Education as a Human Science

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Higgs
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Human Science ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Cultural Considerations ◽  
The Social ◽  
Educational Relationships ◽  
And Control ◽  
The Relationship

The debate concerning the nature of education, and more particularly the debate as it is directed toward the discourse and logic of schooling, has customarily taken place within the social science tradition. As a result, educational research has been characterized by a modern positivist science which has tended to privilege knowledge relevant to a technocratic evaluation and control of educational relationships and achievements through a process of socialization. From the relationship between student and teacher to the relationship between school and society, the widespread acceptance of quantitative research findings and behavioristic theory reveals that the evaluation of educational issues has been tied to an understanding of reality as ideological as it is “scientific.” What should constitute a scientific inquiry that effectively counters positivist assumptions and what should characterize the inquirer’s relation to the real are still central questions within educational theory and practice in the philosophy of education. In responding to these questions, the positioning of education in the social science tradition has given rise to the politicization of education in an ideologically directed process of socialization which, in turn, has resulted in education, including schooling, being subjected to the idiosyncratic stranglehold and abuse of ideological and cultural considerations propagated in the name of a pseudo-scientific scientism. Furthermore, the problem concerning the nature of education is more authentically situated within the human science tradition than within the social sciences. This argument is grounded on a fundamental objection to positivism and the influence that this has had on the tradition of the social sciences.

scholarly journals Integrating the social sciences into the COVID-19 response in Alberta, Canada

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (7) ◽  
pp. e002672
Author(s):  
Myles Leslie ◽  
Raad Fadaak ◽  
Jan Davies ◽  
Johanna Blaak ◽  
PG Forest ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Infection Prevention ◽  
Interdisciplinary Team ◽  
Infection Prevention And Control ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The Social ◽  
Policy Communication ◽  
And Control

This paper outlines the rapid integration of social scientists into a Canadian province’s COVID-19 response. We describe the motivating theory, deployment and initial outcomes of our team of Organisational Sociologist ethnographers, Human Factors experts and Infection Prevention and Control clinicians focused on understanding and improving Alberta’s responsiveness to the pandemic. Specifically, that interdisciplinary team is working alongside acute and primary care personnel, as well as public health leaders to deliver ‘situated interventions’ that flow from studying communications, interpretations and implementations across responding organisations. Acting in real time, the team is providing critical insights on policy communication and implementation to targeted members of the health system. Using our rapid and ongoing deployment as a case study of social science techniques applied to a pandemic, we describe how other health systems might leverage social science to improve their preparations and communications.

Data as representations: contextualizing qualitative and quantitative research strategies

2000 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaan Valsiner
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Main Issue ◽  
Research Strategies ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
The Social ◽  
New States

The opposition between “quantitative” and “qualitative” perspectives in contemporary social science is an organizational limitation that directs discussions of the topic away from the main issue - the adequacy of any kind of data in respect to the phenomena they represent. This is particularly complicated if the phenomena are known to include inherent dynamics, are modifiable by the research encounter, or develop towards new states of existence. It is often assumed that qualitative and quantitative methods are mutually exclusive alternatives within a methodological process that is itself unified. The article shows that quantitative methods are derivates of a qualitative process of investigation, which itself can lead to the construction of inadequate data. The issue of the representativeness of the data - qualitative or quantitative - remains the central unresolved question for the methodology of the social sciences. Errors in representation can be diminished by correction of methods through direct (experiential) access to the phenomena, guided by the researcher's educated intuition.

History and Social Science in the West

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Passmore
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
External Force ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The West ◽  
Grand Theory ◽  
Academic History ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter analyzes the relationship between history and various disciplines within the social sciences. Historians and social scientists shared two related sets of assumptions. The first supposition was of a world-historical shift from a traditional, hierarchical, religious society to a modern egalitarian, rational one. Second, history and social science assumed that progress occurred within nations possessed of unique ‘characters’, and that patriotism provided the social cement without which society could not function. Nevertheless, academic history seemingly differed from social science in that it was untheoretical and predominantly political. Yet historians focused on the nation’s attainment of self-consciousness, homogeneity, and independence through struggle against internal and external enemies—a history in which great men were prominent. Historians and sociologists unwittingly shared versions of grand theory, in which change was an external ‘force’ driven by the functional needs of the system, and in which meaning derived from measurement against theory, rather than from protagonists’ actions and beliefs.

Alfred Schutz and ethnomethodology: Origins and departures

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 59-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martyn Hammersley
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Alfred Schutz ◽  
Theory Formation ◽  
Harold Garfinkel ◽  
Social Inquiry ◽  
The Social ◽  
Early Influence ◽  
Alfred Schütz ◽  
The Relationship

The work of Alfred Schutz was an important early influence on Harold Garfinkel and therefore on the development of ethnomethodology. In this article, I try to clarify what Garfinkel drew from Schutz, as well as what he did not take from him, specifically as regards the task of social inquiry. This is done by focusing in detail on one of Schutz’s key articles: ‘Concept and Theory Formation in the Social Sciences’. The aim is thereby to illuminate the relationship between Schutz’s views on the character of social science and Garfinkel’s radical proposal for a re-specified focus of investigation. This is further pursued by examining an important debate about the link between Schutz and ethnomethodology.

