Types of Knowledge of Education -- 1
Types of Knowledge of Education
Created through Disciplined Inquiry
Theodore Frick
Instructional Systems Technology Department
School of Education
Indiana University Bloomington
September 4, 2004
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 2
Abstract
Disciplined inquiry in educationshould result in knowledge about education.
Types of knowledge about education should not be conflated with inquiry methods
commonly characterized as qualitative and quantitative. Inquiry methods, if disciplined,
result in knowledge. All knowledge claims are not of the same kind or value.
Axiology is a branch of philosophy which concerns judgments about value. In
general, values are viewed as instrumental or intrinsic. Instrumental values characterize
what something is `good for'. Intrinsic values describe inherent worth, what is `good in
itself'. Thus, axiological knowledge of education can be characterized respectively as
praxiological or philosophical. Furthermore, knowledge of education which is not
axiological is scientific. Scientific knowledge of education characterizes `what is'.
Scientific knowledge has epistemic value and characterizes matters of truth, not
goodness.
Moreover, the scope of knowledge claims can range from that which represents
unique or delimited states of affairs (i.e., situated knowledge) to that which is
generalizable across time and space (i.e., theoretical knowledge).
When crossing these two dimensions, a six-fold typology is created:
1. Situated scientific knowledge of education
2. Theoretical scientific knowledge of education
3. Situated praxiological knowledge of education
4. Theoretical praxiological knowledge of education
5. Situated philosophic knowledge of education
6. Theoretical philosophic knowledge of education.
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 3
Each type of knowledge has value in its own right. Different considerations
obtain for inquiry methodologies and relevant criteria for creating and extending each
knowledge type. For example, empirical data are relevant for justification of Types 1 to
4, whereas Types 5 and 6 require rational argument based on moral or ethical principles
and their justification. Finally, it is important to see relationships among the knowledge
types so as to not get trapped into an overly narrow perspective regarding research
methods and to be careful not to use one knowledge type to draw unwarranted
conclusions about another.
Overview
Research is disciplined inquiry. Disciplined inquiry is the rational way to settle
doubt and so to fixate belief (C.S. Peirce, 1958). Disciplined inquiry contrasts with the
methods of tenacity, authority and agreeableness to reason.
The major purpose for doing disciplined inquiry is to create or extend knowledge.
The outcome of research is knowledge. Inquiry methods are a means to that end. We
should always begin inquiry by identifying the kind of knowledge we hope to create and
the questions we want to answer. Then we should choose whatever inquiry method or
methods that will help answer those questions.
Hammers Versus Screwdrivers When We Really Need a Saw
Much of the debate over qualitative versus quantitative research methods in
education might dissipate if distinctions are made between methods of research and
outcomes of research (Frick & Reigeluth, 1992). Imagine for a moment three carpenters
arguing about which tool is best.
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 4
Quanta: "Hammers and nails are clearly superior."
Qualia: "I disagree. Screwdrivers and screws are much more effective."
Performa: "You're both wrong. Saws are best for cutting wood."
Quanta: "Who said anything about cutting wood? I thought we were
talking about fastening wood together."
Qualia: "Right. Who needs saws?"
Performa: "I do. I need to cut this board in half."
Clearly, Quanta and Qualia have a different outcome in mind than Performa. From this
perspective, their debate is misguided. Yet this debate parallels that among educational
research methodologists who fail to distinguish between outcomes of research when
comparing methods. We engage in disciplined inquiry to create knowledge (Steiner,
1988; Peirce, 1958). Not all knowledge is the same. The kind of knowledge about
education that we create through disciplined inquiry determines what research methods
are appropriate and useful.
Purpose of Disciplined Inquiry
The purpose or intent of a research investigation determines the kind of
knowledge that is created. There is a distinction between describing "what is" and "what
is of value". Steiner (1988) describes the difference as follows:
(S)cience and praxiology differ as to the content they add to knowledge. Science
does not add any axiologicalcontent to knowledge as philosophy and praxiology
do. Yet the axiological content of praxiology differs from that of philosophy.
