Abstract
This article offers a critical review of the philosophical approaches in educational research. In order to bring out the point clearly, the article illustrates the basic research processes and their philosophical basis. It is shown that the limitations posed by one method of inquiry prompted the development of another. However, there is no perfect method of inquiry and the choice depends on the experience, beliefs and the nature of research to be conducted. The paper proceeds to critically examine the various paradigms (positivism, postpositivism, emancipatory and Interpretive/constructivist Paradigm) in terms of social implications and how they affect research in education. More importantly they are analysed on the basis of how social life/experience affects the units in research and how the issue can effectively be dealt with methodologically for effective generalization. The paper closes by citing relevant examples of studies conducted in education that relates to basic beliefs and experience. The purpose of the study is to enable the learner to demonstrate critical understanding of the philosophical issues underpinning educational research. For example, the issues of ‘knowledge’, including epistemological and ontological issues; the nature of understanding and explanation; the philosophical understanding underlying the different paradigms (positivism, postposivism, emancipatory and Interpretive/constructivist Paradigm) positions and terminology underlying the different methods of empirical enquiry and their implications for research in professional contexts; the place of such contexts as objectivity, subjectivity, validity and generalisation in research; the relation of the researcher to the researched and philosophical exploration.
Introduction
Education is not only a fundamental process in society, it is in fact the only primary process that guarantees continuity of all societal processes. Therefore it is imperative to supply all the necessary support that develops and maintains this process. The acquisition of knowledge through philosophical approaches to research is the foundation on which the discipline has thrived throughout history. This paper seeks to critically review crucial available literature that explains the various paradigms that guide philosophical inquiry in the education profession and cite relevant examples of research in education.
In order to conceptualize the basis for the philosophical inquiry process in education it is crucial that one understands the basic research process. “Research in common parlance refers to the search for knowledge.” One can also define research as the scientific and systematic search for pertinent information on a specific topic; in fact research is an art of scientific investigation.” (Walliman, 2006) Common English dictionaries define research as a “careful investigation or inquiry especially through search for new facts in any branch of knowledge.” (Pring, 2000) The inquisitiveness nature of man is the mother of all research, which enables man to move from known to unknown.
Research is an academic activity and as such the term is utilized in technical terms. “It comprises defining and redefining problems, formulating of hypothesis or suggested solutions; collecting, organising and evaluating data; making deductions and reaching conclusions and lastly carefully testing the conclusions to determine whether they fit the formulating hypothesis.” (Walliman, 2006) The purpose of research is “to discover knowledge through the application of scientific procedures.” (Walliman, 2006) The aim is usually to find the truth that is unknown and hidden.
“The conceptual research is employed by philosophers and other thinkers to develop new concepts or reinterpret existing ones.” (Walliman, 2006) This kind of research is related to an abstract idea or principle. The research process entails the identification of own point of view regarding a problem in the society or occurrence of a certain phenomena; Extensive review of the existing literature regarding the problem or phenomena. Selection of a suitable research design which can be Quantitative, qualitative or mixed method; identify and choose the sources of your data; select appropriate data collection methods and instruments; analyse, report and disseminate the data for utilization and give future direction in that area of inquiry.
For the purpose of this article which is to demonstrate critical understanding of the philosophical issues underpinning educational research. The reference materials were carefully selected in order to provide a complete overview of philosophical approach to education. Published articles were also cited to provide first hand information on the ongoing research process in education.
