St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
from 01.01.2021 until now
Russian Federation
UDK 30 Теория, методология и методы общественных наук в целом. Социография
The article is devoted to the relevant for modern humanities of the ratio of quantitative and qualitative research methods in the pedagogical field. Based on the separation of «nature sciences» and «cultural sciences» by V. Windelband and G. Rickert, the authors urge the scientific community to understand their difference at the present stage. Based on a comparative analysis of the objectives, object, subject and hypotheses of research (primarily thesis) in psychology and pedagogy, the specificity of each scientific discipline is revealed, which mediates specific tools to verify the validity and effectiveness of the results obtained. The most controversial issues include the use of mathematical statistics methods in pedagogical research, which, due to the ontology of the studied phenomena, do not adequately cover the observed changes, therefore, are not able to describe them. The most inadequate quantitative methods are used in the sphere of upbringing and adult education, where the processes of reflection, conception, self-determination and the construction of life scenarios in accordance with one’s own convictions take precedence, and the factors of life and prospects cannot be ignored. It is proposed at the stage of creating a pedagogical research program to pay special attention to the definition of the ontology of the phenomenon under study, in accordance with the chosen methodology, to fix the ratio «goal - means of achieving it - diagnostics / monitoring of the process - performance assessment», which will allow answering the question about the ratio / adequacy of quantitative and qualitative methods-proofs of its implementation. In addition, it is necessary to support the institution of dialogue platforms for scientific communities, within which representatives of different subject areas would come to a consensus on this issue and keep it in research and expert work.
research methods in pedagogy, statistical methods in pedagogy, measuring learning outcomes, measuring educational outcomes
1. Rikkert G. Nauki o prirode i nauki o kul'ture. – Sankt-Peterburg: Respublika, 1998. – 413 s.
2. Vindel'band V. Istoriya i estestvoznanie // Prelyudii: Filosofskie stat'i i rechi. – Moskva: Giperboreya, 2007. – S. 333–352.
3. Rozin V. M. Specifika i formirovanie estestvennyh, tehnicheskih i gumanitarnyh nauk. – Krasnoyarsk: KGU, 1989. – 197 s.
4. Kraevskiy V. V. Kachestvo pedagogiki i metodologicheskaya kul'tura pedagoga // Magistr: Nezavisimyy nauchno-pedagogicheskiy zhurnal. – 1991. – № 1. – C. 4–15.
5. Fokina Z. T. Nauki o prirode i nauki o kul'ture: tendenciya k integracii, prakticheskoe znachenie // Vestnik MGSU. – 2017. –№ 3 (102). – S. 293–302.
6. Izmenyayuschayasya teoriya vospitaniya: problemy i perspektivy razvitiya: monografiya / pod red. N. L. Selivanovoy i P. V. Stepanova. – Moskva: Pedagogicheskiy poisk, 2017. – 108 s.
7. Ilakavichus M. R. Vzroslyy v raznovozrastnom soobschestve neformal'nogo obrazovaniya: monografiya. – Sankt-Peterburg: IPOiOV RAO, 2011. – 90 s.
8. Dumcheva A. G. Diagnostika usloviy i rezul'tatov duhovno-nravstvennogo razvitiya i vospitaniya v obrazovatel'nom prostranstve // Sistemno-deyatel'nostnyy podhod v vospitanii. Duhovno-nravstvennoe razvitie i vospitanie – glavnye orientiry obrazovaniya. – Sankt-Peterburg: PGU, 2010. – S. 35–40.
9. Serikov V. V. Stanet li pedagogika naukoy? Razmyshleniya o metodologii V. V. Kraevskogo // Otechestvennaya i zarubezhnaya pedagogika. – 2016. – № 5 (32). – S. 15–27.
10. Skrockiy Yu. A. Stanovlenie lichnosti i psihicheskie otkloneniya. – Sankt-Peterburg: Aleteyya, 2009. – 352 s.
