextual and interpretive world (Silverman 2005, p.
6; and Cohen et al. 2007, p. 26).

Research as creating new knowledge:

Positivism and Post-positivism create knowledge by a process of accretion, with each fact
(or probable fact) serving as a kind of building block that, when placed into its proper
niche, adds to the growing “edifice of knowledge”. When the facts take the form of
generalisation or cause-effect linkages, they may be used most efficiently for prediction
and control. Generalisations may then be made, with predicable confidence, to a
population of settings (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 212).

What counts as evidence in Educational Research:

What counts as evidence in educational research depends on what is being asked. If one
is looking at effectiveness of direct impact then there would be a different type of key
evidence compared to if the question was in relation to the nature of a problem, or how
some intervention worked or how a naturally occurring process takes place. Basically the
kinds of evidence that will count will depend on the nature of the proposition. Anyone that
is interested in the ‘evidence’ needs to remember that the evidence is always connected
to what was being asked or the proposition. One cannot take for granted that it is true one
needs to still ask: how is the connection made possible? And what values, assumptions
and conventions are behind that kind of connection? (Andrews, 2007).

Maintaining quality in Educational Research:

The quality standards related to the post/positivist paradigm are validity and reliability.
This is because the focus of this is to discover the ‘truth’ using empirical investigation.
Anderson and Arsenault (1998) write that “validity refers to the extent to which what we
measure reflects what we expected to measure [which] has two forms: internal and
external (pp. 257). Related to the research, the term internal validity refers to how the
findings meet the expected results. While, external validity refers to being able to
generalise the findings to other situations and contexts. Therefore, an experiment is valid
if the results are appropriate to the manipulated independent variable and if they are able
to be generalised to individuals or contexts other than the experiment’s setting (Gay &
Airasian 2000, pp. 371).

Because the focus of this paradigm is to find out the ‘truth’, reliability is an important
indicator for the consistency of the research findings. Anderson and Arsenault (1998)
state that “reliability refers to the extent that an instrument will yield the same results each
time it is administered” (pp. 256) an example of this is, if you were to administer a survey
the larger the source of the data you collect the more it will be reliable as the results
become more generalised the more it will give the same results the next time you did it.

Furthermore, trustworthiness is a foundational criteria to maintaining quality.

Trustworthiness can be broken down into four quality standards these being, credibility
using multiple methods and perspectives and member checking, transferablility by
providing rich data and thick descriptions, dependability by having a detailed audit trail,
and comformability can be achieved by giving readers clear track of data and
interpretations. (Anderson and Arsenault 1998)

Methods in historical research

Methods within history are informed by a theory or theories that construct a set of
parameters helpful in asking questions about history, particularly about the relationship
between people, events, and the times that create history. In other words the process of
doing historiography does not happen in a theoretical vacuum; it is not just methods, but
praxis (informed action). Hans-UlrichWehler, a social historian from the University of
Bielefeld, coins the term historical social science and believes such a historian
“approaches society with clearly formulated questions related to social change,” and aims
to progressively transform social structures (Iggers, 2005, 70).

Wehler stresses the goal and purpose of doing historical social science and
situates this method in the Frankfurt School’s Critical Theory where political responsibility,
human agency, and intellectual efforts are privileged, as well as prioritized. Often an
explicit and articulated position on historical events is read as biased, as partial accuracy,
yet this assumption presupposes there is a neutral way of reading, understanding, or
knowing history. Such practices only further curtail an individual’s ability to critically
interpret or narrate a situated history. Theory and/ or ideology can be regarded as a
process through which particular knowledge is produced, public consciousness affected,
and reading practices renegotiated. It can facilitate or close off a fluid representation of
historical events or figures.

Many perceive theory and history to be mutually exclusive entities, at least those
situated in more traditional discourses of history. Others discuss the necessity to highlight
or integrate theory into history particularly as an attempt to sustain history in the university,
as an academic discipline. However history is understood, past or present, there are
compelling articulations for how theory works through and informs the discourse,
appreciation, and writing of history. Reinhart Koselleck (2002) cites seven essential
elements (conceptual history, structural history, chronology, historical conflicts, temporal
series, teleology, and monocausality) in the formulation of theory in history. These
elements are also fundamental in doing and studying historiography. Each concept is
discussed for its importance to the theorizing of historiography.

Koselleck (2002) illustrates conceptual history as “…rather, a question of

theoretically formulating in advance the temporal specifics of our political and social
concepts so as to order the source materials” (5). The main focus of conceptual history
is to organize the overarching themes in a historical period in order to stress recurring
patterns in social movements or developments. Conceptual history is structured by topics
or issues casting a wider net over space/ time boundaries. Once these patterns are
articulated new ways of investigating the past can be uncovered and new lenses of
interpretation can be applied. Structural history is situated within a theory of periodization,
which asks questions about the historical determination of time (6).

