首页> 外文期刊>Educational psychology review >When is It Acceptable to Make Prescriptive Statements in Educational Research Articles? Commentary on the Special Issue Papers
【24h】

When is It Acceptable to Make Prescriptive Statements in Educational Research Articles? Commentary on the Special Issue Papers

机译:在什么时候可以在教育研究文章中做出规定性陈述?特刊论文评论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

The commentary considers when it is acceptable to make prescriptive statements in educational research articles. It begins with a consensus view, agreeing with the analysis offered by Marley and Levin (Educational Psychology Review, 2011), that experimental evidence is necessary. Other forms of evidence are considered (e.g., observational, case-based, qualitative); these are described as correlational in nature and considered to be of uncertain value for making causal, prescriptive statements. The essay further considers whether theory is necessary for prescriptive statements, notes the philosophical divide between those who embrace experimental methods and those who do not, and considers both contemporary policies and specific publication strategies that can create a priority for the use of experimental evidence in support of prescriptive statements.
机译:评论考虑了何时可以在教育研究文章中做出规定性陈述。它始于共识观点,与Marley和Levin(《教育心理学评论》,2011年)提供的分析一致,认为实验证据是必要的。考虑其他形式的证据(例如观察性,基于案例的,定性的);这些在本质上被描述为相互关联,并被认为对做出因果性说明性陈述具有不确定的价值。本文进一步考虑了理论对于说明性陈述是否必要,指出了拥护实验方法的人与不拥护实验方法的人之间的哲学鸿沟,并考虑了当代政策和特定的出版策略,这些策略可以为使用实验证据提供支持提供优先权说明性陈述。

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