Both the readings have a similar purpose and that is to explain what scientific research is and what its components are. Both of them are in the position to believe that science is not something that can be based on personal opinions; rather, it is based on evidence. Pring’s main argument is that the ontological dualism between quantitative and qualitative research are false (60). On the other hand, Chalmers strongly argues that in scientific research, the senses should be used objectively rather than subjectively (5). Both the scholars focus on scientific observation and how it should be done in the most accurate, most realistic sense.
Pring backs his claims with other existing studies from different scholars ahead of him. He talks about the stark difference between quantitative and qualitative research claiming that these two are meant to be two different paradigms. The qualitative researchers think that quantitative research is nothing but a epistemological and that the process is deemed flawed. On the other hand, qualitative researchers push for the differentiation between the social and the physical world (Pring 62). Charles illustrates the differences in the manner of observing by different researchers. He believes that they all have different interpretation of what they see or observe (62).
Qualitative and quantitative researchers differ in their manner of observing subjects of their scientific research, so even if they have the same hypothesis, they might come up with different data and observation leading to significant differences in the results and conclusion (Pring 59). The authors’ arguments both relate to the education policy and practice as they bring light to a better and more realistic researching process. The authors’ observations, when linked together, imply that there is a need to improve the education policy practice especially in terms of doing scientific research.
It is convincing to take the position of Pring. I personally believe that there is false dualism in these two different methods of research. In support of Chalmers’ views also, the results of a scientific study will not be accurate and realistic if the researcher’s thoughts, perceptions, and beliefs are clouded with cultural and social factors. Scientific facts should be searched based on objective knowledge only (Chalmers 8). In my personal experience as a student, I can relate to the points made by Chalmers that it is important to use knowledge and objectivity in doing research; otherwise, the result will not even be close to reality. Because I was clouded by my fear of frogs, I did not actually dissect one in my Biology class, so I did not get the accurate description of the parts of the frog. This simple experience is an example of doing a scientific research not based on facts collected by the researcher himself but based on books only.
The position of the authors changed my perception in scientific research or other educational practices. In gathering data, I learned that I need to decide to concentrate on just one of the research methods – qualitative or quantitative because I used to combine both and end up getting confused trying to put the results together. In addition, I also learned not to depend on books too much but on my own objective observations.
Both the arguments in the readings were clearly laid out by the authors. They have considered all voices in expressing their views, so I do not think they have left out a voice or omitted some important points in the reading. I believe that the strengths of the readings rely on the evidences in the form of readings and self observations. The only limitation that I have observed is in Chalmers’ piece. He would have talked about the different research methods as well to see which one is better. But overall, the two articles are very useful reference in improving educational policy and practice.
Questions for analysis:
Which scientific research method is highly recommended in the modern research process?
How exactly will the manner of observation affect educational policy and practice?
Works Cited
Chalmers, Alan. What is This Thing Called Science, 4th ed. Hacket Publishing, n.d.
Pring, Richard. Philosophy of Educational Research, 3rd ed. Bloomsburry, n.d.