Structural history as a lens underscores the technical expressions of space and

time. How we use language to denote time, era, epoch, and so on, as well as the way in
which we employ language to determine time in action (friction, ruptures, resistance,
combat, etc.) facilitates a critical awareness of temporality, of time lived and revisited.
Time is carefully studied to comprehend the conditions of the events of history. We often
run the risk of supplanting present values and beliefs on past events without careful
recognition of the trappings in simulated time travel. Koselleck cautions his students to
be mindful of this phenomenon, thus emphasizes the usefulness in applying structural
history. Chronology, his third element in the theorizing of history, questions the recurrent
narration of history as neatly organized sequences. Koselleck argues:

We must, rather, learn to discover the simultaneity of the nonsimultaneous

in our history…And since the large scale problems of developing countries
are coming back to haunt us today, it becomes imperative to gain theoretical
clarity about the nonsimultaneity of the simultaneous and to pursue related
questions. (8)

Interrogating historical chronology invites an intertextual understanding in the

construction of history, emphasizing various interpretations and perspectives of any
historical event or movement. History shifts dramatically from a positivist epistemology to
a constructivist one. Historical conflicts is the next element in Koselleck’s list.
Controversies, disputes, and tensions in history are at the core of historical writing,
unresolved conflicts in particularly, those that tend to mutate and change form with the
times, sustain students in their continuous pursuit of history. “A historical theory of
conflicts can be…developed only by bringing out the temporal qualities inherent in the
conflict…In historiography, conflicts are usually dealt with by introducing opponents as
stable subjects, …fixed entities whose fictive character can be recognized…” (Koselleck,
2002, 9). In other words, events of the past are told through a story of numerous
characters where relational interactions are as central to the story as the characters
themselves. This kind of storytelling, mainly focusing on conflicts between places, people
or ideas renders a partial story that can rely heavily on the reconstructed history based
on the available documents.

Understanding the limitations of historical conflicts deters the student and

researcher of history from replicating fixed or fictive entities. Koselleck then turns to his
concept of temporal series to demonstrate the study of a subject through time as a
continuous entity. The boundaries of time and space provide a heightened magnifying
lens on the selected topic of history bracketing certain information and allowing for closer
measuring of the quality of experience. He states, “Moreover, excluding certain questions
under certain theoretical premises makes it possible to find answers that would otherwise
not have come up; a clear proof of the need for theory in our discipline” (10). Teleology,
the study of final causes, results, or predetermined outcomes, is the next element in the
construction of a theory of history. According to Koselleck the field of history presupposes
a teleology, yet whether the historian supports or disputes the finality of history, the way
in which history is told/ written is the operative strategy in teaching through history. He
contends the following:

If every historian remains rooted in his situation, he will be able to make only
observations that are framed by his perspective. These, however, evoke
final causes. A historian can hardly escape them, and if he disregards them
he relinquishes the reflection that teaches him about what he is doing. The
 difficulty does not so much lie in the final causality deployed but in naively
accepting it. It is possible to come up with as many causes as one wishes
for any event that ever took place in the course of history. There is no single
event that could not be explained causally…. Stated more concisely:
everything can be justified, but not everything can be justified by anything.
(11-12)

Both issues of finality and the author’s perspective or position are pivotal factors in
the interpretation and analysis of history. Unless the student of history is aware of these
conditions she/he will be unable to critically grasp history as a holistic inquiry instrumental
to both present and future identity formation and social change. Koselleck’s final concept
of monocausality, where history is explained through one major causal agent, requires
reflexivity and critique. Once again Koselleck cautions his reader in being overly singular
in their historical approach. He is not negating that one cause may be predominantly
useful in comprehending history; instead that one should not use one cause as default
nor exercise ideological tunnel vision. He advocates the investigation of multiple causes
and conditions. The seven elements in the theory of history provide cautions and
directions on what are necessary contentions in the study of history. The theoretical
construction here allows for the student of history to delineate the larger constructs which
inform the ways she/he makes sense of past, present, and future.

Another useful theoretical structure through which to examine history is ontology.

Ontology is a branch of metaphysics that focuses on how things are the way they are,
subjective existence, and the relationships that exist between the self and society. By
prioritizing being and existence and using it to conduct historical studies, events and
people of the past take on a larger human quality. The quality and nuances of experience
are centralized not objectified. Ontology affords another theoretical impetus for the
purpose of doing historiography.

Conclusion:
Educational research with its characteristics is influenced by four major paradigms. Each
paradigm has its own epistemology, ontology, and quality standards which influence the
researchers to find the truth and see the reality. The important point is that knowing the
nature of each paradigm which can help the researchers to conduct their research
process. Researchers can conduct the research within and across paradigms which is
called multi-paradigmatic research paradigms (Taylor, 2008).

The nature of educational research is analogous with the nature of research itself, which
is systematic, reliable and valid to find the “truth”, investigates knowledge, and solves
problems. Moreover, educational research process involves steps to collect the
information in order to investigate problems and knowledge. However, the educational
research is more complex because it can use various approaches and strategies to solve
problems in educational setting. It also can involve many disciplines such as
anthropology, sociology, behaviour, and history. In addition, educational research is
important because of contributing knowledge development, practical improvement, and
policy information. Therefore, educators can use those research findings to improve their
competences and teaching and learning process (Yulirahmawati, 2008).

http://www.translationdirectory.com/glossaries/glossary007_e.htm

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/methodological

http://atheism.about.com/od/philosophybranches/p/Epistemology.htm

Educational research has changed dramatically in both its stated objectives and
techniques since the late nineteenth century. From its early beginnings in the ivory towers
of many research universities to the present day, educational research has not only
undergone a variety of transformations but it has been a topic of significant scholarly,
societal and political debate over the years. This research proposal will provide a
historical overview of the key transformations educational research has gone through
since the late nineteenth century until present day by focusing on important individuals
who lead these efforts. It is not an attempt to validate or discredit certain educational
scholars or the research approaches they embraced. It will primarily focus on the
development of educational research in the United States with particular attention to the
University of Chicago.

