Evolution in Research and Theory: A Study of Prominent Researchers

Abstract

The mode of scientific inquiry that was dominant in the 1950s and early 1960s is described, and the work of four prominent sets of researchers of that period is analyzed in an effort to determine the degree to which the research that was conducted actually followed the tenets of the prevailing philosophy. Then, the much more complicated conditions of the present are examined in the light of the multiple, divergent, and conflicting ideologies that are now being espoused. Four currently prominent sets of researchers are selected, and both the theoretical and methodological characteristics of their efforts are assessed. The general conclusion of the analysis is that the researchers of the present are ignoring the criticisms of functionalism as well as the new approaches being advocated, and they are still working loosely within the framework of logical positivism.

The Panorama of the Last Decade’s Theoretical Groundings of Educational Leadership Research: A Concept Co-Occurrence Network Analysis

“…The mounting dissatisfaction in the educational leadership research community, amid the rising influence of logical positivism in social sciences, led to the theory movement in the 1950s and 1960s. Departing from the prescriptive nature of the field, the theory movement favored a cumulative, generalizable knowledge base built from rigorous, hypothetical-deductive empirical inquiries and aimed at building a unique theory for educational leadership (Culbertson, 1988; Getzels, 977; Griffiths, 1983; Halpin, 1970). What was advocated for in the theory movement thrust the field into the stage of normal science.…”

“…As a result, the closed-system theories were replaced by open-system theories; universal or grand theories of organizations were replaced by contingency theory (Hoy, 1982). Given the substantial influence of the social and behavioral sciences on educational leadership (Boyan, 1981; Culbertson, 1988; Griffiths, 1983), Hoy (1982) sternly warned that “uncritically borrowing of concepts or models from the social and behavioral sciences does not provide useful theory” (p. 3). He further argued that the emergent theories in educational leadership should be situationally oriented, as well as strike a balance between theoretical complexity and utility.…”

The field of educational administration

“…The spirit of logical positivism originated in social sciences coupled with common dissatisfaction with the prescriptive nature of the field led to the emergence of the "theory movement" which defined the knowledge in EA in accordance with conventions of a modernist, positivistic, rational-empiricist approach to science (Culbertson, 1988;Griffiths, 1983;Willower, 1996). In its proponents' optimistic view (e.g.…”

“…classical theory, functionalist theory, behaviorism, human relations theory, phenomenology, symbolic interaction, neo-symbolic interaction or critical theory) (Bates, 1993;Clark-Lindle and Foster, 2004)[12], without dominance of any one of them (Griffiths, 1983)[13]. This internal diversification was related to professors' own allegiance to differing disciplines or to differing ideologies within these disciplines (Bates, 1980).…”

Information Technology

“…Recent papers dealing with this subject were reviewed (Culberston, 1988;Evers, 1988;Griffiths, 1983Griffiths, , 1988McCarthy, 1986;Riffel, 1986;Sander & Wiggins, 1985;Willower, 1987). None of them mentioned ITiEA.…”