Praxiology treats of instrumental value, while philosophy treats of intrinsic value.
In other words, praxiology treats of effectiveness, while philosophy treats of
worthwhileness. To treat of effectiveness is to treat of what means are effective
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 5
with respect to a given end or ends. Effectiveness, of course, can be established
by sensory observation, but worthwhileness cannot. (p. 25)
Steiner (1988) considers science, praxiology and philosophy to be kinds of theoretical
knowledge, unbounded by time and space.
Scope of Knowledge Created through Disciplined Inquiry
There is also a distinction between the particular and the general: between what is
unique in contrast to what is common to many instances. This distinction has to do with
the scope of knowledge created by disciplined inquiry. If the scope of knowledge is
descriptive of a unique case (educational situation, program, product, design), then
generalization beyond that case is not warranted. Such knowledge is situated. If the
scope of knowledge is unbounded by time and space, then it is theoretical.
Cronbach, Gleser, Nanda and Rajaratnam (1972) referred to different universes of
generalization in the context of dependability of measures, which became known as
generalizability theory (Shavelson & Webb, 1991). Here we are discussing the scope of
knowledge claims, not scores or profiles. However, the concept is similar.
For example, the scope of the claim, "Socrates is mortal," is the particular human,
Socrates. Alternatively, the scope of the claim, "All humans are mortal," is unbounded
by time and space. To observe the death of Socrates does not by itself warrant the
broader generalization. Different kinds of verification are required for situated and
theoretical knowledge claims.
I believe that science (`what is'), praxiology (`what is instrumental'), and
philosophy (`what ought to be') can also be situated ­ i.e., bounded by time and space,
and deal with particulars. Furthermore, the typology that follows also differs from
Steiner's notions of qualitative and performative knowledge.
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 6
A Six-Fold Typology of Knowledge of Education
When crossing these two dimensions ­ the purpose of disciplined inquiry and the
scope of the knowledge created ­ there are six types of research outcomes, as illustrated
in the table below.
Table 1. Six types of knowledge of education
Scope of Knowledge of Education Created
through Disciplined Inquiry
Purpose of Inquiry Situated Theoretical
Scientific: `What is?' 1 2
Praxiological: `What is
instrumental?'
3 4
Philosophical: `What
ought to be?'
5 6
Type 1 and 2 knowledge represent matters of epistemic value ­ i.e., truth.
Correspondence between the descriptions and what is observed is important.
Type 3 and 4 knowledge represent matters of utility ­ i.e., what something is
`good for'. What is important is how well something works ­ either a particular product
or program, or a set of generalizable principles, heuristics or guidelines for effective
education.
Type 5 and 6 knowledge represent matters of intrinsic value ­ i.e., description and
evaluation of states of affairs in education that ought to be. Standards, norms or criteria
are important in evaluation of specific situations as well as philosophic theory.
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 7
Scientific and praxiological knowledge claims rely on empirical justification ­ by
comparing knowledge claims with what we observe through our senses, or through
measuring devices or instruments of observation which extend our senses. For example,
if we want to know if it is raining outside at the moment, or if we want to know if
precipitation is associated with the presence of clouds in the sky, we can verify
empirically whether or not these claims agree with our observations. Empirical
justification does not necessarily imply experimental methods. Naturalistic observation
of existing states of affairs in the world is empirical. Experimental methods are empirical
as well, but states of affairs are instead manipulated in order to make causal inferences.
Philosophic knowledge claims should not rely on empirical justification. To
conclude `what ought to be' on the basis of `what is' is to commit the naturalistic fallacy
(Steiner, 1988). For example, it is empirically true that murder and wars do exist and
have existed. However, these empirical facts do not justify the claim that `humans ought
to kill each other.' Indeed, this is inconsistent with the moral principles of benevolence
and justice. From these principles (axioms) we would infer that `humans should respect
one another,' and if we do respect humans, then we `ought not kill each other.'