THE BIRTH OF EDUCATION AS A FIELD OF STUDY AND RESEARCH

The study of and research on education traces its roots back to the late 1830’s and early
1840’s with the revival of the common school and it is the first time that both school
supervision and planning were influenced by systematic data collection.[1] These data
collection efforts, according to Robert Travers, involved “an examination of the ideas on
which education was based, an intellectual crystallization of the function of education in
a democracy, and the development of a literature on education that attempted to make
available to teachers and educators important new ideas related to education that had
emerged in various countries.”[2] Horace Mann and Henry Barnard were early pioneers
in educational data collection and in the production and dissemination of educational
literature during the mid- to late-nineteenth century. Additionally, they held prominent
educational leadership positions by being the first secretaries of educational boards of
Massachusetts (Horace Mann) and of Connecticut (Henry Barnard).[3] In many ways, the
trends in the early history of educational research were components of the trends in
American culture of the time.[4]

The founding of Johns Hopkins University as the first research university in 1876 set the
stage for new elite research universities to be founded such as Stanford University and
the University of Chicago.[5] Additionally, the Morrill Act of 1862[6] allowed for the
establishment of ‘land-grant’ colleges and universities, many of which would rival the
more established elite institutions on the east coast in research and knowledge
production, across the United States. As Ellen Condliffe Lagemann points out, research
universities quickly became the leaders in creating and disseminating new knowledge,
the professionalization of many professions and they became the “spawning grounds” for
research on education at the end of the nineteenth century.[7] During this time period,
there was a belief that the social world could be “acted on and changed through scientific
practices …and that teaching and the social welfare professions embodied scientific
analysis and planning.”[8] The restructuring of higher education in the United States from
a focus on teaching to a new focus that included both teaching and research activities
lead to new schools of thought and approaches to science. Professors at universities
were now expected to teach and to plan and conduct original research.[9] Numerous
pioneers of American education began their work and research in the major research
institutions of the day. Perhaps one of the most well known of these scholars was John
Dewey, Chair of the Department of Philosophy at the University of Chicago from 1896 to
1904, who introduced a new approach to the study of education and became a leader in
pedagogy. Dewey’s experimental Laboratory School was based more on psychology than
on behaviorism which had long influenced educational research activities.[10] John
Dewey’s progressive education philosophy opposed testing and curriculum tracking and
relied more on argument than on scientific research and its evidence.[11] He worked to
combine philosophy, psychology and education. Surprisingly, John Dewey never
proposed future areas of inquiry or suggested future research directions in his writings
and he never published any evidence on the effects his Laboratory School experiment
had on children.[12] Dewey’s influence on educational practice outside of his Laboratory
School was quite limited and overestimated.[13] Ellen Condliffe Lagemann summed up
John Dewey’s legacy on educational research as follows: “to suggest that Dewey had
served as something of a cultural icon, alternatively praised and damned by thinkers on
both the right and left, might capture his place in the history of education more accurately
than to say he was important as a reformer. Certainly, his ideas about a science of
education did not create a template for educational study.”[14] In 1904, John Dewey left
the University of Chicago for Teachers College at Columbia University where he remained
as a professor of Philosophy until his death in 1952.

Within five years of John Dewey’s departure, Charles Judd arrived in 1909 to serve as
Chair of the School of Education at the University of Chicago. Charles Judd differed
substantially from John Dewey in his approach to educational research. Charles Judd, a
psychologist, sought to bring a rigorous and scientific approach to the study of education.
Judd was a proponent of the scientific method and worked to integrate it into educational
research. This was evidenced by the University of Chicago’s School of Education
reorganization into the Department of Education within the Division of the Social Sciences
shortly after Judd’s arrival on campus. Judd’s preference for quantitative data collection
and analysis and his emphasis on the scientific method, with a particular focus on
psychology, was one of the leading schools of thought on educational research during
the early decades of the twentieth century.

