Heidegger's Theory of Truth and its Importance for the Quality of Qualitative Research

When reliability and validity were introduced as validation criteria for empirical research in the human sciences, quantitative research methods prevailed, and theory of science relied on neopositivism (Vienna Circle) or postpositivism (scientific realism). Within this worldview, notions of reliability and validity as criteria of scientific goodness were introduced. Reliability and validity were associated with the correspondence theory of truth, which is mostly ill-suited to the needs of qualitative research. For that reason, qualitative research must look for other kinds of validation criteria. The article elaborates the problems arising when the correspondence theory of truth is used as an ultimate criterion in evaluating qualitative research and proposes Heidegger's hermeneutical or alethetical idea of truth as a more suitable approach.     

Consequences of Project Organisation in Graduate Education

It is a common assumption that disciplinary differences in the organisation of research and knowledge structure have implications for graduate students' learning processes. The present study indicates, however, that even though the inclusion of master's degree students in faculty member's research projects are much more common in the natural sciences than in the humanities and the social sciences, such projects improve quality and effectiveness of graduate education in all fields of learning. Disciplinary differences imply, nevertheless, that projects should be organised differently. Graduate education in the humanities and the social sciences should be organised as research seminars and umbrella projects of individual student theses to a greater extent, rather than trying to apply a research organisation model developed in laboratory fields.     

Straddling rows and columns: Students’ (mis)conceptions of an assessment rubric

Abstract

Assessment rubrics intend to make criteria explicit to students. However, an understanding of assessment criteria requires tacit knowledge about which students may not be aware. The lack of such knowledge is notable in undergraduate health science students taking a compulsory course in the social sciences. This study performed a content analysis of how 1^st year health sciences students interpret a SOLO assessment rubric for a sociology ‘reflection piece’ essay. The findings suggest that empiricism, standardisation and lack of tacit knowledge limit students’ ways of reasoning about the rubric. These limitations manifest in a methodical difference between students’ expectations and lecturers’ intentions of using a rubric. This difference is illustrated by the students’ need for procedural knowledge and the lecturer’s expectation of conceptual knowledge. These differences have implications for teaching, learning and assessment in health sciences undergraduate education. The findings also justify a dialogical approach to assessments through facilitating students’ epistemological development.     

Knowledge and the university curriculum

What are students learning in university? Can this learning be measured? We do not at this time possess a conceptual framework for understanding what and how knowledge is acquired in different university disciplines. A framework for the acquisition of knowledge would have to account for the manner in which forms of knowledge differ. Disciplinary differences could be expected to occur at four levels: in the nature of the concepts used; in the logical structure of the discipline; in the truth criteria used; and in the methods employed in the discipline. In this article, such a framework is tested on university courses representative of different disciplines. At the most basic level, characteristics of the most important concepts used in courses across disciplines are investigated. The characteristics include concept familiarity, generality and abstractness. At a second level, differences in the logical structure of disciplines are examined through analysis of the relationships between course concepts, the structure of propositions in the field, and organizing principles which play a major role in the discipline. The truth criteria used by various disciplines suggest more global differences which would affect the acquisition of knowledge. Finally, the methods considered important in different disciplines, and their effect on the development of students' intellectual skills, complete the portrayal of the parameters of knowledge and the university curriculum. Directions for future research are discussed.     

Lost in translation? Comparative education research and the production of academic knowledge

The worth of academic knowledge tends to be tested against global metrics of citations and articles published in high-ranking English language academic journals. This paper examines academic knowledge production in three local fields of research with different national languages (English, Finnish and French). It focuses on knowledge production on the topic of apprenticeship where there are distinctive differences in the three local research fields and the associated patterns of academic publication over a 15-year period. The findings suggest that publication patterns are still largely tied to the respective national languages. Concerns are raised about the limited visibility of non-Anglophone local contexts and conceptual frameworks as filtered through global academic knowledge production processes. The language practices in the production of academic knowledge need to be challenged to ensure that knowledge from these sources is not lost in translation or in the re-contextualisation for global audiences.     

