The "epistemological gap" in Educational Sciences: its origin and consequences.

This paper has the aim of showing how epistemological issues in Education today are poorly treated in academic centers and scientific literature, so that there has been in this field an “epistemological gap” (Moya Otero, 2003) between the theories, methodologies and foundations. Also will discuss th...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Analía Inés Portela de Nieto
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Asociación Latinoamericana de Filosofía de la Educación 2014-12-01
Series:IXTLI
Online Access:http://ixtli.org/revista/index.php/ixtli/article/view/16
id doaj-9800a519daef4d199a7356f5056f2987
record_format Article
spelling doaj-9800a519daef4d199a7356f5056f29872020-11-25T02:47:29ZengAsociación Latinoamericana de Filosofía de la EducaciónIXTLI2408-47512014-12-011218719816The "epistemological gap" in Educational Sciences: its origin and consequences.Analía Inés Portela de Nieto0CIC (Centro de Investigaciones de Cuyo), CONICET (Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas) Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad Nacional de Cuyo.This paper has the aim of showing how epistemological issues in Education today are poorly treated in academic centers and scientific literature, so that there has been in this field an “epistemological gap” (Moya Otero, 2003) between the theories, methodologies and foundations. Also will discuss the background of this problem, the “Paradigm wars” (Gage, 1989) and its consequences, pluralism and epistemological pragmatism. The confrontation between the paradigms of Educational Research, quantitative and qualitative, is still unsolved (Gage, 1989: 135) and survive in the “paradigmatic proliferation” (Donmoyer, 2006; Lather, 2006). The relevance of these issues consists in that paradigms are deeply embedded in the socialization of adherents and practitioners: Paradigms tell them what is important, legitimate, and reasonable. Paradigms are also normative, telling the practitioner what to do without the necessity of long existential or epistemological considerations (Cf. Patton, 1990: 37). Address these issues to conclude, finally, the idea of resuming epistemological discussions to achieve envision ways to overcome the problem of incommensurability between different approaches and Perspectives in Education. These discussions reflect the concerns in Philosophy Science about the same notion in Educational Sciences. We estimate that they must be assumed, since otherwise their knowledge will always be of importation, and not a product of the second-order reflection made by educators based on observational data (Cf. García Carrasco and García del Dujo, 1995: 38).http://ixtli.org/revista/index.php/ixtli/article/view/16
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Analía Inés Portela de Nieto
spellingShingle Analía Inés Portela de Nieto
The "epistemological gap" in Educational Sciences: its origin and consequences.
IXTLI
author_facet Analía Inés Portela de Nieto
author_sort Analía Inés Portela de Nieto
title The "epistemological gap" in Educational Sciences: its origin and consequences.
title_short The "epistemological gap" in Educational Sciences: its origin and consequences.
title_full The "epistemological gap" in Educational Sciences: its origin and consequences.
title_fullStr The "epistemological gap" in Educational Sciences: its origin and consequences.
title_full_unstemmed The "epistemological gap" in Educational Sciences: its origin and consequences.
title_sort "epistemological gap" in educational sciences: its origin and consequences.
publisher Asociación Latinoamericana de Filosofía de la Educación
series IXTLI
issn 2408-4751
publishDate 2014-12-01
description This paper has the aim of showing how epistemological issues in Education today are poorly treated in academic centers and scientific literature, so that there has been in this field an “epistemological gap” (Moya Otero, 2003) between the theories, methodologies and foundations. Also will discuss the background of this problem, the “Paradigm wars” (Gage, 1989) and its consequences, pluralism and epistemological pragmatism. The confrontation between the paradigms of Educational Research, quantitative and qualitative, is still unsolved (Gage, 1989: 135) and survive in the “paradigmatic proliferation” (Donmoyer, 2006; Lather, 2006). The relevance of these issues consists in that paradigms are deeply embedded in the socialization of adherents and practitioners: Paradigms tell them what is important, legitimate, and reasonable. Paradigms are also normative, telling the practitioner what to do without the necessity of long existential or epistemological considerations (Cf. Patton, 1990: 37). Address these issues to conclude, finally, the idea of resuming epistemological discussions to achieve envision ways to overcome the problem of incommensurability between different approaches and Perspectives in Education. These discussions reflect the concerns in Philosophy Science about the same notion in Educational Sciences. We estimate that they must be assumed, since otherwise their knowledge will always be of importation, and not a product of the second-order reflection made by educators based on observational data (Cf. García Carrasco and García del Dujo, 1995: 38).
url http://ixtli.org/revista/index.php/ixtli/article/view/16
work_keys_str_mv AT analiainesporteladenieto theepistemologicalgapineducationalsciencesitsoriginandconsequences
AT analiainesporteladenieto epistemologicalgapineducationalsciencesitsoriginandconsequences
_version_ 1724753257508634624