In 1904, the same year that John Dewey left the University of Chicago for Teachers
College at Columbia University, the psychologist Edward Thorndike, also of Teachers
College, published An Introduction to the Theory of Mental and Social Measurements
which argued for a strong positivistic theoretical approach to educational research.
Thorndike held a similar epistemological approach to the study of education to that of
Charles Judd at Chicago. Thorndike favored the separation of philosophy and
psychology. He did not care for the collection of data for census purposes but rather the
production of statistics and precise measurements that could be analyzed. Thorndike
became a very influential educational scholar and his approach to educational research
was widely accepted and adopted across academia both in the United States and
abroad.[15] What Ellen Condliffe Lagemann describes as “Edward Thorndike’s triumph
and John Dewey’s defeat” was critical to the field and to attempts to define an educational
science.[16]

EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND THE INTER-WAR YEARS

The inter-war years were a time of transformation in educational research. By 1915, the
study of education had been established at the university level with 300 of the 600
institutions of higher education in the United States offering courses on education. This
time period also experienced an increase at the doctoral level of study which saw
enrollments higher than any other discipline other than chemistry.[17] While faculty at
institutions such as Harvard, Teachers College and the University of Chicago, which had
dominated the educational research landscape decades earlier, continued to make
significant contributions to the study of education, there were scholars at many other
institutions making additional valuable contributions to educational research scholarship.
At the conclusion of World War I the focus on educational reform in the United States
began to change to a more social control and efficiency and there was an opportunity for
many educationists to provide guidance to public schools in the United
States.[18] Disagreement among educational research scholars persisted during this
time period and there was little consensus on the aims of education. With the population
of the United States growing rapidly and the demographic make-up of its people changing
due to the arrival of immigrants from across the globe coupled with the migration of African
Americans from rural areas and the Southern states to the urban cities in the Northeast
and Midwest the student bodies at public schools were diversifying at a rapid pace. The
arrival of new immigrants to the United States coincided with the “testing movement” that
emerged during World War I when the United States Army was testing its recruits. The
most prominent psychologists of the time, including Edward Thorndike, were either
involved with or supported the Army’s testing. The testing movement attracted both
psychologists and sociologists alike and it was the sociologists, primarily in the
Department of Sociology at the University of Chicago, who challenged and actively
researched the racial differences in intelligence quotients. Otto Klineberg from Columbia
University also played a leading role in studying racial and cultural differences in
intelligence quotients and their measures.

EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH – POST WORLD WAR II AND THE FUTURE

Educational research continued to flourish in the years and decades after World War II
ended. During this time period, the growth in schools of education and in the number of
courses on education at institutions of higher education continued to rise. Additionally,
more academic journals with a focus on educational issues emerge as a means to
disseminate new knowledge. These exciting changes in educational scholarship were not
confined to the ivory towers in the United States. Even as Europe was rebuilding, the
study of education across the continent was on the rise and in the United Kingdom, for
example, the rise of professional graduate degrees in education was
significant.[19] Scholarly debates on the aims of education as well as epistemological
discourse persisted.
In the decades after World War II, and in particular at the start of the 1960’s, a post-
positivist movement in educational research starts taking shape.[20] While positivistic
approaches to educational research continued to be put forth during the post-war years
and continued to be favored by many social scientists, we start to see the introduction of,
and in some case the reemergence of, other epistemological
approaches.[21] Constructivism, functionalism and postmodernism theoretical
frameworks, among others, have offered strong criticisms of positivism.[22] Vigorous
debates on the virtues of the various theoretical perspectives about knowledge, science
and methodologies have played a very important role in educational research. Frequently,
these critical discussions and analyses have found both a platform and a captive
audience in the field of comparative education. These philosophical debates continue
today both in and outside of academia.

The United States federal government also began to take a much more active role in
educational research in the post-war years. Specifically, in 1954, the United States
Congress passed the Cooperative Research Act. The Cooperative Research Act was
passed as a means for the federal government to take a more active role in advancing
and funding research on education in academia.[23] Additional legislation and federal
initiatives during the 1950’s and 1960’s that supported and/or funded educational
research and provided a means for the dissemination of new educational knowledge
included the National Defense Education Act of 1958 and the establishment of the
Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) in 1966. These are but a few of the
many examples of the new role the federal government was playing in educational
research during this time period. To be sure, the federal government has continued to
play a significant role in educational research since this time period. Since the 1970’s,
according to Robert Travers, “virtually every bill authorizing particular educational
programs has included a requirement that the particular program be evaluated to
determine whether the program was worth the money spent upon it.”[24] For a long period
of time, public focus on education and schools focused on resource allocation, student
access, and the content of the curriculum and paid relatively little attention to
results.[25] This new “evidenced-based movement”[26] is one that remains with us today.
Patti Lather describes the evidenced-based movement as “governmental incursion into
legislating scientific method in the real of educational research” and that the federal
government’s focus on evidence-based knowledge is much more about policy for science
than it is about science for policy.[27] The federal government has a vested interest in
and support for “applied research” over “basic or pure research”. This, of course, is
challenging for social scientists and educational researchers who are positivist in their
approach to science and knowledge.[28]