Methodology
There are several methods used for educational research, the different methods are employed to offer answers to different areas of study. This is due to the complexity associated with education discipline and researchers are prevailed upon to be diverse in there truth seeking process. But behind these different methods there exists fundamental distinctions of philosophical origin. “This is evident by the mere existence of different opinions by different researchers which emanates from the underlying assumptions taken by them.” (Pring, 2000)From this point, there are several kinds of approaches a researcher may consider using to conduct his research. The approaches are derived from a philosophical basis and they include:
Observing what happens
It is common sense that in order for any one to know something new or different he/she must observe it. A careful observation will enable one to know what works and how. The observations are “conducted in a systematic way and recording” done. (Pring, 2000)The more observations one makes the more strength of the conclusions that will be made. Through this process a theory is gradually built up inductively from the observations recorded. Such a theory when ascertained on several occasions can be used as basis to predict outcomes of processes and guide practice. According to Pring, the main point to consider in conducting such observation is the consistency of approach. (2000) However, there can be a lot to be observed and the different researchers conducting the study may be interested in different things thereby giving different conclusions. To counter this anomaly an observation schedule is constructed, to give clear instructions to all the observers involved in the study. The schedule and instructions given can be used carefully by the researchers to arrive at to similar conclusions. In reference to this, it was hoped that a science could also be developed to for teaching curriculum just as it has been done for the observation study in the physical world. It is believed that many interactions take place between the teacher and the learner, therefore a systematic approach to learning needed to be developed. In such cases learner testing could be performed by manipulating the conditions for observation and recording the outcomes. Therefore examinations are used as means of generalizations to gauge student ability by application of systematic testing. This can further be used to determine how schools are managed or how the teachers perform their duties;
Experimenting
This is an aspect of scientific paradigm, which educational research may consider adopting. The favourable experimenting design is one with a control and an experimental group. The control and experimental groups should be carefully selected and big enough in order to allow the extrapolation of the results to the general population. The best method of sample selection therefore is the random approach, where the researcher compares the performance of two or more groups while referring to the controlled group. This kind of research is utilized in the medical sciences where it can be used to determine the effect of a drug by selecting patients to be put on medication using the drug, then observing and recording the results. However the Scientific paradigm raises questions concerning the individual differences accruing from distinctive consciousness and therefore some belief that the individuals should not be used in an experiment as one unit. In what ways can the approach be manipulated to reflect individual differences? People differ in many aspects and reconciling all the differences may not be a reality, as a result, general conclusions are made and the fact that one is human qualifies him/her to be included in the sample. Such challenges make one inquiry to be a rather difficult distinction between qualitative and quantitative research. In other words, the “subtle interconnections between the public and the private, the objective and the subjective, the physical and the mental, the personal and the social, is too often neglected by those who espouse research paradigms which embrace one side of dichotomy to the exclusion of the other.” (Pring, 2000)
Surveying what is the case
Survey provides an option that enables a researcher to escape the difficulties post by the experimental design. The survey method includes only the people that are relevant to the study in a way that general conclusions can be made and applied to the population of study. Pring applies this to the educational context by asserting that the ideas and not just the observable behaviours of the teachers or learners might be wanted.” Thus, a survey can simply be conducted by preparing a questionnaire and having a sample of the targeted population to give answers the questions. (2000) Moreover, when a researcher wants to collect responses from several schools observation cannot be employed. Survey does not however provide a perfect solution for problems associated with observation study; it often provides evidence that can be quantified. “Though there are sophisticated ways of collecting information and checking for reliability of the answers, limitations arise from the distinctive ways with which the researcher and the ones being researched look at the world. For example, two parents may both answer yes to the question ‘is your child’s school a successful one?’ but mean different things,” (Pring, 2000) whereby one could saying yes because of excellent academic performance while the other may be saying yes because of achievements in sports. This limitations can countered by reducing ambiguity in the questions asked. The questions need to be specific and easy to interpret for valid conclusions to be drawn from the research. This way, the effects of personal beliefs can be reduced. Pring suggests a solution to this problem by stating that, it is always reasonable to ask further what a person meant by answering the question in the way he or she did.(2000)
Interviewing
The solutions to the problems above associated with systematic observed from differential behaviours or with wide scale of surveys of what people believe or do not believe can be solved by the interviewing method. The researcher might modify the questions asked in an interview in order to meet some specific objectives. In the interviewed research, the interviewee has limited influence on the results because the researcher only picks the information that is relevant to the study. The interviewer should be able to know what the events in the interview mean for the interviewed because an “individual’s consciousness and intentions are significant factors in explanation of why things happen the way the do.” (Pring, 2000There seems to be a marked development of studies being conducted by interviews but some problems can still be observed. For instance, for the studies to be practical, individuals in that unique situation must be identified, uniqueness brought about by differential interpretation of events through ideas and beliefs by actors within the situation. Educational research has been criticized because the researchers who study it with aim of improving service delivery of effecting policy change have “nothing to say beyond particular events and contexts studied” and it is believed that the difficulties are accrued from the philosophical basis of the research. (Pring, 2000) Because every individual has a unique understanding of an event it becomes difficult for the interviewer to interpret what is implied by the interviewee.
