Paradigms and Empirical Research

I am intrigued by the notion of applying different paradigms to research in disability, particularly in developmental disabilities. The only paradigm that has ever been presented to us as students has been that of the positivists. The "scientific" viewpoint has been dogmatically presented as the only true, empirical source of knowledge. If it can't be tested by the scientific method, it ain't so. This denies other world views or paradigms. The postpositivist view is closer to the positivits, but not as dogmatic.

Critical theory as a lens through which to conduct ethnographic studies seems to be a paradox. However, it does present a way to interject social justice into a Foucaultian discourse of general and special education. I hope that this post does not appear to be too convoluted to the reader. If it does, however, that in itself can be a cause for posting a comment. Please, if you do have a criticism of the content of this post, please cite sources so that I may dig deeper.

I will leave constructionism to explore another day. I am exploring this whole area and welcome comments, positive and negative.


Essential readings:
Biklen, D. & Duchan, J. (1994). "I Am Intelligent": The Social Construction of Mental Retardation. Journal of the Association of Persons with Severe Handicaps, v19 n3, 173-184.

Connor, D. (2005). Studying Disability and disability studies: Shifting paradigms of LD-A synthesis of responses to Reid and Valle. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 159-174.

Poplin, M. (1987). Self-Imposed Blindness: The Scientific Method in Education. Research in Special Education, 8(6), 31-37.

Reid, K. & Valle, J. (2004). The discoursive practice of learning disability: Implications for instruction and parent-school relations. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 466-481.