A distinctive form of research emerged from the new assessment or evaluation movement
in recent decades. Educational assessment, in many ways, is a form of “action
research”.[29] Action research does not aim to produce new knowledge. Instead, action
research aims to improve practice and in the context of education it aims to improve the
educational practice of teachers.[30] Action research, as Richard Pring points out, “might
be supported and funded with a view to knowing the most effective ways of attaining
particular goals – goals or targets set by government or others external to the transaction
which takes place between teacher and learner.”[31] Action research proponents,
Yvonna Lincoln and Egon Guba, highlight that “the call for action…differentiates between
positivist and postmodern criticalist theorists.”[32]
A new and interesting approach to educational research can be found today at the
University of Chicago. The Department of Education at the University of Chicago was
closed in 1997 to much surprise around the world. Despite the closing of the Department
of Education, a sprinkling of educational research activities by faculty and available
education course offerings can be found in a variety of academic departments and
professional schools. In addition, the University of Chicago has also operated the North
Kenwood/Oakland Charter School under the Center for Urban School Improvement since
1998. Campus interest in urban schools and educational research led to the creation of
a new Committee on Education in 2005, with a home in the Division of the Social
Sciences, chaired by Stephen Radenbusch who joined the faculty in the Department of
Sociology and whom the University lured from the School of Education at the University
of Michigan. The University of Chicago Chronicle highlighted the arrival of Stephen
Radenbusch and noted that the Committee on Education “will bring together distinguished
faculty from several departments and schools considered to be among the best in the
world into common research projects, seminars and training programs. The committee
will engage faculty and graduate students from such areas as public policy, sociology,
social service administration, economics, business, mathematics and the sciences to
collaborate on the most critical issues affecting urban schools.”[33] The interdisciplinary
focus of Chicago’s Committee on Education and its Urban Education Initiative plans to
create a “Chicago Model” for urban schools that will “draw on and test the best ideas
about teaching, learning, school organization, school governance, teacher preparation,
and social service provision.”[34] While interdisciplinary research and collaboration is no
stranger to the University of Chicago, it is a new and innovative approach to the study of
education. The Committee on Education at the University of Chicago is highly
quantitatively driven and data focused.[35] If this interdisciplinary approach to educational
research is successful and is modeled by other institutions of higher education, both in
the United States and abroad, it will be interesting to see if a positivistic approach similar
to that found at Chicago is followed or if a more relativistic approach is pursued. Either
way, interdisciplinary collaboration may very well be the next chapter in the history of
educational research.

CONCLUSION

since its birth, educational research has been a subject of debate. Educational research
has grown significantly over time and the variety of theoretical approaches that have been
implemented in the research has diversified greatly over time. This essay identified many,
but certainly not all, of the key transformations in educational research from the late
nineteenth century to present day. Also, this essay is not an attempt to recommend one
theoretical approach over another in the study and research of education. Rather, it is an
attempt to provide a brief history of the types of educational research efforts and to
highlight the epistemological debates that have occurred during this time period.

REFERENCES
Bowen, J. 1981. A History of Western Education; Volume III: The Modern West. London:
Methuen.

Cohen, D.K, and C.A. Barnes. 1999. “Research and the Purposes of Education,” in Issues
in Educational Research: Problems and Possibilities, ed. E.C. Lagemann and L.S.
Shulman, 17-41. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Committee on Education. 2008. The Role of the Committee on Education. Chicago:

The Committee on Education, University of Chicago.
http://coe.uchicago.edu/about/index.shtml.

Fuchs, E. 2004. Educational Sciences, Morality and Politics: International Educational

Congresses in the early twentieth Century. Pedagogica Historica 40, no. 5: 757 784.

Greenwood, D.J., and M. Levin. 2003. “Reconstructing the Relationships between

Universities and Society through Action Research” in The Landscape of Qualitative
Research: Theories and Issues, 2nd ed., ed. Norman K. Denzin and
Yvonna S. Lincoln, 131-166. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Hamilton, D. 2002. ‘Noisy Fallible and Biased Though it be” (On the Vagaries of
Educational Research). British Journal of Educational Studies 50, no. 1: 144 164.

Harms, W. 2005. “Radenbusch to Chair New Committee on Education,” The University

of Chicago Chronicle. May 26. http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/050526/raudenbush.shtml.

Hofstetter, R. and B. Schneuwly. 2004. Introduction Educational Sciences in Dynamic

and Hybrid Institutionalization. Pedagogica Historia 40, no. 5: 569-589.

Kliebard, H.M. 1986. The Struggle for the American Curriculum, 1893-1958. Boston:
Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Lagemann, E.C. 2000. An Elusive Science: The Troubling History of Education Research.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Lather, P. 2004. Scientific Research in Education: A Critical Perspective. British

Educational Research Journal 30, no. 6: 759-772.

Lincoln, Y.S., and E.G. Guba. 2003. “Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions, and
Emerging Confluences” in The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues,
2nd ed., ed. Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, 253-291. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications.

Popkewitz, T.S. 1998. The Culture of Redemption and the Administration of Freedom as
Research. Review of Educational Research 68, no. 1: 1-34.

Pring, R. 2000. Philosophy of Educational Research, 2nd ed. New York: Continuum.

Suskie, L. 2004. Assessing Student Learning: A Common Sense Guide. Bolton, MA:
Anker Publishing Company, Inc.

Travers, R.M.W. 1983. How Research Has Changed American Schools: A History from
1840 to the Present. Kalamazoo, MI: Mythos Press.