Age and scientific productivity. Differences between fields of learning

This article analyzes the relationship between age and scientific productivity at Norwegian universities. Cross-sectional data indicate that publishing activity reaches a peak in the 45–49 year old age group and declines by 30 per cent among researchers over 60 years old. Large differences exist, however, between fields of learning. In the social sciences productivity remains more or less at the same level in all age groups. In the humanities publishing activity declines in the 55–59 year old age group, but it reaches a new peak in the group 60 years old and over. Productivity declines in the medical sciences among faculty members who are older than 55, while in the natural sciences, productivity continually decreases with increasing age.This article suggests that the differences between the various fields of learning arise from corresponding differences in the development of scientific disciplines. In fields where the production of new knowledge is fast and where new scientific methods and equipment are continuously introduced, researchers may have problems coping and thus become obsolescent. In fields where knowledge production occurs at a slower pace, e.g. the social sciences and the humanities, faculty may be productive throughout their careers. This explanation gains further support when looking at various natural and medical science disciplines. Older faculty members in physics are less productive than older researchers in mathematics, and older scientists in biomedicine are less productive than their colleagues of the same age in social medicine.     

Complex Systems in Education: Scientific and Educational Importance and Implications for the Learning Sciences

The multidisciplinary study of complex systems in the physical and social sciences over the past quarter of a century has led to the articulation of important new conceptual perspectives and methodologies that are of value both to researchers in these fields as well as to professionals, policymakers, and citizens who must deal with challenging social and global problems in the 21st century. The main goals of this article are to (a) argue for the importance of learning these ideas at the precollege and college levels; (b) discuss the significant challenges inherent in learning complex systems knowledge from the standpoint of learning sciences theory and research; (c) discuss the "learnability issue" of complex systems conceptual perspectives and review a body of literature that has been exploring how learning sciences pedagogical approaches can lead to student learning of important dimensions of complex systems knowledge; (d) argue that the cognitive and sociocultural factors related to learning complex systems knowledge are relevant and challenging areas for learning sciences research; and (e) consider ways that concepts and methodologies from the study of complex systems raise important issues of theoretical and methodological centrality in the field of the learning sciences itself.     

DOMAIN DIFFERENCES IN THE EPISTEMOLOGICAL BELIEFS OF COLLEGE STUDENTS

This study examined the differences in the epistemological beliefs of college students across major fields of study. Beliefs in fixed ability, simple knowledge, quick learning, and certain knowledge were assessed for 290 students attending a large urban public university. Major fields of study were classified in domains of study according to the hard-soft and pure-applied dimensions of Biglan's well-known classification of academic fields. Additional analyses examined the effects of gender, age, year in college, and GPA. Results indicated that students majoring in pure fields were less likely than those in applied fields to hold naive beliefs in simple knowledge, quick learning, and certain knowledge, and students majoring in soft or pure fields were less likely than others to hold naive beliefs in certain knowledge. Gender, age, and GPA were also related to students' beliefs. The results of this study suggest that students' beliefs about the nature of knowledge and learning are related to the disciplinary contexts in which students select and experience their specialized coursework in college.     

Mathematics in engineering - part I

In this two part article I try to convey some of the variety and excitement involved in the application of mathematics to engineering problems; to provide a taste of some actual mathematical calculations that engineers do; and finally, to make clear the distinctions between the applied subject of engineering and its purer parents, which include mathematics and the physical sciences. Two main points of this article are that in engineering it is approximation, and not truth, that reigns; and that an engineer carries a burden of responsibility that mathematicians and scientists are spared. In this first part, I present my views on how engineering differs from mathematics and the physical sciences, and describe what I consider the workhorses of engineering calculations.     

The role of educational context in beliefs about knowledge,information, and truth: an exploratory study

Beliefs about knowledge have been found to relate to a variety of student outcomes and to vary across educational domains and instructional contexts. However, there are limited data on students’ beliefs about information and truth, vis-à-vis knowledge (i.e., epistemic beliefs) and how these beliefs differ across instructional settings. Undergraduates from two educational contexts, in the USA (n?=?240) and the Netherlands (n?=?72), participated in this study. While students in the USA were enrolled primarily in lecture and discussion classes, students in the Netherlands followed a problem-based learning curriculum. Beliefs about knowledge, information, and truth and their interrelations were examined across these two contexts through graphical and written justification tasks. Results from this exploratory study indicate that Dutch students were more likely than American students to depict knowledge, information, and truth as subjective and to define knowledge and information as synonymous. Commonalities and differences associated with educational backgrounds are considered in relation to instructional implications.     