Type 1 Knowledge: Situated, Scientific
This is empirically justified knowledge that describes a specific situation in
education.
Examples of knowledge claims: King (1998) observed several museum schools in
Washington, D.C, New York City, and Minneapolis, Minnesota. In this multiple-case
study she described in rich detail and supplemented with photographs how these
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 8
particular public schools and museums worked together to provide educational
experiences for elementary and secondary students. This is situated knowledge, and
describes what was the case in 1997 when she observed these museum schools.
A further example of situated, scientific knowledge is statistics about children
with disabilities in the United States over a ten-year period:
Between 1986 and 1996, the number of students with learning disabilities (LDs)
who were educated in regular classrooms increased by nearly 20 percent, whereas
the percentage served in resource rooms or separate classes decreased
substantially (National Center for Educational Statistics, 1999). (Holloway, 2001,
p. 86)
Useful research methods: Case study research, historical research methods,
naturalistic methods, descriptive statistics.
Type 2 Knowledge: Theoretical, Scientific
This is empirically justified knowledge which describes elements, patterns or
relationships which are true in general.
Examples of knowledge claims: William Glasser (1998) has developed what he
calls `Choice Theory'. This theory claims that all human behavior is purposeful in order
to meet one or more basic needs. He classifies needs for: survival, love and belonging,
power, freedom, and fun (Erwin, 2004).
Maccia and Maccia (1966) developed a theory of school systems based on general
systems theory, information theory, di-graph theory and set theory. One of their 201
hypotheses is 12a: "If school resource increases, then school filtrationness decreases."
(p. 139) Another hypothesis is 64a: "If school hierachically orderness increases, then
school vulnerableness increases and school flexibleness decreases." (p. 145)
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 9
Estep (2003) has developed the Theory of Immediate Awareness. In her theory,
she claims that "(k)nowing how is far more fundamental in our intelligence than
knowledge that because it is logically, epistemologically, and temporally prior to our
knowing propositional (knowledge that) statements." (p. xvii)
Useful research methods: Experiments, surveys, observational studies, metaanalyses
­ with statistical inferences from sample to population.
Type 3 Knowledge: Situated, Praxiological
This is empirically justified knowledge which describes the instrumental value of
a particular educational product, program or situation. The focus is on effectiveness how
well the design or solution works or functions.
Examples of knowledge claims: Corry, Frick & Hanson (1997) described the
design process for improving the effectiveness of the Indiana University Bloomington
Web site. They conducted usability tests of the existing 1995 Website and of a new
design with representative members of the target audiences. Their usability tasks
required prospective students, parents, faculty and staff, and current undergraduate and
graduate students to attempt to find information based on frequently asked questions at
IUB. Findings from usability tests:
Success rates. Subjects using the proposed Web site found many more locations
containing answers to the most frequently asked questions than did subjects using
the existing Web site.
Efficiency. When subjects found answer locations in both the existing and the
proposed Web sites, in most cases they were able to find the location two or three
times faster using the proposed Web site. Subjects of the proposed Web site were
able to find most answer locations in less than one minute.
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 10
Alphabetical list of links. One of the satellite pages of the existing Web site
consistently performed better than the proposed site. This page contained a long,
alphabetized list of all on-line departments. (p. 71)
As a further example, Shavelson and Towne (2002) discuss instances of
evaluations of particular program effectiveness:
... among the education programs whose effectiveness have been evaluated in
randomized trials are the Sesame Street television series (Bogatz and Ball, 1972),
peer-assisted learning and tutoring for young children with reading problems
(Fuchs, Fuchs, and Kazdan, 1999), and Upward Bound (Myers and Schirm,
1999). And many of these trials have been successfully implemented on a large
scale, randomizing entire classrooms or schools to intervention conditions. (p.