NOTES

[1] Travers, R.M.W. How Research Has Changed American Schools: A History from 1840
to the Present. Kalamazoo, MI: Mythos Press, 1983), 7.
[2] Ibid, 7-8.
[3] Bowen, J. A History of Western Education; Volume III: The Modern West. (London:
Methuen, 1981), 360.
[4] Ibib, 21.
[5] Both Stanford and The University of Chicago were founded in 1891.
[6] The Morrill Act of 1862 is sometimes referred to as the Morrill Land Grant College Act
.
[7] Lagemann, E.C. An Elusive Science: The Troubling History of Education Research.
(Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2000), 9; Hofstetter, R. and B. Schneuwly.
Introduction Educational Sciences in Dynamic and Hybrid Institutionalization.
(Pedagogica Historia 40, no. 5, 2004), 571.
[8] Popkewitz, T.S. The Culture of Redemption and the Administration of Freedom as
Research. (Review of Educational Research 68, no. 1, 1998), 4-5.
[9] Lagemann, 19.
[10] Ibid, 21.
[11] Cohen, D.K, and C.A. Barnes. “Research and the Purposes of Education,” in Issues
in Educational Research: Problems and Possibilities, ed. E.C. Lageman and L.S.
Shulman. (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1999), 19.
[12] Ibid, 20.
[13] Kliebard, H.M. The Struggle for the American Curriculum, 1893-1958. Boston:
Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986), 31.
[14] Lagemann, 42.
[15] Fuchs, E. Educational Sciences, Morality and Politics: International Educational
Congresses in the early twentieth Century. Pedagogica Historica 40, no. 5, 2004, 773;
Lagemann, 42.
[16] Lagemann, 22.
[17] Ibid, 20 and 103.
[18] Ibid, 20; Travers, 351.
[19] Hamilton, D. ‘Noisy Fallible and Biased Though it be” (On the Vagaries of Educational
Research). British Journal of Educational Studies 50, no. 1, 2002, 145.
[20] Ibid, 160.
[21] Ibid, 159-160.
Pring, R. Philosophy of Educational Research, 2nd ed. (New York: Continuum, 2000), 90;
Greenwood, D.J., and M. Levin. “Reconstructing the Relationships Between Universities
and Society Through Action Research” in The Landscape of Qualitative Research:
Theories and Issues, 2nd ed., ed. Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, (Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2003) 143-144.
[23] Lagemann, 184-186; Travers, 532-534.
[24] Travers, 539.
[25] Cohen, D.K, and C.A. Barnes. “Research and the Purposes of Education,” in Issues
in Educational Research: Problems and Possibilities, ed. E.C. Lagemann and L.S.
Shulman, (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1999), 29
[26] The “evidence-based movement” is also sometimes referred to as the “accountability
movement” or the “evaluation movement”.
[27] Lather, P. "Scientific Research in Education: A Critical Perspective". British
Educational Research Journal 30, no. 6, 2004), 759.
[28] Greenwood and Levin, 145.
[29] Suskie, L. Assessing Student Learning: A Common Sense Guide. (Bolton, MA: Anker
Publishing Company, Inc., 2004), 8.
[30] Pring, 133-136.
[31] Ibid.
[32] Lincoln, Y.S., and E.G. Guba. “Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions, and
Emerging Confluences” in The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues,
2nd ed., ed. Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications, 2003), 268.
[33] Harms, W. 2005. “Radenbusch to Chair New Committee on Education,” The
University of Chicago Chronicle. May
26. http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/050526/raudenbush.shtml.
[34] Committee on Education. 2008. The Role of the Committee on Education. Chicago:
The Committee on Education, University of Chicago.
http://coe.uchicago.edu/about/index.shtml.
[35] Stephen Radenbusch is known as quantitative methodologist and he is an expert on
hierarchical linear models.

Posted by David Comp at 10:43 PM

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

Labels: Education, History, Research

7 comments:

1.

hamza muzaffarSeptember 10, 2017 at 1:08 AM

hello mr david how are you? hope you will be fine sir. i need your help sir, can tell
me how to give apa style reference of this webpage, for my thesis sir. please guide
me sir. try to respond as soon as possible. my email id is
hamzamuzaffar1505@gmail.com

Reply

2.

David CompSeptember 10, 2017 at 7:59 AM

Hello Hamza, thanks for your question. I recommend a citation of this blog post in
APA style as:

Comp, D. (2009, July 13). A brief history of research on education [Blog post].
Retrieved from https://ihec-djc.blogspot.com/2009/07/brief-history-of-research-on-
education.html
http://atheism.about.com/od/philosophybranches/p/Epistemology.htm

What is Research?

Research means to carefully analyze the problems or to do the detailed

study of the specific problems, by making use of special scientific
methods.

Research can be done on any topic, be it medical, non- medical, IT, or

anything else. In order to do research, first of all, you need to have a
topic or the problem on which you can do research. The topic must
have relevant questions to answer.

For research, certain steps have to be followed like first observation,

then background research then preparing of hypothesis, eventually
conducting a simple experiment.

The Importance of Research:

Study implications:

The main purpose of the research is to get deep into the topic so that
something helpful can be churned out which can be helpful for
everybody and used in that particular niche sector.
The quality which you maintain while research should always be high
so that the information that you get can be used in certain policy and
any future project implications.

Goals of Research:

Working on a research project will obviously be a challenging and

rewarding experience, provided you put the best of your expertise and
skill in it.

It is an opportunity which helps you to pursue an in-depth or deep

original study about any topic which interests you.

The main aim of the goals is to provide the best of the solution to some
of the world problems and also to enhance our knowledge.