Logics of History as a Framework for an Integrated Social Science

2008 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-553 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Steinmetz
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Social Structure ◽  
Traumatic Event ◽  
Social Structures ◽  
Event History ◽  
Historical Event ◽  
The Social ◽  
Historical Social Science ◽  
The Relationship

This essay surveys the contributions of William H. Sewell Jr.'sLogics of History and concludes that the book sketches a compelling agenda for an integrated historical social science. The author first summarizes Sewell's ontological and epistemological claims concerning social structure and event, history and temporality, and sociohistorical causality. The author then discusses five main areas in which ambiguities in Sewell's approach might be clarified or his arguments pushed farther. These concern (1) the relationship between historical event and traumatic event; (2) the idea of the unprecedented event or “antistructure”; (3) the theory of semiosis underlying Sewell's notion of a multiplicity of structures; and (4) the compatibilities and differences between the concepts of structure and mechanism (here the author argues that social structures are the distinctive “mechanisms” of the human or social sciences). Finally, (5) Sewell's call for “a more robust sense of the social” in historical writing locates the “social” mainly at the level of the metafield of power, or what regulation theory calls the mode of regulation; the author suggests a possible integration of this society-level concept with Pierre Bourdieu's theory of semiautonomous fields.

Can Law Learn from Social Science?

2001 ◽  
Vol 35 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 205-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Nelken
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Fundamental Problem ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Political Critique ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Styles Of Reasoning

In this paper I shall be discussing a fundamental problem in the relationship between law and the social sciences. Many social scientists have pointed out that the “pull of the policy audience” in legislative and administrative exercises and the confines of practical decision-making in legal settings can compromise the proper development of academic social science and blunt the edge of political critique. The danger is real enough. But they have given insufficient attention to the opposite concern which will be my topic in this article. Here the charge is that the introduction of social scientific styles of reasoning can have ill effects for legal practice by threatening the integrity of legal processes and the values they embody. How can social scientists be sure that they have properly understood the nature of law or the meaning and point of the legal rules, procedures, and institutions which they attempt to analyze and seek to improve? What warrant can they have that social scientific interpretation, at any level, does not end up creating law in its own image? If this is a genuine risk, what implications follow for the way law should learn from social science? I shall argue that there are no easy answers to these questions even, or especially, where law apparently welcomes contributions from social science.

scholarly journals A Practical Resource for the Social Sciences: A Book Review of Bruce Friedman’s The Research Toolkit - Problem Solving Processes for the Social Sciences

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Faubert
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
The Social ◽  
Student Reading ◽  
Social Science Researcher

Bruce D. Friedman provides an invaluable resource for social science researchers and practitioners to add to their “toolkit.” This book provides practical and straightforward guidance for understanding and conducting qualitative and quantitative research. As a social science researcher, sessional instructor, and doctoral student, reading this book answered important questions I had regarding the research process and implications of social science research. This review will discuss the primary tenets of the book as well as the relevance of this toolkit for student-researchers.

Truth and power, monks and technocrats: theory and practice in international relations

1996 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 301-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Wallace
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Social Science ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Past Century ◽  
The Past ◽  
University Curriculum ◽  
The Social ◽  
The University

‘The study of international relations is not an innocent profession.’1 It is not like the classics, or mathematics, an abstract logical training for the youthful mind. The justification for the place it has gained in the university curriculum rests upon utility, not on aesthetics. The growth of the social sciences in Western universities in the past century, and their remarkable expansion over the past thirty years, has been based upon their perceived contribution to better government, in the broadest sense. ‘The forever explosive relationship between social science and public policy’ has been embedded in the discipline of International Relations from the outset.2

scholarly journals Three Voices of Socio-Legal Studies

2001 ◽  
Vol 35 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 175-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malcolm M. Feeley
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Social Reform ◽  
Social Problems ◽  
Distinct Form ◽  
Legal Studies ◽  
The Social ◽  
Traditional Language ◽  
The Relationship

The connection between law and contemporary social science emerged as a consequence of the quest for social reform. As law became more instrumental, it also became more empirical, more concerned with policy. For this process, it turned to social science. Social science complied and has become an adjunct to law in the quest for solving social problems. As this partnership has developed, the relationship between law and social science has matured. Not only has social science sought to educate and influence law, it has also incorporated law into its own disciplinary concerns. Furthermore, the field of socio-legal studies may be on the verge of establishing itself as a separate and distinct discipline, independent of the practical concerns of law.The scholarly intersection of law and social science — or socio-legal studies, as I shall call it — now speaks with at least three voices addressed to at least three audiences. It speaks as policy analysis, a handmaiden to law. It also speaks in the traditional language of the social sciences. Thirdly, it may be gaining a voice of its own, reflecting a belief that law is a distinct form of ordering that merits its own position among the scholarly disciplines, separate from both scholarly fields and the professional concerns of law. At their core, each of these enterprises entails a distinct voice, a distinct audience, and a distinct agenda.

Charisma and objectivity

1988 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron A. Rhodes
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Theory ◽  
Ecclesiastical Authority ◽  
Science Theory ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Cross ◽  
The Relationship

This essay analyzes the relationship between two ideas central to the social sciences and religion: charisma and objectivity. My goal is to interpret a longstanding theoretical dispute regarding objectivity in the social sciences by referring to sectarian charisma and its challenge to the legitimacy of ecclesiastical authority. In illuminating a religious pattern revealed in the confrontation between social science theory and political philosophy, I suggest that objectivity represents a form of ‘secular’ charisma. I describe the cross-cutting relationship between charisma and objectivity and examine both the religious implications of objectivity and the epistemological implications of charismatic phenomena.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document