In this article, the author begins to trace the concept scientifically based research in federal legislation, in the Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences, and in the reports of several National Research Council committees. She also discusses how this concept has produced a certain scientism that has been deployed to attempt to control the field of educational research. She points out, however, that scientifically based research treats methodology as if it can be separated from epistemology and thus forgets that different bodies of knowledge and thought make different sciences possible. Thus, science is not one thing, as those who support scientifically based research often claim. Finally, the author suggests that our task as education scholars, researchers, and policy makers in this age of accountability is to engage rather than exclude epistemologies not our own that may help us produce different knowledge and produce knowledge differently.
Atkinson, E. (2004). Thinking outside the box: An exercise in heresy. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 111-129.
2.
Ball, S. J. (1997). Policy sociology and critical social research: A personal review of recent education policy and policy research. British Educational Research Journal, 23(3), 257-274.
3.
Ball, S. J. (2001). “You’ve been NERFed!” Dumbing down the academy: National Education Research Forum: “A National strategy-consultation paper”: A brief and bilious response. Journal of Education Policy, 16(3), 265-268.
4.
Beghetto, R. (2003). Scientifically based research (ERIC Digest 167). Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service, No. ED474304)
5.
Berliner, D. C. (2002). Educational research: The hardest science of all. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 18-20.
6.
Bloch, M. (2004). A discourse that disciplines, governs, and regulates: The National Research Council’s report on scientific research in education. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1).
7.
Bottomore, T. (Ed.). (1991). A dictionary of Marxist thought. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
8.
Bové, P. A. (1990). Discourse. In F. Lentricchia & T. McLaughlin (Eds.), Critical terms for literary study (pp. 50-65). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9.
Britzman, D. P. (1995). Is there a queer pedagogy? Or, Stop reading straight. Educational Theory, 45(2), 151-165.
10.
Burkhardt, H., & Shoenfeld, A. H. (2003). Improving educational research: Toward a more useful, more influential, and better-funded enterprise. Educational Researcher, 32(9), 3-14.
11.
Butler, J. (1995). For a careful reading. In L. Nicholson (Ed.), Feminist contentions: A philosophical exchange (pp. 127-143). New York: Routledge.
12.
Chatterji, M. (2004). Evidence on “what works”: An argument for extended-term mixed-method (ETMM) evaluation designs. Educational Researcher, 33(9), 3-13.
13.
Davies, P. (2000). The relevance of systematic reviews to educational policy and practice. Oxford Review of Education, 26(3 & 4), 365-378.
14.
Derrida, J. (1974). Of grammatology (G. C. Spivak, Trans.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. (Original work published 1967)
15.
Eisenhart, M. (2005a). Hammers and saws for the improvement of educational research. Educational Theory, 55(3), 245-261.
16.
Eisenhart, M. (2005b). Science plus: A response to the responses to Scientific Research in Education. Teachers College Record, 107(1), 52-58.
17.
Eisenhart, M., & DeHann, R. L. (2005). Doctoral preparation of scientifically based education researchers. Educational Researcher, 34(4), 3-13.
18.
Eisenhart, M., & Towne, L. (2003). Contestation and change in national policy on “scientifically based” education research. Educational Researcher, 32(7), 31-38.
19.
Elliott, J. (2001). Making evidence-based practice educational. British Educational Research Journal, 27(5), 555-574.
20.
Erickson, F. (2005). Arts, humanities, and sciences in education research and social engineering in federal education policy. Teachers College Record, 107(1), 4-9.
21.
Erickson, F., & Gutierrez, K. (2002). Culture, rigor, and science in educational research. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 21-24.
22.
Evans, J., & Benefield, P. (2001). Systematic reviews of educational research: Does the medical model fit?British Educational Research Journal, 27(5), 527-541.
23.
Fay, B. (1987). Critical social science: Liberation and its limits. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
24.
Feuer, M. J., & St. Pierre, E. A. (2005, May) Science etc.: From bicycle helmets to dialogue across differences. Plenary session presented at the 2005 International Congress on Qualitative Inquiry, Urbana, IL.
25.
Feuer, M. J., Towne, L., & Shavelson, R. J. (2002a). Reply to commentators on “Scientific Culture and Educational Research.”Educational Researcher, 31(8), 28-29.
26.
Feuer, M. J., Towne, L., & Shavelson, R. J. (2002b). Scientific culture and educational research. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 4-14.
27.
Flexner, A. (1910). Medical education in the United States and Canada: A report to the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Boston: Merrymount Press.
28.
Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language (A. M. Sheridan Smith, Trans.). New York: Pantheon Books. (Original work published 1971)
29.
Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). New York: Vintage Books. (Original work published 1975)
30.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977 (C. Gordon, Ed.; C. Gordon, L. Marshall, J. Mepham, K. Soper, Trans.). New York: Pantheon Books.