The “Iterative” Process of Research:

Iteration is one of the keys for successful research. Researches usually

do not end, the study goes on deep and deep.

There may be instances when you will take the time to find the
expected results but ultimately you will be getting the outcome.

One thing that you will always observe during research, are the
questions which arises one after the other. These questions usually
lead to new ideas, revisions, and improvements.
All these, in turn, will be very helpful in the research process making
data more effective and useful.

How does research impact our daily life:

“Research is to see what everybody else has seen, and to think what
nobody else has thought.” – Albert Szent-Gyorgyi

In simple words, have you ever thought how would the world have
been without any development of technology or anything?

Well, the life people enjoy now or the things that we do in minutes
which earlier looked impossible are all because of the research.

Research is not limited to any one sector but has been done for almost
every sector.

Some of them are technology, healthcare, defence, precautionary steps

against natural calamities and many more.

So research plays a very important role in our day to day life.

Research is the best and reliable way to understand and act on the
complexities of various issues which we as humans are facing.

“…Aside from the pure pursuit of knowledge for its own sake,
research is linked to problem-solving,” John Armstrong, a
respected global higher education, and research professional write for
The Conversation.
“What this means is the solving of other people’s problems. That is,
what other people experience as problems”.

What is Educational Research?

Any kind of educational research requires a few steps of inquiry to

provide the solution to any particular research query.

Creswell defines educational research as,

“…Aside from the pure pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, research
is linked to problem-solving,” John Armstrong, a respected global
higher education, and research professional write for The
Conversation.

Types of Educational Research:

There are majorly 3 types of educational research.

Descriptive:

This type of research will try to describe things as they presently are.

Correlation:

This type of studies will try to identify the relationship between two or
more things.
Experimental:

This research tries to display a relation between two or more things.

They usually might be groups.

The Importance of Research in the

Advancement of Society:

“Human needs never end”

Believe it or not, but it is the truth. We have been habituated to adapt

to new things, as our desires and wants increases day by day.

As our demands increases, the requirement of research also rises. It

can also be said that research is what that makes our lives easier. It is
just the result of the curiosity or a new innovative idea.

When we have any problem, we usually think of a solution or get

confused. Several questions arise in our mind like what do you think
will the next big thing? or what to do to overcome this problem.

Here comes the role of research. This helps us in many ways and
provides us with a complete solution to the problems faced by
humans. Now when we humans, are satisfied without any problems,
this results in the advancement of society. So research overall helps in
the advancement and development of society.
Why Research is Important to Students?

The research is important for the students because it helps them to

have a detailed analysis of everything. When you have proper in-depth
analysis on any topic, the result comes out to be fruitful and also the
knowledge is enhanced. Other benefits of research to the students are
as follows:

1. Enhances the knowledge:

When you do research on any topic, you get to know detailed

information about that topic. The more the knowledge of the topic, the
more successful is the research. So, in order to get good output, the
student needs to do maximum research.

2. Clarifies confusion:

The research helps in clarifying the complicated facts and figures. If

the student has any doubt on the subject, the student must research
and study on it in detail so as to remove all sorts of confusion and get
the proper understanding of the content.

3. To have a proper understanding of the subject:

To understand the subject, one needs to go in depth of the lines. The

scanning of the content will never do any good for the students.
In order to learn the subject and to know the unknown facts, research,
detail study and full analysis are the must.

4. To learn about the methods and issues:

Proper reading, the finding is the only way by which you can learn
about the methods and the current issues. Not just the current issues,
rather the previous past issues can also be learned in detail through
the research. The research includes various methods by which it can
be done.

5. Understand the published work:

Research is done through the work already published. The experts and
the researchers had already done some of the research and the
students are asked to go through that published material to know the
idea and the vision of those researchers.

6. Learn to create a balance between collaborative and

individual work:

When the students do research, they get to learn how to create

a balance between the collaborative and the individual work.
Individual work in which the student has to do, while the collaborative
work means that work which has already been done by the previous
researchers.
So, in this manner, the students get to know which points are to be
taken into consideration and which points are to be ignored.

7. To know the interest:

The students also get to know their area of interest. Sometimes, the
students aspire to become researchers only in their near future which
is quite helpful.

So, through this, we come to know that the research not only helps
with the accomplishment of the work, but also helps in knowing what
needs to be done in their future.

8. To know how the original study originated:

Research is done to know the concept from scratch. Like, if you wish to
know from where has the concept originated, then this could be done
only through the research work.

It can also be defined as an investigation because the student

eventually ends up with expanded research.

9. Understanding the rationale:

By engaging in the process of research, the students understand the

concept in an easier manner as the rationale of the topic is known in a
better manner.
For example, by preparing the hypothesis, one truly understands the
nuances of the research topic. Not just this, the research also helps in
being a source of one on one mentorship which also plays a vital role
in the brain development of the individual.

So, above are the reasons by which we come to know the benefits of
the research for the students.

What is the Importance of Research to

Humankind:

Humankind involves everything from a pin to an elephant. Every bit of

information, the things to live and survive are needed for mankind,
should be known.