Case studying
According to Pring, the emphasis upon the uniqueness of events or actions, arising from their being shaped by the meanings of those who are the participants in the situation, points to importance of the case study- the study of unique case of that particular instant ( 2000). Such study will be considered from the premise that any area of investigation in which one is involved can only be understood if the perspectives of both the researcher and the researched are taken into consideration. When this is considered then the conclusions of the research process can be validated and regarded as unique rather than used for generalization. “The unit studied may vary form an individual to a collection of institutions, the larger the unit the more the complex it becomes the unravelling of the interactions and the perspectives.” (Pring, 2000)
Epistemological issues in education research
The philosophical approach to research in education takes several paradigms. Scott & Usher define a paradigm is a way of looking at the world. It is made up of philosophical assumptions that guide and direct judgment and action. (1999) Educational research is categorized into paradigms that ultimately aim at unravelling the misery surrounding; the ontological, epistemological and methodological questions. The paradigms that guide philosophical understanding of education can be categorized into; “Basic beliefs (ontology, epistemology and methodology), positivism/postpositivism, interpretive/constructivist and emancipatory (accrued from close relationships of critical theory with Marxist theory).” (Scott & Usher, 1999)
In the early positivist thinking, the researcher and the subject of study were assumed to be independent that is the two had no influence on each other. The belief was modified by post positivists who recognized that the theories, hypotheses, and background knowledge can strongly influence the results of a study. “The positivism paradigm holds that objectivity is the standard to strive for in the research inquiry and” therefore the researcher should be neutral to safe gourd the integrity of the results of a research study. (Scott & Usher, 1999)
Epistemology has traditionally dealt with what distinguishes different types of knowledge with emphasis on the criteria that is used to make out the differences between what is valid knowledge and what is can be said to be simply an opinion or point of view. Epistemology is intended to answer the question how do we know what we think we know. “Thus epistemology raises the question of validity in knowledge,” creating a set of limits and mechanism to gourd what is within the limits. (Scott & Usher, 1999) Therefore, when applying epistemological rules, only certain kind of knowledge is considered valid. Epistemology relies on empirical investigation and therefore utilizes a lot on scientific study. It is now accepted that any research conducted, whether in social sciences, searching for knowledge and any other application is guided by questions in the epistemological paradigm. Indeed any research in any discipline has some epistemology in it. However, nowadays the importance of epistemology in research has been undermined. Many researches are being conducted without reference to the epistemological questions that arise. The researchers tend to assume that the epistemological issues will be taken care of by the positivist empiricism. This implies that educational research or inquiry is not bound by epistemological rules of validity alone. There are other numerous societal demands the inquiry needs to meet. Consequentially, it is not appropriate to argue that the paradigm of epistemology has been neglected. The social conceptions are embodied in an epistemology, the most powerful of which is the conception offers the methods and procedures of for natural science as the model for producing valid knowledge claims. This implies that the rules for policing knowledge claims are culturally located. Positivism is considered to be an epistemological premise which emphasizes the factual nature of the world. It asserts that since the only content of true statements is facts, it is only the scientific method that can reveal facts about the world. This gives a clear correspondence of what actually exists and how it is represented in knowledge. Scientific inquiry has been developed to include methodologies for investigation in the natural and social world. “Epistemology therefore uses positivism to equate science to validity. However, positivism cannot be said to be just an epistemology, it is more of a method of theorizing social reality.” (Scott & Usher, 1999)
The most vocal critique of the positivist/empiricist epistemology is Thomas Kuhn. His major work ‘the structure of scientific Revolutions played a significant part in changing our understanding of science, research and scientific method by doing two things-first, “focusing on the way scientist actually work for instance, on the practice of science rather than science self-understandings, and second showing that scientific discovery is located in the historical rather than the transcendental realm.” (Scott & Usher, 1999) He disputed the viewing of science as science from a philosophical point. Through a positivist/ empiricist epistemology, what science is supposed to do is not what it is actually doing. To him, science was not a tool for collecting regularities in the world but was discovering the truth about the world. Positivist/empiricist epistemology forms a picture of natural science and other scientific research as an individualistic affair, “as something which is carried out by individuals who detach themselves from the world they are researching.” Kuhn criticized the individualistic view and instead depicts “science as a socio-historical practice carried out in research communities within which individual researchers are located.” (Scott & Usher, 1999)