112)
It should be noted here that Shavelson and Towne's use of the notion of `scientific
research in education' is a subset of what is being referred to in the present article as
`disciplined inquiry' (note 1).
Useful research methods: Usability testing, formative and summative evaluation,
experiments to compare effectiveness.
Type 4 Knowledge: Theoretical, Praxiological
This is empirical knowledge which describes the instrumental value of a
methodology for creating aneffective educational state of affairs, an educational product,
or program. In other words, such knowledge constitutes generalizable prescriptions,
processes, principles or heuristics which are means to an end.
Examples of knowledge claims: David Merrill (2002) posits five of what he calls
`first principles' of instruction. He claims that learning will be less effective if one or
more of these principles is absent from instruction:
1. Learning is promoted when learners are engaged in solving real-world
problems.
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 11
2. Learning is promoted when existing knowledge is activated as a foundation
for new knowledge.
3. Learning is promoted when new knowledge is demonstrated to the learner.
4. Learning is promoted when new knowledge is applied by the learner.
5. Learning is promoted when new knowledge is integrated into the learner's
world. (pp. 44-45)
The means are learner engagement in real-world problem solving, activation of existing
knowledge, demonstration, application and integration. The end is promotion of
learning.
Nelson (1999) prescribes a nine-step process for collaborative problem solving in
education. She claims that this process is needed (the means) in order to make
collaborative problem solving work optimally (the end):
1. Instructor and learners establish and build their readiness to engage in
collaborative group work.
2. Either the instructor or the learners form small, heterogeneous work groups,
and then the groups engage in norming processes.
3. Groups engage in a preliminary process to define the problem they will work
on.
4. Each group defines what roles are necessary to accomplish the design plan
and then assigns them.
5. The group engages in the primary, iterative CPS process.
6. Groups begin to finalize their solutions or projects.
7. The instructor and learners engage in activities to help them reflect and
synthesize their experiences.
8. The instructor, and, when appropriate, the learners access their products and
processes.
9. The instructor and learners develop an activity to bring closure to the learning
event. (pp. 257-266)
Useful research methods: Formative research methodology for developing
instructional theory (Reigeluth & Frick, 1999), analysis of patterns in time (Frick, 1990).
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 12
Type 5 Knowledge: Situated, Philosophical
This is knowledge which describes the worthwhileness (intrinsic value) of a
unique state of affairs in education.
Examples of knowledge claims: Jorgenson & Vanosdall (2002) are critical of the
risks in the current rush towards standardized testing and its potential negative impact on
student learning in science:
Despite the revolutionary results from El Centro and the successes in the other
districts, many teachers and school administrators nationwide currently will not or
cannot ­ devote attention to science instruction. The vast majority of school
systems today are locked in a frenzied struggle to better prepare their teachers and
students for the high-stakes standardized tests that are sweeping through the U.S.
state by state. Increasingly, politicians, the media, and the public have decried the
academic performance of our schools based solely on the results of tests of
student achievement. Consequently, preparation for basic skills tests has become
the fixation in public school districts. In some Arizona school systems, for
example, testing required by the state and individual districts already consumes
20% of a student's total time in class. And the pressure will only intensify with the
passage in January of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, with its provision for
annual testing in grades 3 through 8 in reading and math. Thus we continue to
weigh the elephant again and again, rather than feed it, and still we expect it to
grow. (pp. 603-604)
Marshak (2003) views No Child Left Behind as good in one sense: that every child
should get a high-quality education ­ but bad in another: that many will get harmed in
the short term.
GEORGE W. BUSH deserves significant credit for one policy achievement in
education. No Child Left Behind, his stated goal, has become the title of the
education bill he signed into law in January 2002. President Bush is the first
American President who has affirmed so clearly that every single child deserves a
high-quality education ­ and that no child should be victimized by malignant or
benign neglect.