关于建构知识科学的问题

本文以波普的“三个世界”理论为基础，肯定客观知识世界的存在。随着知识世界的发展，我们有了自然、社会、思维（主观精神世界）和知识四个“世界”。目前，我们相应地有自然科学、社会科学和思维科学（包括心理学）分别对前三个世界加以研究，但惟一没有跟知识世界相对应的科学领域。因此，应当建立知识科学。在今天，知识的作用越来越大，成为推动社会发展的首要而最大的动力。这也要求对知识本身进行更加深入而全面的研究。于是，一门专门研究知识发展及其价值问题的科学－－知识科学的产生将是时代的必然要求。知识科学是一个大的门类，它同自然科学、社会科学、思维科学等属于同一序列的科学研究领域。它应当包括知识哲学、具体知识学科以及知识运用等三个基本层次，划分为许多具体学科。     

Blended and co-existing worlds in intersectoral mobilities of European PhD graduates in the social sciences and humanities

ABSTRACT

This paper argues that links between academia and other economic sectors are increasing, especially through intersectoral mobility of university graduates. Murray [(2010). “The Oncomouse that Roared: Hybrid Exchange Strategies as a Source of Distinction at the Boundary of Overlapping Institutions.” American Journal of Sociology 116 (2): 341–388] has identified literature pointing both to blending and continuing co-existence of the academic and commercial worlds. Based on a European-wide study of PhD graduates in the social sciences and humanities (SSH), this paper considers the extent to which intersectoral mobility reflects blending. It finds that intersectoral communities of practice exist mainly in applied fields of knowledge. However, in many areas of the SSH, differences in institutional norms and values inhibit intersectoral mobility, particularly in mid-career stages.     

Characteristics of academic areas and students' evaluation of instruction

This study examines the relationship between characteristics of academic areas and students' evaluation of instruction. Based on Biglan's model of subject matter and relevant studies of the role of instruction, a weak partial order model for classifying academic fields and predicting their relative ranking on instructional evaluation was tested. The findings of the study support the weak partial order model for all three criteria of instructional evaluation that are used in this research. Moreover, the major discriminant facet in this study is the knowledge base of the academic program (i.e., hard versus soft sciences). Based on the results of this research, an adapted model for understanding the role of academic areas in predicting instructional evaluation is proposed. The implications of this study are discussed and elaborated.     

College student epistemological perspectives across knowledge domains: A proposed grounded theory

Scholars have studied epistemologicaldevelopment – or how one understands knowledgeand knowing – of college students for manyyears. Research in this domain has includedbenchmarking studies of epistemologicaldevelopment, examinations of how curricularinnovations impact epistemology, and somestudies of differences in epistemologicaldevelopment based on disciplinary areas. Thelatter group of studies has generally focusedon differences in epistemological beliefs forstudents who are studying in two differentdomains (e.g., nursing students versus physicsstudents). In this study, we qualitativelyinvestigate whether the epistemologicalperspectives of 60 science/engineering collegestudents differs across the disciplinary areasof the sciences and the humanities. Our resultsindicate that such differences do exist andinclude a proposed grounded theory thatdescribes how students' epistemologies may varyacross knowledge domains.     

On the Epistemology of Narrative Research in Education

The purpose of this article is to explore the epistemological foundations of narrative research in education. In particular, I seek to explain how one can obtain knowledge, given its origin in teachers' subjective experiences. The problem with rhetorical and aesthetic criteria that narrative researchers use to warrant their knowledge claims is not that they don't meet a correspondence criterion of truth as post‐positivists contend, but rather that they fail to connect teachers' ethical views with their practice. Since narrative research is aimed at understanding teachers' actions and not at seeking some kind of mechanism in teachers' behaviour, the link between past experiences and present teaching practice is not causal but teleological. I suggest that although the knowledge claims of narrative researchers may not be justified (because they don't meet the criteria of truth as correspondence theory), we might nonetheless be intellectually entitled to accept them. Entitlement is an epistemic right or warrant that constitutes knowledge as justification, but uses different reasons—teleological not causal explanations. I offer three criteria to establish entitlement to accept narrative researchers' findings: (1) the meeting of rhetorical standards such as plausibility, adequacy, and persuasion; (2) the inclusion of teachers' stories about their pedagogical practice; (3) the meeting of ethical criteria that connects a teacher's actions to an articulate and defensible end‐in‐view or vision of the good.     