Paradigms
Positivism
Positivism is the main dominant paradigm that has guided the educational research process in the past. The word positivist relates to those accounts, what is clear, factual and open to observation. Currently the paradigm has been faced out and a new post positivist paradigm ushered in. According to Mertens, positivism is founded on rationalistic empiricist philosophy that was championed by Aristotle, John Locke, August Comte, Francis Bacon and Emanuel Kant. (2007)
Positivism is based on beliefs that the inquiry into the social life can be conducted in the same way as it is done for the natural world. That there is a technique of conducting research in the social life that is not value oriented. This paradigm mainly presented logical approach to inquiry into the social life which education is part of. As stated by Pring, the positivism theory is more historically associated with “Auguste Comte, a French Philosopher who lived in the nineteenth century although he worked with a tradition of empirism.(2000) This tradition was championed by pessimists who out rightly rejected philosophical and religious beliefs of the world that were considered to be non empirical. Comte extended the positivist agenda to the research into the society, social structures and human affairs. In this case a positivist explanation must consider not only the phenomena of the physical world but also those of the social world in what is referred to as the unity of sciences. The positivist agenda created a lot of discontent and there was a profound suspicion in the given explanations. Without evidences to explain the discontent, the positivism paradigm thrived in those days and in some societies it even took the role of religion. For example, “the London Positivist Society founded in 1897 opened a positivist temple in Chapel Street in the east of London.” (Pring, 2000) The positivist spirit was also reflected in the works of Rudolf Carnap who asserted that the foundations of all knowledge must be the immediate experiences that we have. Therefore the theories and bodies of knowledge which we develop must be ultimately reducible to basic statements about those experiences. In relation to this philosophers converged in Viena in what was referred to as the Vienna circle, united in what they believed as meaningful beliefs about the world. The main agenda of the Vienna circle therefore, was to show how meaningful statements in social studies can be logically reduced to basic statements about the immediate experiences. In other words, the Vienna circle filtered the statements about the immediate experiences and statements which weren’t logically satisfactory were considered pseudo statements and therefore could not fit into the positivism paradigm. The general mood among the philosophers was that there were many grammatically correct statements which defined the immediate experience and yet were false. “It was argued that a sentence was factually significant to any given person, if he knows how to verify the preposition it purports to express- that is, if he knows what observations would lead him, under certain conditions to accept the preposition as being true or reject it as being false.” (Pring, 2000) The argument had a fierce backing from a British professor, “A. J. Ayer, who was a member of the Vienna Circle for a short duration.” (Pring, 2000) It is imperative that the formulation of a statement is carefully considered to understand its implication. The emotional or situational conditions that prompted the one to utter the statement can not be used as criteria to validate it. Ayer argued that by putting forward a statement, one is claiming that something is the case. One is asserting that there exist certain properties on the feature he is talking about. For instance, it is either cloudy or not cloudy. I am either running or not. For proponents of the positivism paradigm, such statements were said to have blurred edges which could be cleared up to qualify them for description of the immediate experience they purport to explain. In the ensuing escalation, Ayer concludes that there are only two types of prepositions which can be said to be meaningful. First, statements that constitutes logical/mathematical expressions which are true tautologically. Secondly, statements that are empirical and some kind of science can be built upon them. “Science therefore shows the way of development of knowledge.” (Pring, 2000) To understand education then, one needed to comprehend the function it had on the society which would then vary from one society to another. In addition, within any society different schools serve different functions and this prompted a commanding research tradition within the education. The research was based on the fact that social structures define the purpose of particular institutions and social understanding within the given social setting. In this sense, positivism demands a clear distinction between the aims and values of education. “Description of an occurrence in terms of value is not subject to empirical enquiry;” therefore it is outside the limits of a significant discussion. (Pring, 2000) However, methods of ascertaining the values are within the boundaries of meaningful discussion. Therefore in essence research should show how a certain conclusion might be arrived at and not the say what it should be like.