31.
Foucault, M. (1984). On the genealogy of ethics: An overview of work in progress. In P. Rabinow (Ed.), The Foucault reader (pp. 340-372). New York: Pantheon Books (Interview conducted 1983)
32.
(Reprinted from Panorama, April 25, 1984)
33.
Foucault, M. (1978/1991). Governmentality. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality (pp. 87-104). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34.
Gee, J. P. (2005). It’s theories all the way down: A response to Scientific Research in Education. Teachers College Record, 107(1), 10-18.
35.
Glass, G. V. (2004). An interview with Gene Glass (conducted by D. H. Robinson). Educational Researcher, 33(3), 26-30.
36.
Grace, G. (1995). School leadership: Beyond education management: An essay in policy scholarship. London: Falmer Press.
37.
Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and human interests (J. J. Shapiro, Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press. (Original work published 1968)
38.
Habermas, J. (1975). Legitimation crisis (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press. (Original work published 1973)
39.
Hammersley, M. (2001). On ‘systematic’ reviews of research literatures: A ‘narrative’ response to Evans & Benefield. British Educational Research Journal, 27(5), 543-554.
40.
Haraway, D. J. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575-599.
41.
Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
42.
Hassan, I. (1987). The postmodern turn: Essays in postmodern theory and culture. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
43.
Hiley, D. R., Bohman, J. F., & Shusterman, R. (1991). The interpretive turn: Philosophy, science, culture. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
44.
Howe, K. R. (2004). A critique of experimentalism. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 42-61.
45.
Howe, K. R. (2005a). The education science question: A symposium. Educational Theory, 55(3), 234-241.
46.
Howe, K. R. (2005b). The question of education science: Experimentism versus experimentalism. Educational Theory, 55(3), 307-321.
47.
Jameson, F. (1984). Foreward. In J.-F. Lyotard (Ed., G. Bennington & B. Massumi, Trans.), The post-modern condition: A report on knowledge (pp. viii-xxi). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1979)
48.
Jameson, F. (1998). The cultural turn: Selected writings on the postmodern. London: Verso.
49.
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
50.
Kaestle, C. F. (1993). The awful reputation of education research. Educational Researcher, 22(1), 23-31.
51.
Keenan, T. (1997). Fables of responsibility: Aberrations and predicaments in ethics and politics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
52.
Lagemann, E. C. (2000). An elusive science: The troubling history of education research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
53.
Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy with/in the postmodern. New York: Routledge.
54.
Lather, P. (1996, April). Methodology as subversive repetition: Practices toward a feminist double science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York City.
55.
Lather, P. (2004). This IS your father’s paradigm: Government intrusion and the case of qualitative research in education. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 15-34.
56.
Lather, P. & Moss, P. A. (2005). Introduction: Implications of the Scientific Research in Educationreport for qualitative inquiry. Teachers College Record, 107(1), 1-3.
57.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Cannella, G. S. (2004). Dangerous discourses: Methodological conservatism and governmental regimes of truth. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 5-14.
58.
Lyotard, J. F. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge (G. Bennington & B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1979)
59.
MacLure, M. (2005). “Clarity bordering on stupidity”: Where’s the quality in systematic review?Journal of Education Policy, 20(4), 393-416.
60.
Marcus, G. E., & Fischer, M. M. J. (1986). A crisis of representation in the social sciences. In G. E. Marcus & M. M. J. Fischer (Eds.), Anthropology as cultural critique: An experimental moment in the human sciences (pp. 7-16). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
61.
Maxwell, J. A. (2004a). Causal explanation, qualitative research, and scientific inquiry in education. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 3-11.
62.
Maxwell, J. A. (2004b). Reemergent scientism, postmodernism, and dialogue across differences. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 35-41.
63.
Mayer, R. E. (2000). What is the place of science in educational research?Educational Researcher, 29(6), 38-39.
64.
Moss, P. A. (2005a). Toward “epistemic reflexivity” in educational research: A response to Scientific Research in Education. Teachers College Record, 107(1), 19-29.
65.
Moss, P. A. (2005b). Understanding the other/understanding ourselves: Toward a constructive dialogue about “principles” in educational research. Educational Theory, 55(3), 263-283.
66.
Mosteller, F., Nave, B., & Miech, E. J. (2004). Why we need a structured abstract in education research. Educational Researcher, 33(1), 29-34.
67.
Mouffe, C. (1996). Radical democracy or liberal democracy? In D. Trend (Ed.), Radical democracy: Identity, citizenship, and the state (pp. 19-26). New York: Routledge.
68.
National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education (R. J. Shavelson & L. Towne, Eds.; Committee on Scientific Principles for Education Research). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
69.