The President has articulated a new goal for American public schools. But despite
all the hype emanating from Washington, nothing else in schools has really
changed, except for a lot more testing to come, a list of prospective penalties, and
a sparse handful of dollars per student. And the intensification of standardized
testing ­ the key tool that President Bush and his Democratic allies (first and
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 13
foremost Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, who really should know better)
will employ to achieve their goal ­ comes not from the future but from the past. (p.
229)
... the Bush/Kennedy NCLB races foolishly into the past of industrial social
forms. It will surely be a disaster, though we can hope that it will so discredit the
industrial paradigm of schooling that we can finally let it go ­ and begin to move
ahead. Unfortunately, a lot of children and teens and teachers and parents will get
hurt in the process. (p. 231)
Useful research methods: Logic, philosophic reasoning, and evaluation in a
broader sense than often construed: applying criteria to determine merit or worth of a
specific situation­ i.e., a critique or criticism.
Type 6 Knowledge: Theoretical, Philosophical
This is knowledge which describes what ought to be, what is worthwhile in
general in education.
Examples of knowledge claims: Steiner (1981) provides justification for what
education should be, referring to a teaching-learning process that is both guided and
intended, and that the content of education should be the best of culture:
To be learning within education, the learning must be intended by the learner.
The learner must deliberately engage in learner tasks. This follows from
education being a process involving human learners. Since human learners are
human beings, they are active not reactive learners.... (p. 31)
To be sure, if education is to be worthwhile, then the culture that is selected
should be the arts and fund of intelligence.... (p. 60).
Steiner (1988) later presents her rationale of what education ought to be:
Since `education' is derived from the Latin `educo' to lead out, I take education,
not in Dewey's sense, but in the sense of both intended and guided learning....
Education, then, becomes the teaching-studenting process. Teaching is a process
of guiding learning, and studenting is a learning process of a conscious learner, an
I or one intending learning. (p. 16)
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 14
Notice that Steiner (1988) subsequently introduced the notion of `studenting' instead of
`learning' in order to clarify the difference between intended learning and other kinds of
learning, and that guiding of learning does not imply direct instruction such as lecturing.
Freire (1993) arrives at a similar conclusion regarding intentionality of teachers
and students, but from a different social context:
A revolutionary leadership must accordingly practice co-intentional education.
Teachers and students (leadership and people), co-intent on reality, are both
Subjects, not only in task of unveiling that reality, and thereby coming to know it
critically, but in the task of re-creating that knowledge. As they attain this
knowledge of reality through reflection and action, they discover themselves as its
permanent re-creators. In this way, the presence of the oppressed in the struggle
for their liberation will be what it should be: not pseudo-participation, but
committed involvement. (p. 51)
Useful research methods: Logic, philosophic reasoning ­ i.e., methods of
philosophy such as phenomenological method, deduction, and syllogism.
Forms of Knowledge Claims
A knowledge claim is an assertion. It is a statement that can be tested or verified
in some way. For example, "the moon is made of green cheese" is an assertion(Type 1,
but not in the domain of education, and a false claim). The examples in Table 2 provide
prototypical forms of claims. Note that a claim is represented by a sentence or a group of
sentences, not a research study or report. Such studies or reports often assert many
knowledge claims, some of which are from review of research done previously and others
which are the focus of the study itself ­ what is being added to knowledge or being
emended.
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 15
Table 2. Forms of knowledge claims that when adequately verified become knowledge of
education.
Scope of Knowledge of Education Created through
Disciplined Inquiry
Purpose of Inquiry Situated Theoretical
Scientific: `What is?'
Type 1: x1, x2 ... are true
properties of an existing
situation, S1.
Type 2: X, Y, and the
relationship XY tend to be true
in general, independent of
time and space.
Praxiological: `What
is instrumental?'
Type 3: unique product,
program, or invention P1 is
effective.
Type 4: X1, X2 ... are methods
which are generally effective.
