The paper discusses the differences and similarities between positivist and naturalistic paradigms (perspective) in knowing. Educational research is the formal, systematic application of the scientific method to the study of educational problems. The scientific method is an orderly process detailing a number of steps: recognition and definition of a problem; formulation of hypotheses; collection of data; analysis of data, and interpretation of data (Gay, Mills, & Airasian 2012). Nevertheless, the scientific method should be integrated with the non-scientific methods of knowing in order to foster our understanding. The non-scientific methods include: personal experience, inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning.
This paper focuses on the differences between positivist and naturalistic paradigms in knowing under the philosophical bases underpinning research, and their similarities in research. A paradigm, or worldview, is a set of basic beliefs used to guide actions and make sense of complex real-world issues (Patton, 2002). The origin of the term paradigm is to be found in Thomas Kuhn's book called: the structure of scientific revolution, which was first published in 1962 (Mouton, 1996). Thomas Kuhn coined the word 'paradigm' to mean established research traditions in a particular discipline.
Researchers adopt the paradigm that best represents their relationship to that worldview, and helps legitimise the practice of their research ( Creswell, 2013). In brief, the positivist associate themselves with the quantitative research approach, whereas the naturalistic researchers associate themselves with the qualitative approach. The philosophical bases underpinning research are: ontological, epistemological, axiological and methodological.
Jetzt kaufen
- Arbeit zitieren
- Michael Asante (Autor:in), 2025, Positivists and Naturalists Paradigm (Perspective) of Knowing, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1587209