Postpositivism
Due to its inefficiencies caused by the positivism paradigm it was eventually discredited during the run up to the Second World War and was replaced by the postpositivism and research methodologist such as Stanley and Campbell embraced post positivist paradigm. They shared the view that observations are mainly composed of theory and the making of sophisticated scientific instruments and methodologies for data presentation generally entail the “explicit or implicit acceptance of well-developed scientific theories, over and above the theories being tested. And they rejected the position that observations are laden with only a single theory paradigm.” (Mertens, 2007)The above statement represents the theoretical viewpoint that is presently applied as in education and psychology as the postpositivist paradigm
3. Interpretive/constructivist Paradigm
“Despite the recognition by postpositivists that facts are theory laden, other researchers questioned the underlying assumptions and methodology” of that paradigm. Several distinct labels have been used for the interpretive/constructivist paradigm, the utilized label was chosen on because it has a more clear reflection of the basic doctrine of this theoretical paradigm. (Mertens, 2007) “This paradigm was born out of the philosophy of Edmund Husserl’s phenomenology and Wilhelm Dilthey’s and several other German philosophers’ of the interpretive understanding called “hermeneutics which is the study interpretive understanding or meaning. (Mertens, 2007)This concept was utilized by historians to analyse historical documents in order to understand what the author intended to communicate within the time and culture the documents were written. According to Mertens, Interpretive/ constructivist researchers use the term more often to view the meaning of something from a different situational angle or standpoint. The interpretive/ constructivist paradigm is guided by the assumption that knowledge is created socially by individuals undertaking the research process and “the researchers should attempt to understand the complex world of lived experience from the point of view of those who live in it”. (Mertens, 2007) The paradigm emphasizes that research results from the values of the researchers but cannot be dependent on them.
The Interpretive/constructivist Paradigm on ontology issues
Ontology asserts that “reality is socially constructed and therefore multiple mental” creations can be held. (Mertens, 2007) Some of which may be conflicting with one another, and perceptions of reality may vary in the entire course of the research process. or instance, according to Mertens the concepts of disability, feminism, and minority are socially constructed phenomena that mean different things to different people. In other words, we are all constructivists if we think that the mind is active in the creation of knowledge. In effect the constructivism concept affirms that human beings do not find or discover knowledge, they make or build it. Constructivist researchers escalate further by “rejecting the notion that there is an objective reality that can be known and take the stance that the researcher’s goal is to understand the multiple social constructions of meaning and knowledge.” (Mertens, 2007)
Emancipatory Paradigm (critical theory)
The interpretive/constructivist paradigm has been criticized by “positivists, postpositivists and a group of researchers who represent the emancipatory paradigm”; the group constitutes of Marxists, critical theorists, participatory action researchers, feminists, ethnic minorities and persons with disabilities. (Mertens, 2007) The proponents of the emancipatory paradigm argue that the interpretive/constructivist paradigm did transform the rules; however it did not change the nature of the game. “The emancipatory paradigm directly addresses the politics in research by confronting social oppression at whatever levels it occurs. Thus, emancipatory researchers go beyond the issue of the powerful sharing power with the powerless and relinquish control of the research to the marginalised groups.” (Mertens, 2007) The paradigm was developed by researchers who were concerned about the issues affecting the minorities in the society. These include; the perception that the dominant research paradigms were created from white, able bodied male perspective. Secondly, just as the “overall population in the United States, the total school age population is becoming poorer and more racially and ethnically diverse.” (Mertens, 2007) Thirdly, by ethnic-minority psychologists that white researchers do not understand or are biased when conducting research in the minority groups. Other issues that resulted in the creation of the emancipatory paradigm were; the differences in school achievements by gender, race, class and disability, the absence of literature on the children of the minority groups in the “standard guild journals of the American Psychological Association and American Educational Research Association. Lastly, due to the need for informed practitioners to form partnerships with researchers to plan and conduct research evaluation in meaningful a way.” (Mertens, 2007)
The table below offers an insight in the basic believes concerning all the paradigms affecting research in education.
Table: basic beliefs of Alternative Inquiry Paradigms
Published studies of enquiry in education
“Culture of Mathematics in Schools” (Na’ilah, Hand & Taylor, 2010)
A research was conducted to determine the culture of mathematics in “Basketball players of black African American origin”. (Na’ilah, Hand & Taylor, 2010) It was found that students had their own reservations about the mathematics due their experiences. Most of them did not see the need of teaching mathematics, this view accrued from the deep seated negative attitudes in the students that depicted Mathematics as a difficult subject. The social status of this young men has denied them access to quality “mathematics teaching or resources at the school level that might allow them to use mathematics to challenge existing hierarchies and injustices and at the same time to create a more prosperous future for themselves.” (Na’ilah, Hand & Taylor, 2010) The responses given by the “Basketball players reflect their social and political position in the American society.” (Na’ilah, Hand & Taylor, 2010) To counter such a problem, there needs to be a liaison between teachers, researchers and policy makers. It has to entail a “paradigm shift with respect to the purposes for teaching mathematics and desired outcomes. When these shifts occur, multiple cultures will be part and parcel of the math classroom, and no longer will boundary between domain and cultural knowledge be constructed so forcefully by our collective assumptions.” (Na’ilah, Hand & Taylor, 2010)
In the above study the researcher utilizes philosophical approach in his/her research by proceeding to analyse the social factors that may be the cause of the negative perception on mathematics. Thus, ontological issues can be observed by the social description offered by the researcher; The social status of this young men has denied them access to quality “mathematics teaching or resources at the school level that might allow them to use mathematics to challenge existing hierarchies and injustices and at the same time to create a more prosperous future for themselves.” (Na’ilah, Hand & Taylor, 2010). The researcher utilizes all the methodological approach described by the different paradigms to conduct the researcher and come up with a valid conclusion.
