Critical Realism and Empirical Research Methods in Education

In the light of recent writings of Richard Pring, and in relation to the application of empirical research methods in education, this paper offers a corrective to a neo-realist viewpoint and develops a critical realist perspective. The argument is made that the deployment of empirical research methods needs to be underpinned by a meta-theory embracing epistemological and ontological elements; that this meta-theory does not commit one to the view that absolute knowledge of the social world is possible; and that critical realism is the most appropriate meta-theory to underpin the use of empirical research methods. Further to this, unhelpful dualisms between quantitative and qualitative methodologies, and between structure and agency, are discussed in relation to neo-realist and critical realist perspectives.     

EVALUATING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION: OVER WHAT PERIOD OF TIME SHOULD ACHIEVEMENT BE MEASURED?

An assumption fundamental to compensatory education is that greater achievement can change the academic future of disadvantaged students, which may in turn enhance their "life chances." Therefore, one of the goals of compensatory education is to increase the achievement of disadvantaged students. To change students' futures, this increase in achievement should be evident subsequent to participation in a compensatory-education program. At a minimum, an increase in achievement should persist over the summer following a school-year program. Evaluations of compensatory education in general, however, and of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in particular, have not included measures of sustained achievement. Instead, judgments of program success have been based on students' achievement during the school year: that is, on a spring posttest score adjusted in some way for the preceding fall pretest score.