As if the essentials will not be known then we will remain illiterate,

unaware of what is happening in the society or around the world.
Research is important for humankind because of the various factors:

1. Helps in understanding society:

When one does some research related to society, the human becomes
aware and also alert of the good and bad things. In order to know the
society’s norms, policies, code of conduct, one needs to do proper
research or it may become difficult to survive in society.
2. Helps in knowing the culture:

Every society has its own culture. In order to understand the culture of
a particular society, research about that society is needed.

If you do not do research or read maximum about any topic, you will
fail to know the hidden meanings and the concepts about society’s
culture and will remain unaware of the same. So, if you are curious to
know and learn something new, then the research work will help.

3. For more awareness, research is needed:

To make yourself aware, reading is the key. Read the published books
and the research already done by an expert.

Once you have gone through the research work of great alumni, you
feel like being on the top of the world as the information flows into
your head. Not just this, if you wish to plan any holiday, you become
aware of the weather and the requirements of that particular place.
This way also research is very helpful.

4. For making the right choices for a career:

Research is needed in all fields, i.e. it is pervasive. For even the

smallest information, one needs to research and understand.
For example, if you need to know about the careers with greater scope
overseas, you will have to do research for that too. So, this way
research is of great importance to everyone, be it a student, a traveller,
teacher, professor, researcher himself.

5. Knowing the truth:

If you wish to know the truth about anything, reading, learning, and
research is the only way. When you read and research on any topic,
you get to know the truth.

The real facts and statistics come across which enlightens the person
and also increases one’s knowledge.

6. Update about the technology:

If there comes any new technology, the human gets to know about that
also through the research work.

So, basic research is helpful to human to know what new is coming in

the market. Also, it helps in being updated about the present scenario
of the society one is living in.

7. Differences between good and bad:

When a person reads the already published material, it builds trust

and also enlightens one’s mind. The person is able to differentiate
between right and the wrong which further helps in the decision-
making process.

So, above are the reasons which say why one should do research or
what is the importance of research. It is for the whole of mankind,
which involves individuals from every group and age. Whatever an
individual reads, it somewhere and at sometime surely helps as it gets
accumulated in the knowledge bank of an individual.

Why is Research Important in Education:

As earlier said, the role of research is important in all fields, in a

similar manner, the importance of research in education is very vital.
This is because of various reasons like:

1. It is a systematic analysis:

In education, research is essential as it gives a systematic analysis of

the topic. Also, the objectives are clearly defined in the research
process. One needs to study in a systematic and controlled manner,
and this is exactly what the research work provides an individual.

2. Leads to great observations:

In the field of education, the research helps in coming to one

conclusion. That conclusion can be achieved by observing the facts
and figures in depth.
So, such in-depth knowledge is provided by following various research
methods only. In this way, research also assists in leading to greater
observations.

3. Results in predictions, theories, and many principles:

The researchers come up with the valid predictions, theories and great
results through the observations, hypothesis and the research queries.
So, this way also it helps researchers to come up with great
conclusions.

4. Improving practices:

The educational research is important for the students to improve

practices and at the same time, it helps in improving those individuals
who really wish to bring improvement in those practices.

So, this way educational research helps in the overall

improvement of the individual. Be it a student or any teacher who
is researching on some topic, it is of great help to them. It acts as a
lighthouse and empowers the individual.

5. Develops new understanding related to the learning,

teaching etc:

The educators are benefited through various research as it helps them

in having a better understanding of the subject. Along with this, it
develops greater understanding related to the teaching, learning and
other educational administration.

The new knowledge further helps in improving educational practices

of the teachers and the professors.

6. Helps in initiating the action:

The research you do should result in performing some action or

practice. So, the research should aim to produce the highest result
which compliments the study. Also, you should make sure your study
ensures the applicable findings so as to match the result.

Research helps in performing well and also sheds away all the
problems. This way, you are able to understand the role of research
which further helps in the decision-making process.

7. Helps in decision making:

Good research requires proper time and effort. It prepares the person
for taking essential decisions which further necessitates the same from
all the participants involved in the process.

For better results, it is important for the participants to consider the

required consequences and all the risks involved in the whole process.
8. Brings consistency in the work:

When the work is done with full in-depth analysis, it tends to be right
and accurate. The process of research help brings consistency in the
work, which lessens the flaws and mistakes in the final outcome of the
process.

The consistency is needed in all sorts of work or you might have to end
up getting the wrong and inaccurate result. The research takes lots of
time and effort, so it is the duty of the researcher to be specific and
sure with the facts so that the end result is clean and without any silly
mistakes.

9. Motivates others:

Educational research builds patience because it is a lengthy process. In

order to get fruitful results, you need to build patience and only then
you will be able to motivate others.

Also, if your research is full of the right facts and figures, it will
ultimately motivate others. Not just this, accurate research assists in
enhancing the reader’s knowledge which might not be possible for any
other person.

So, above are some of the benefits which research provides in the field
of education. Every kind of research, every kind of method has been
always useful and gives a positive result. In case, you find something
fishy during the research work, it is advisable to consult someone
superior to you, or some expert.

Research is useful in all the fields and is used by all the departments,
whether public or private. The research work is done by all age groups,
whether the students or the teachers and even the humankind in order
to understand the society, it’s rules and other policies.