Philosophical: What
ought to be?'
Type 5: x1, x2 ... are
intrinsically valuable properties
of an existing situation, Z1 what
is good or bad about Z1.
Type 6: X, Y, and the
relationship XY are
intrinsically valuable
principles ­ in general what is
good or bad in itself.
Relationships among Types of Knowledge
To characterize knowledge as in Table 1 does not imply that types of knowledge
are unrelated. For example, instructional design theory (Type 4) can certainly influence
the process of development of a particular instructional product (Type 3), and vice versa
­ i.e., repeated experience in developing products can help improve design
methodologies. Educational philosophy can influence what is designed as well ­ e.g.,
what kinds of instructional products are worth developing. Educational philosophy can
also influence what kinds of student learning are important. Scientific, theoretical
knowledge of education can be useful in creating instructional design theories.
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 16
Criteria for Evaluating Adequacy of Knowledge Claims Should Be Different
It can also be seen that research methods which are useful for creating some kinds
of knowledge are not necessarily useful or appropriate for developing other kinds of
knowledge. For example, experimental methods are typically of little or no use for Types
1 and 4 knowledge, but have utility for Type 2 when cause and effect relationships are
studied, and for Type 3 when effectiveness of an educational program or product is being
tested. Experimental methods are inappropriate for Type 5 and 6 knowledge.
Furthermore, criteria for judging what constitutes adequate research will differ
from one kind of knowledge to another. For example, criteria pertaining to
generalizability from a random sample to a population will not be appropriate for judging
the quality of Type 1 and 5 research outcomes, but are appropriate for Type 2 and 3.
Moreover, for Types 1, 3 and 5 knowledge, generalizability is restricted to the scope of
the situation investigated.
Methods of inductive inference (inferential statistics), which are important in
Type 2 knowledge and may be of use for verifying Type 3 knowledge, are inappropriate
for Types 1, 4, 5 and 6.
In short, criteria used for judging the merit of one kind of inquiry are not
necessarily appropriate for judging another.
There is Value for Each of these Kinds of Educational Knowledge
Type 1 research outcomes are useful for learning about what has already been
done or is being done in education. Phi Delta Kappa magazine often has articles of this
kind. Many articles often tell stories about particular schools or educational programs.
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 17
Type 2 research is important for predicting or explaining theoretical relationships
in education. Knowledge about these generalizable relationships can inform education
practice indirectly. They can also inform types 3 and 4 design and development
processes.
Type 3 research is important in order to develop useful educationalprograms,
products or materials. Case studies of unique designs can inform other designers of how
particular problems were solved or overcome. Studies of program or product
effectiveness are important for making decisions about their specific utility.
Type 4 research is important in order to inform methodology. Principles of
design, heuristics, and guidelines can inform the design of new products and can
influence extant educational practice. Principles of instruction and instructional theories
can also inform educational practice and help improve learning in the classroom. These
are generalizable, theoretical prescriptions which have instrumental value.
Type 5 research is important for identifying what is intrinsically good or bad
about particular educational states of affairs, programs or products. These are not
questions of effectiveness, but questions of worthwhileness. For example, punishment as
a form of student discipline may be effective in schools in Houston, Texas, but it cannot
be justified morally or rationally if one holds benevolence and justice as important values
­ i.e., minimizing harm to humans, and by treating them individually as everyone should
be treated (cf. Kant's categorical imperative, 1998).
Type 6 research is important for identifying what ought to be done in education.
This is important for establishing goals or visions of what education could be. General
policies or philosophy can guide the development of educational programs and practice.
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 18
They do not tell us how to do education, but what education we should do. These are not
empirical questions, but rather what educational ends we should seek.
Conclusion
Educational practitioners often complain that is difficult to apply educational
research outcomes to classroom practice. I believe that this is because the large majority
of educational research published has been Type 1 and 2. Descriptions of `what is' are
inadequate for deciding what educational ends are worthwhile and for effective means to
achieve such ends.
