Topic 6 Synthesis of Foundations of Educational Research 北京师范大学研究生课程 教育研究的基础：方法论、知识论及本体论

zThe complexity of the social reality: In light of the ontological characterization of the social reality stipulated by the critical realists and new institutionalists, social and educational researchers are now in a better position to clarify the objects of study confronting them. The features of the social reality may be summarized as follows Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe complexity of the social reality: yThe primary object of study in social and educational research is human agent. They are endowed with capacities of meaning creating and understanding, intentional planning and will of carrying out their plans to the ends. yThese human agents also endowed with the capacities to work cooperatively and concertedly to fulfill collectively recognized goals. They are able to typify, habitualize, routinize, objectivate, crystalize and institutionalize their concerted efforts into standardized and formalized “rules of the game” known as “institution”(North, 1990, P. 3) Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe complexity of the social reality: yBased on the conceptions of social institution human social interactions are then construed to have possessed the features of regularity, persistence, continuity, and commonality or even universality across space and time. As a result, these features can be studied with statistical- positivistic methods with the objectives of obtaining valid and reliable law-like conclusions and predictions. Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe complexity of the social reality: yIt must be emphasized immediately that these “law- like” and predictable results are in essence different from those attained in natural-scientific researches. The degrees of universality across space and permanence over time of the results produced in social sciences are not as nomological as those in natural sciences. That is because, in ontological terms, social institutions Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe complexity of the social reality: y….That is because, in ontological terms, social institutions are xcontext-dependent, that is the institutional features constituted are “conditioned” by the social-cultural, geo- political, and epochal contexts under which these features are constituted. xtransformable by human actions, that is though these institutional features are enduring over time, they can be changed by transformation or revolution by human efforts. Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe complexity of the social reality: y….. However of course, as Karl Marx reminded us, “Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living” (in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, 1852) Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe complexity of the social reality: yThese conditionally transformational and “emancipatable” features of social reality have triggered the theoretical movement of “critical social science” (Habermas, 1971; and 1987). These research tradition as a whole believes that social realities are embodied with biased power hypostatization and distorted ideological hegemony. As a result, social and educational researchers are obliged not only to reveal the meanings embedded in human interactions and the regularities manifested in social institutions, but also to critically assess that plausible biases and distortions embodied in social reality. Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe diversity of epistemological perspectives: Given such a complexity found in social and educational reality, the theories of knowledge that could help and guide social and educational researchers are by definition multiple in natures. Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe diversity of epistemological perspectives: yAims and “interest” of knowledge: The general aims and specific objectives of attaining knowledge, or in Habermas terms knowledge-constitutive interest, can therefore be differentiated into xto work and to control under the principle of efficacy, xto understand or even to agree under the principle of communicative rationality, and xto emancipate under the principle normative reasons and reasonableness. Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe diversity of epistemological perspectives: yForms and substances of beliefs to be justified: Accordingly, the beliefs or subject matters to be enquired and tested may appear in the following formats xempirical/logical propositions, which can be verified or falsified with empirical data and/or logical procedures; xmeaning manifestations and representations, which can be interpreted, communicated and reciprocally understood in order to reach consensus; and xbiased power relationships and distorted ideological hegemony, which can be explanatory criticized and possibly rectified and emancipated. Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe diversity of epistemological perspectives: yConceptions of truth: The different types of beliefs will then be justified against the three different conceptions of truth and their respective principles. They are xthe objective truth based on the correspondence principle between propositions and empirical facts; xthe practical truth based on the principle of communicative rationality and communicative ethics; xthe normative truth based on the principle of virtuous, moral and political reasons and reasonableness. Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe diversity of epistemological perspectives: yModes of justifications and explanations: In order to lend valid justifications to the respective beliefs against the corresponding principles of truth, social and educational researchers have developed, throughout the years, different models of explanations and methods to build up their justifications. They include xmodel of causal explanations of antecedent conditions and subsequent effects, more specifically, the statistical- probabilistic explanation in social research, which employ variety of quantitative methods, such as experiments and survey; Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe diversity of epistemological perspectives: yModes of justifications and explanations : …. x…. xmodel of intentional explanation, which employ variety of research methods in interpretive research to reveal the meanings, intentions and values embedded in different types of human representations, including human actions, social interactions, literal texts, etc. xmodel of functional-institutional explanation, which mainly employ comparative-historical method to account for the existence, continuity and discontinuity of particular types of social institutions, such as educational institution; Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zThe multiplicity in research methods: Confronted with such a complexity of social reality and diversity of theories of knowledge, social and educational researchers could no long adopt the approach of methodological monism and are required to submit to the approach of methodological pluralism, such as quantitative an qualitative research methods listed above. Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research

zGiven all the impasses explored in this course and the conceptual tools introduced in the perspective of Critical Realism and New Instiutionalism, I think we are in the position to provide a preliminary resolution (in sketch) to these methodological, epistemological and ontological disputes. The Institutional-Realist Synthesis

Ontological SynthesisMethodological Synthesis Structure Agents Typification of Habitual Actions Routinization Objectivation Formalization Sedimentation Legitimation of tradition Institution (as Rules of the game) Objectively regularity, persistence, continuity, and universality Subjective meanings Culturally Integrative Lifeworld Power-Steering State & Money-steering market Methodological Collectivism Analytical-structuralism Nomolgical-causal Explanation Functional-institutional Explanation Intentional Explanation Rational-choice Explanation Conscious Being Methodological Individualism Interpretive Understanding of Representations, e.g. actions, texts, relics, discourse, etc. Social Facts as Objective Things Subjective Meanings Institutional Realism

Ontological Synthesis: Institutional Realism Structure Typification of Habitual Actions Routinization Objectivation Formalization Sedimentation Legitimation of tradition Institution Rules of the game Objectively regularity, persistence, continuity, & universality Agents with Subjective meanings Culturally Integrative Lifeworld Power-Steering State & Money-steering market Socialization Internalization Role Induction Role Performance Taking the role as one’s own: Identification Resistance Emancipation Transformation or Revolution Reinstitution Idea Change Morphostatic & institutional endurance Morphogenetic & institutional Change

Epistemological Synthesis in Institutional Realìsm Communicative Actions Interpretation & Intentional Explanation Practical Truth Confirmed Interpretation Explanatory Critique Verified Universal Causal Law Objective Truth Subjective meanings Empirical-Causal Propositions Objective- Factual Regularitie s Regularity, Persistence, Continuity, Universality Institutional Realism Legitimation, Sedimentation, Formalization, Objectivation, Typification Objective Corresponding Principle Prediction & Control Universal Causal Law Subjective meanings Lifeworld Practical Corresponding Understanding & Agreement Normative Truth Normative Ground Power-Hypostatized Structure Ideological-Frozen Belief-system

End Topic 3 Methodological & Epistemological Foundations of Historical-Hermeneutic Studies 20