Promoting Conceptual Development in Physics Teacher Education: Cognitive-Historical Reconstruction of Electromagnetic Induction Law

In teaching physics, the history of physics offers fruitful starting points for designing instruction. I introduce here an approach that uses historical cognitive processes to enhance the conceptual development of pre-service physics teachers’ knowledge. It applies a method called cognitive-historical approach, introduced to the cognitive sciences by Nersessian (Cognitive Models of Science. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp. 3–45, 1992). The approach combines the analyses of actual scientific practices in the history of science with the analytical tools and theories of contemporary cognitive sciences in order to produce knowledge of how conceptual structures are constructed and changed in science. Hence, the cognitive-historical analysis indirectly produces knowledge about the human cognition. Here, a way to use the cognitive-historical approach for didactical purposes is introduced. In this application, the cognitive processes in the history of physics are combined with current physics knowledge in order to create a cognitive-historical reconstruction of a certain quantity or law for the needs of physics teacher education. A principal aim of developing the approach has been that pre-service physics teachers must know how the physical concepts and laws are or can be formed and justified. As a practical example of the developed approach, a cognitive-historical reconstruction of the electromagnetic induction law was produced. For evaluating the uses of the cognitive-historical reconstruction, a teaching sequence for pre-service physics teachers was conducted. The initial and final reports of twenty-four students were analyzed through a qualitative categorization of students’ justifications of knowledge. The results show a conceptual development in the students’ explanations and justifications of how the electromagnetic induction law can be formed.     

Dimensionality and Disciplinary Differences in Personal Epistemology

A growing body of work addresses the nature of epistemological development and epistemological beliefs: how individuals come to know, the theories and beliefs they hold about knowing, and the manner in which such epistemological premises are a part of and an influence on the cognitive processes of thinking and reasoning. This study investigates the dimensionality of personal epistemology as hypothesized in a recent review of the literature as well as the nature of disciplinary differences. First-year college students responded to a set of questionnaires that included an adaptation of a domain-general epistemological instrument and a discipline-focused questionnaire. Results suggest that there is an underlying dimensionality to epistemological theories that cuts across disciplinary domains, but that students, at least by the 1st year of college, discriminate as to how these theories differ by discipline. Disciplinary differences were strong, suggesting that 1st-year college students see knowledge in science as more certain and unchanging than in psychology, are more likely to regard personal knowledge and firsthand experience as a basis for justification of knowing in psychology than in science, view authority and expertise as the source of knowledge more in science than in psychology, and perceive that in science, more than in psychology, truth is attainable by experts. This contradicts existing research that suggests that epistemological development is domain general and that epistemological beliefs do not differ by discipline.     

优秀外语教师实践性知识的个案研究

本文从对实践性知识的实践性、个人化和情境性等的理解出发,探讨优秀大学外语教师的实践性知识。研究的核心问题是：（1）优秀外语教师实践性知识的构成与特点是什么？（2）外语教师实践性知识的来源与影响因素是什么？（3）学生在教师实践性知识建构中发挥怎样的作用？研究采取定性个案研究方法,课堂观察、深度访谈和问卷调查为主要研究工具。通过对教师行为的呈现以及教师自己的意义解释,揭示优秀外语教师实践性知识的内涵。     

Creating Self‐Generating Knowledge Sharing Spirals: Improving Motivation in a Knowledge Economy

Many new research advancements have been gained in fields other than the basic social sciences. Some of these advancements come from multidisciplinary studies that merge social sciences with theories from other fields of study. This article takes a multidisciplinary approach, juxtaposing some of the more recent findings from other disciplines to develop a general model for improving performance. The proposed model utilizes social theory from sociology and community studies, knowledge spirals from the knowledge management discipline, motivation theories derived in part from evolutionary biology, and research on engagement from different fields of study within the social sciences. By incorporating a multidisciplinary theory for performance improvement, the authors are adhering to recommendations from researchers calling for alternative paradigms to be utilized, providing a more holistic understanding of the phenomena being studied (Storberg‐Walker, 2007 ; Torraco, 2004 ).