“Emotional capital and education: theoretical insights from Bourdieu” (Zembylas, 2007)
This article explores the current application of the “notion of ‘emotional capital’ in educational research, and try to find out possibilities as a conceptual tool in future empirical work in educational research.” (Zembylas, 2007) The researcher has put emphasis on extending the work for application in other areas in the field of education. The researcher asserts the need for “social and political analysis for transformation of the emotional capital in education.” (Zembylas, 2007) To justify his point the researcher explains that the use of emotional capital concept as an instrument ensures that emotions are taken care of in education and this also ensures that, the research focus is focus is widened in “terms of socio-political implications.” (Zembylas, 2007)
In the above study; “Emotional capital and education: theoretical insights from Bourdieu” (Zembylas, 2007) the researcher explores the concept of emotional capital and analyses it as a future tool for empirical research in education. This raises the issue of validity of the current research in education. Thus the study entails all the philosophical approaches that are applied while conducting educational research. The paradigms that support empirical approach in educational research are well represented in the above inquiry.
“Empowering the local through education? Exploring Community Managed Schooling in Nepal” (Carney, Bista & Agergaard, 2007)
In this research study the author investigates the effects of involvement of various stake holders in the education system in Nepal. External donor agencies are particularly exerting much control on the countries schools. In the recent past there have been concerted efforts to influence and overhaul the system. The World Bank is on the forefront in this initiative. However, the efforts are depicting the state is a major obstacle in the much needed change in the community schools. This portrait has been facilitated by the decade long absence of proper state management of the countries educational issues. However, the project aimed reforming the education system lacks the involvement of the local communities although it is entitled a ‘community project’ and may just create an alien system inconsistent with the needs of the society. In the ensuing confusion various stake holders including the school management are grappling with how to implement the reforms with many adopting the private school model. From the analysis it is clear that the educational reforms may not be able to satisfy the educational needs of the locals because it is not based on their experiences and beliefs.
In the above study the researcher questions the implementation of education reforms without due involvement of the locals. Thus, the researcher is applying the philosophical approach to explain that without the involvement of the local communities the education reforms cannot succeed. All the relevant philosophical approach accruing from the various paradigms explaining the research in education have been utilized by the researcher to validate the results.
Conclusion
Conducting research has been the main foundation for development and improvement of the social welfare of the human race. This has been facilitated by the education sector which provides the required skill needed to pass over and maintain a highly competitive skilled man power for societal continuity. The foundation of the research and hence the education itself is the philosophy that has been developed over the years. This paper sought to analyze the philosophical approaches to research in education. All the philosophical issues underpinning educational research in education have been critically examined. The issues of ‘knowledge’ and epistemology have been carefully examined and their relationship to the various paradigms drawn. The issue of nature of truth and its verification, what counts objectivity and subjectivity have been critically analysed in relation to the four paradigms (positivism, postposivism, emancipatory and Interpretive/constructivist Paradigm) affecting research in education.
Reference
Carney, S., Bista, M., & Agergaard, J., 2007. Empowering the ‘local’ through education? Exploing Community-managed Scooling in Nepal :Oxford Review of Education, 33(5), pp. 611-628.
Mertens, D. (2007) Research Methods in Education and Psychology
Na’ilah, S, N., Hand, V., & Taylor, E, V., 2010. Culture and Mathematics in School: Boundaries Between “Cultural” and “Domain Knowledge in the Mathematics Classroom and Beyond:Review of Research in Education: Sage publications.com.
Pring, R. (2000) Philosophy of Educational Research.
Scott, D., Usher, R. (1996) Understanding Educational Research.
Walliman, N., 2006. Your Research Project, 2nd ed. New Delhi, Vistaar Publications.
Zembylas, M., 2007. Emotional Capital and Education: Theoritical Insights From Bourdieu. British Journal of Educational Studies 55(4), pp. 443-463.