首页> 外文期刊>Educational psychology review >How to Support Prescriptive Statements by Empirical Research: Some Missing Parts
【24h】

How to Support Prescriptive Statements by Empirical Research: Some Missing Parts

机译:如何通过实证研究支持陈述性陈述:缺少的部分

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This paper continues a discussion started in a special issue about the acceptability of prescriptive statements in educational research articles. In light of some ambiguities concerning what counts as a prescriptive statement, and the special issue's focus on causal relations as a requirement for the justification of prescriptive statements, a more detailed characterization of prescriptive statements and the structure of a complete argumentation for them is offered. This reveals two major obstacles to valid justifications of prescriptive statements that have received little attention before: the problem of normativity and the problem of generality. The proposed solution to the problem of normativity-that is, the impossibility to support prescriptive statements by empirical research alone-is to take into account that arguments for prescriptive statements target an audience that may agree on the values of many educational goals. The proposed solution to the problem of generality-that is, the necessity of well-established general causal regularities for the justification of prescriptive statements-requires appropriate designs for testing the generality of claims. Methodological suggestions include nested designs with quasi-representative samples of treatments as well as standard procedures for determining the cost and side effects on an agreed-upon set of relevant outcome dimensions for both current practice and any new intervention. If such steps are undertaken, prescriptive statements are no less justified in discussion sections than general descriptive claims as long as the final decision about them is suspended if the available normative and empirical arguments are not yet conclusive.
机译:本文继续在有关教育研究文章中规定性陈述可接受性的特刊上展开讨论。鉴于在什么才算是说明性陈述方面存在歧义,并且本期特别关注因果关系是说明性陈述合理性的要求,因此提供了更详细的说明性陈述特征和针对它们的完整论证结构。这揭示了以前很少有人注意的有效说明性陈述理由的两个主要障碍:规范性问题和普遍性问题。为规范性问题(即不可能仅靠经验研究就不可能支持陈述性陈述)提出的解决方案,是要考虑到陈述性陈述的论点针对的是可能同意许多教育目标价值的受众。为解决普遍性问题而提出的解决方案,即为说明性陈述的正当性建立良好的一般因果规律性的必要性,需要适当的设计来检验权利要求的普遍性。方法学建议包括嵌套设计和类似的代表性治疗样品,以及用于确定成本和副作用的标准程序,这些成本和副作用针对当前实践和任何新干预措施均已商定。如果采取了这些步骤,则只要可用的规范性和实证性论点尚无定论,则只要中止关于这些陈述的最终决定,在讨论部分中的陈述性陈述与在一般性描述性主张中所起的作用一样。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号