National Research Council. (2004a). Implementing randomized field trials in education: Report of a workshop (L. Towne & M. Hilton, Eds.; Committee on Research in Education). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
70.
National Research Council. (2004b). Strengthening peer review in federal agencies that support education research (L. Towne, J. M. Fletcher, & L. L. Wise, Eds.; Committee on Research in Education). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
71.
National Research Council. (2005). Advancing scientific research in education (L. Towne, L. L. Wise & T. M. Winters, Eds.; Committee on Research in Education). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
72.
Olson, D. R. (2004). The triumph of hope over experience in the search for “what works”: A response to Slavin. Educational Researcher, 33(1), 24-26.
73.
Pellegrino, J. W., & Goldman, S. R. (2002). Be careful what you wish for—You may get it: Educational research in the spotlight. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 15-17.
74.
Popkewitz, T. S. (2004). Is the National Research Council committee’s report on scientific research in education scientific? On trusting the manifesto. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 62-78.
75.
Putnam, H. (2002). The collapse of the fact/value dichotomy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
76.
Rorty, R. M. (Ed). (1967). The linguistic turn: Essays in philosophical method. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
77.
Royce, J. (1891). Is there a science of education?Educational Review, 1, 23-24.
78.
Ruccio, D. F., & Amariglio, J. (2003). Postmodern moments in modern economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
79.
Ryan, K. E., & Hood, L. K. (2004). Guarding the castle and opening the gates. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 79-95.
80.
St. Pierre, E. A. (1997). Methodology in the fold and the irruption of transgressive data. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 10(2), 175-189.
81.
St. Pierre, E. A. (2000). The call for intelligibility in postmodern educational research. Educational Researcher, 29(5), 25-28.
82.
St. Pierre, E. A. (2002). “Science” rejects postmodernism. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 25-27.
83.
St. Pierre, E. A. (2004). Refusing alternatives: A science of contestation. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 130-139.
84.
Scheurich, J. J. (1994). Policy archaeology: A new policy studies methodology. Journal of Education Policy, 9(4), 297-316.
85.
Schwandt, T. A. (2005). A diagnostic reading of scientifically based research for education. Educational Theory, 55(3), 285-305.
86.
Serres, M. (with Latour, B.). (1995). Conversations on science, culture, and time (R. Lapidus, Trans.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. (Original work published 1990)
87.
Shaffer, D. W., & Serlin, R. C. (2004). What good are statistics that don’t generalize?Educational Researcher, 33(9), 14-25.
88.
Shavelson, R. J. (2004, April). Discussant for presentation by G. J. Whitehurst, Progress and prospects at the Institute of Education Sciences. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA(Session 25.012).
89.
Shavelson, R. J., Phillips, D. C., Towne, L., & Feuer, M. J. (2003). On the science of education design studies. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 25-28.
90.
Slavin, R. E. (2004). Educational research can and must address “what works” questions. Educational Researcher, 33(1), 27-28.
91.
Sorrell, T. (1991). Scientism: Philosophy and the infatuation with science. London: Routledge.
92.
Spivak, G. C. (1974). Translator’s preface. In J. Derrida, Of grammatology (G. C. Spivak, Trans., pp. ix-xc). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
93.
Spivak, G. C. (1993). Outside in the teaching machine. New York: Routledge.
94.
Sroufe, G. E. (1997). Improving the “awful reputation” of education research. Educational Researcher, 26(7), 26-28.
95.
Stenmark, M. (2001). Scientism; Science, ethics, and religion. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
96.
Stronach, I., & Hustler, D. (2001). Editorial: Old whine in new bottles. British Educational Research Journal, 27(5), 523-525.
97.
Sweet, R. W., Jr. (2004). The big picture: Where we are nationally on the reading front and how we got here. In P. McCardle & V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 13-44). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
98.
U. S. Government. (2002). White House Commission on complementary and alternative medicine policy. Retrieved September 5, 2005, from http://www.whccamp.hhs.gov/finalreport.html
99.
U. S. Government. (2005). Scientifically based evaluation methods. Federal Register, 70(15), 3585-3589.
100.
Walker, V. S. (2005). After methods, then what? A researcher’s response to the report of the National Research Council. Teachers College Record, 107(1), 30-37.
101.
Whitehurst, G. J. (2003, April). The Institute of Education Sciences: New wine and new bottles. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago(Session 29.011).
102.
Whitehurst, G. J. (2004). Evidence-based education. Power Point presentation at 2004 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Session 25.012). Retrieved January 30, 2005, from http://www.ed.gov/searchResults.jhtml
103.
Willinsky, J. (2001). The strategic education research program and the public value of research. Educational Researcher, 30(1), 5-14.
104.
Willinsky, J. (2005). Scientific research in a democratic culture: Or what’s a social science for?Teachers College Record, 107(1), 38-51.
