Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational Researcher
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gage, N. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Confronting Counsels of Despair for the Behavioral Sciences

N. L. Gage, Margaret Jacks professor of education and, by courtesy, professor of psychology, emeritus

Stanford University, School of Education, Stanford, CA 94305–3084. His areas of specialization are educational psychology and research on teaching

In recent decades, influential counsels of despair have asserted that the behavioral sciences, including much educational research, have failed to produce long-lasting generalizations. The failure, they say, is due to cultural and historical relativism and interaction effects. But those counsels rest more on logical possibilities than on empirical actualities. They depend on questionable assumptions about the spread and influence of knowledge, they involve contradictions, and they overemphasize the importance of interaction effects. In the last 20 years, moreover, meta-analysis has yielded knowledge concerning the impressive magnitude, consistency, and validity across contexts of many generalizations in the behavioral sciences and promising methods for quantifying and analyzing the generalizability of research results. These arguments, findings, and methods justify mitigating the despair and continuing the effort to build sciences of behavior.

Educational Researcher, Vol. 25, No. 3, 5-22 (1996)
DOI: 10.3102/0013189X025003005


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHERHome page
D. F. Labaree
Educational Researchers: Living With a Lesser Form of Knowledge
Educational Researcher, November 1, 1998; 27(8): 4 - 12.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHERHome page
W. W. Cooley, N. L. Gage, and M. Scriven
"The Vision Thing": Educational Research and AERA in the 21st Century Part 1: Competing Visions of What Educational Researchers Should Do
Educational Researcher, May 1, 1997; 26(4): 18 - 21.
[PDF]



AER home page RER home page EPA home page JEB home page RRE home page