Beijing Normal University
Foundation of Educational Research:
Methodology, Epistemology and Ontology
Topic 6
Synthesis of the Foundations of Educational Research:
Proposal from Institutional realism
A. Synthesis of the Foundations of Social Educational Research: A Institutional Realism
1. The 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
a. The 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.
b. These 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)
c. Based 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.
d. It 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 are
i. context-dependent, that is the institutional features constituted are
“conditioned” by the social-cultural, geo-political, and epochal contexts
under which these features are constituted.
ii. transformable by human actions, that is though these institutional features
are enduring over time, they can be changed by transformation or
revolution by human efforts.
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)
e. These 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
1
Tsang & Ye
Foundations of Educational Research
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.
2. The 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.
a. Aims 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
i. to work and to control under the principle of efficacy,
ii. to understand or even to agree under the principle of communicative
rationality, and
iii. to emancipate under the principle normative reasons and reasonableness.
b. Forms and substances of beliefs to be justified: Accordingly, the beliefs or
subject matters to be enquired and tested may appear in the following formats
i. empirical/logical propositions, which can be verified or falsified with
empirical data and/or logical procedures;
ii. meaning manifestations and representations, which can be interpreted,
communicated and reciprocally understood in order to reach consensus;
and
iii. biased power relationships and distorted ideological hegemony, which can
be explanatory criticized and possibly rectified and emancipated.
c. Conceptions of truth: The different types of beliefs will then be justified against
the three different conceptions of truth and their respective principles. They are
i. the objective truth based on the correspondence principle between
propositions and empirical facts;
ii. practical truth based on the principle of communicative rationality and
communicative ethics;
iii. normative truth based on the principle of virtuous, moral and political
reasons and reasonableness.
d. Modes 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
i. model 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;
ii. model 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.
iii. model 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;
iv. model of explanatory critique, which is to base on specific normative and
2
Tsang & Ye
Foundations of Educational Research
well-reasoned perspective as point of departure and then to account for
why particular social regularities and structures and/or meaning
representations are biased, distorting and/or unjust.
3. The 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.
B. The Institutional-Realist Synthesis
Given 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.
3
Tsang & Ye
Foundations of Educational Research
Methodological Synthesis
Ontological Synthesis
Social Facts as
Objective Things
Structure
Culturally
Integrative
Lifeworld
Power-Steering
State &
Money-steering
market
Methodological
Collectivism
Analytical-structuralism
Objectively regularity, persistence,
continuity, and universality
Nomolgical-causal
Explanation
Rules of the game
Institution
Institutional
Realism
Functionalinstitutional
Explanation
Legitimation
of tradition
Rational-choice
Explanation
Sedimentation
Intentional Explanation
Formalization
Objectivation
Routinization
Interpretive Understanding
of Representations, e.g.
actions, texts, relics, etc.
Methodological
Individualism
Typification of
Habitual Actions
Subjective Meanings
Subjective meanings
Agents
Conscious Being
4
Tsang & Ye
Foundations of Educational Research
Ontological Synthesis: Institutional Realism
Morphogenetic & institutional Change
Morphostatic & institutional endurance
Structure
Reinstitution
Culturally
Integrative
Lifeworld
Power-Steering
State &
Money-steering
market
Objectively regularity, persistence,
continuity, and universality
Transformation
or Revolution
Socialization
Rules of the game
Institution
Legitimation
of tradition
Internalization
Role Induction
Emancipation
Sedimentation
Formalization
Resistance
Objectivation
Routinization
Idea Change
Role
Performance
Taking the role
as one’s own:
Identification
Typification of
Habitual Actions
Subjective meanings
Agents
5
Tsang & Ye
Foundations of Educational Research
Epistemological Synthesis in Institutional Realsim
Regularity,
Persistence,
Continuity,
Universality
Objective- Factual Regularities
Objective Corresponding
Principle
Empirical-Causal Propositions
Objective Truth
Verified Universal Causal Law
Power-
Hypostatized
Structure
Prediction & Control
Universal Causal Law
Normative
Truth
Normative
Ground
Institutional
Realism
Explanatory
Critique
Understanding & Agreement
Confirmed Interpretation
IdeologicalFrozen
Belief-system
Practical Truth
Interpretation &
Intentional Explanation
Practical Corresponding
Lifeworld
Legitimation,
Sedimentation,
Formalization,
Objectivation,
Typification
Communicative Actions
Subjective
meanings
Tsang & Ye
Foundations of Educational Research
Subjective
meanings
6