This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Salomon, G. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Transcending the Qualitative-Quantitative Debate: The Analytic and Systemic Approaches to Educational Research

University of Arizona, College of Education, Tucson, Arizona 85721. His specialization is educational psychology and communication

There is a distinction to be made that transcends the one between the quantitative and qualitative research paradigms. It is a distinction between that kind of research that suits best the study of causal relations among selected variables and the study of complex learning environments undergoing change. Two studies illustrating the differences lead to the formulation of two approaches–the analytic and the systemic–which differ from each other in terms of the epistemological assumptions that underlie them. These differences are not accounted for by other contrasts such as "'basic-applied" or "quantitative-qualitative." The analytic approach mainly assumes that discrete elements of complex educational phenomena can be isolated for study, leaving all else unchanged. The systemic approach mainly assumes that elements are interdependent, inseparable, and even define each other in a transactional manner so that a change in one changes everything else and thus requires the study of patterns, not of single variables. It is, however, further argued that the validity of each approach is limited by the combination of assumptions made, phenomena chosen for study, questions asked, and research methodologies employed. Thus, the two approaches, by epistemological necessity, have to be employed complementarily.

Educational Researcher, Vol. 20, No. 6, 10-18 (1991)
DOI: 10.3102/0013189X020006010


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Chatterji Evidence on "What Works": An Argument for Extended-Term Mixed-Method (ETMM) Evaluation Designs Educational Researcher, June 1, 2005; 34(5): 14 - 24. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. Torff No Research Left Behind Educational Researcher, October 1, 2004; 33(7): 27 - 31. [PDF]

				S. M. Miller, M. W. Nelson, and M. T. Moore Caught in the Paradigm Gap: Qualitative Researchers' Lived Experience and the Politics of Epistemology American Educational Research Journal, January 1, 1998; 35(3): 377 - 416. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. A. Alexander, J. M. Kulikowich, and S. K. Schulze How Subject-Matter Knowledge Affects Recall and Interest American Educational Research Journal, January 1, 1994; 31(2): 313 - 337. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. M. Royer, C. A. Cisero, and M. S. Carlo Techniques and Procedures for Assessing Cognitive Skills Review of Educational Research, January 1, 1993; 63(2): 201 - 243. [Abstract] [PDF]