The six-fold typology of knowledge of education presented here includes
philosophy and praxiology as legitimate domains of disciplined inquiry in education.
Scientific research in education is insufficient by itself. Educators can benefit from
instrumental knowledge ­ what specific educational programs and instructional products
are likely to be effective (Type 3), and what instructional theories (methodologies) are
likely to work (Type 4). Educational practitioners can benefit further from philosophic
knowledge ­ what we ought to be doing in education.
Notes
1. Shavelson and Towne's notion of scientific research omits philosophic inquiry as a
legitimate discipline of inquiry in education, and hence is too narrow. They also give
little emphasis to theoretical, praxiological knowledge of education itself (Type 4), which
is somewhat ironic in that their book is largely concerned with principles for conducting
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 19
educational research, which is praxiological knowledge of how to do research in
education (Type 4 knowledge of research principles).
References
Corry, M., Frick. T. & Hansen, L. (1997). User-Centered Design and Usability Testing
of a Web Site: An Illustrative Case Study. Education Technology Research and
Development, 45(4), 65-76.
Cronbach, L. J., Gleser, G. C., Nanda, H., & Rajaratnam, N. (1972). The dependability of
behavioral measurements: Theory of generalizability of scores and profiles.
New York, NY: John Wiley.
Erwin, J. C. (2004). The classroom of choice: Giving students what they need and
getting what you want. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed (translated by M. B. Ramos, new rev. 20th
anniversary
ed.). New York: NY, Continuum.
Frick, T. W. (1990). Analysis of Patterns in Time (APT): A Method of Recording and
Quantifying Temporal Relations in Education. American Educational Research
Journal, 27(1), 180-204.
Frick, T. W. & Reigeluth, C. M. (1992). Verifying Prescriptive Instructional Theory by
Analysis of Patterns in Time. At the annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association (AERA), San Francisco, CA, April, 1992.
Glasser, W. (1998). Choice Theory: A new psychology of personal freedom. New York,
NY: HarperCollins.
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 20
Holloway, J. (2001). Research link / Inclusion and students with learning disabilities.
Educational Leadership, 58(6), 86-88.
Kant, I. (1998). Critique of pure reason (Translated by P. Guyer & A. Wood). New
York, NY: Cambridge University Press
King, K. S. (1998). Alternative educational systems: a multi-case study in museum
schools. Bloomington, IN: Thesis (Ph.D.), Indiana University.
Jorgenson, O., & Vanosdall, R. (2002). The death of science? What we risk in our rush
toward standardized testing and the three R's. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(8), 601-605.
Maccia, E. S. & Maccia, G. S. Development of educational theory derived from three
educational theory models (Final report, Project No. 5-0-638). Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education, Bureau
of Research.
Marshak, D. (2003). No Child Left Behind: A foolish race into the past. Phi Delta
Kappan, 85(3). 229-231.
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Education Technology Research
and Development, 50(3), 43-59.
Nelson, L. M. (1999). Collaborative problem solving. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),
Instructional-design theories and models Volume II: A new paradigm of
instructional theory. Mawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 241-268.
Peirce, C. S. (1958). Values in a universe of chance. (Ed., P. P. Weiner). New York,
NY: Doubleday.
Reigeluth, C. M. & Frick, T. W. (1999). Formative research: A methodology for
creating and improving design theories. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-
Types of Knowledge of Education -- 21
design theories and models Volume II: A new paradigm of instructional theory.
Mawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 633-652.
Shavelson, R. J. & Towne, L. (Eds.) (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington,
DC: National Academy Press.
Shavelson, R. J. & Webb, N. M. (1991). Generalizability theory: A primer. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Steiner, E. (1981). Educology of the free. New York, NY: Philosophic Library.
Steiner, E. (1988). Methodology of theory building. Sydney, Australia: Educology
Research Associates.