Interpretativna raziskava in njena uporaba na pedagoškem področju
Ključne besede:
interpretativna raziskava, vzgoja in izobraževanje, raziskovalne paradigme, kvantitativno raziskovanje, kvalitativno raziskovanje
Povzetek
Prispevek se osredinja na opredelitev interpretativne raziskave, ki je v slovenskem prostoru slabo poznana. Tudi v svetu je neenotno definirana in pri več avtorjih različno klasificirana. Nekateri jo omenjajo kot način raziskovanja znotraj interpretativne paradigme, medtem ko jo drugi opredeljujejo kot vrsto raziskave oziroma način interpretacije podatkov, ki je mogoč tudi v okviru drugih paradigem. Pogosto je enačena tudi s kvalitativnim raziskovanjem. V prispevku sta tako predstavljena njena vloga in pomen pri raziskovanju, posebej pa je prikazana njena uporabnost na pedagoškem področju.
Prenosi
Podatki o prenosih še niso na voljo.
Literatura
Adam, F. (1980). Kvalitativna metodologija in akcijsko raziskovanje v sociologiji. Doktorska disertacija. Zagreb: Sveučilište u Zagrebu, Filozofski fakultet.
Akhtar, I. (2016). Research design. Research in Social Science: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 68–84. Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308915548_Research_Design (Dostopno 23. 11. 2020.)
Al Riyami, T. (2015). Main Approaches to Educational Research. International Journal of Innovation and Research in Educational Sciences, 2(5), 2349–5219.
Alvermann, D. E., in Mallozzi, C. A. (2010). Interpretive research. V A. McGill-Franzen in R. L. Allington (ur.), Handbook of Reading Disability Research (str. 488–498). New York: Routledge.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2019). Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices. Pridobljeno s https://courses.lumenlearning.com/atd-herkimer-researchmethodsforsocialscience/cha-pter/chapter-12-interpretive-research/ (Dostopno 13. 2. 2020.)
Blaikie, N. (2009). Designing social research. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Cao Thanh, N., Thi Le Thanh, T. (2015). The Interconnection Between Interpretivist Paradigm and Qualitative Methods in Education. American Journal of Educational Science, 1(2), 24–27.
Cencič, M. (1992). Učitelj raziskovalec in predlogi za uspešno komuniciranje in vedenje učitelja raziskovalca. V F. Žagar (ur.), Kaj hočemo in kaj zmoremo: zbornik s posveta o problemih in perspektivah izobraževanja učiteljev, str. 108–112. Ljubljana: Pedagoška fakulteta.
Chalmers, D.J., Manley, D., in Wasserman, R. (2005). Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Pridobljeno s http://bespalovseminar.narod.ru/literature/MetaX2.pdf (Dostopno 15. 3. 2020.)
Comte, A. (1856). A general view of positivism. London: Smith Elder & Co.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. London: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2006). Five Qualitative Approaches to Inquiry. Pridobljeno s http://williamwolff.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/cresswell-chapter4-5approaches.pdf (Dostopno 15. 10. 2020.).
Crossman, A. (2019). How to Understand Interpretive Sociology. Pridobljeno s https://www.thoughtco.c-om/interpretive-sociology-3026366 (Dostopno 17. 3. 2020.)
Decrop, A. (2006). Vacation decision making. Wallingford: CABI publishing.
Durkheim, E. (1964). The Rules of Sociological Method. New York, The Free Press.
Elliott, R., in Timulak, L. (2005). Descriptive and interpretive approaches to qualitative research, 11, 147–159.
Erciyes, E. (2020). Paradigms of Inquiry in the Qualitative Research. European Scientific Journal, 16(7), 188–200.
Everington, J. (2013). The Interpretive Approach and Bridging the “Theory-Practice Gap”: Action Research with Student Teachers of Religious Education in England. Religion & Education, 40(1), 90–106.
Finnis, J. (1980). Natural Law and Natural Rights. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., in Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7th Ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Goldkuhl, G. (2012). Pragmatism vs interpretivism in qualitative information systems research. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(2), 135–146.
Grondin, J. (2017). The Hermeneutical Circle. V N. Keane and C. Lawn (ur.), A Companion to Hermeneutics (str. 299–305. Oxford: Blackwell.
Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29(1981), 75–91.
Gunasekare, T. (2015). Mixed Research Method as the Third Research Paradigm: A Literature Review. International Journal of Science and Research, 4(8), 361–367.
Hall, R. (2013). Mixed Methods: In search of a paradigm. Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/pub-lication/259045135_Mixed_Methods_In_search_of_a_paradigm (Dostopno 10. 10. 2020.)
Hussain, M. A. (2015). In the Labyrinth of Research: Critiquing Research Studies Conducted in Contrasting Paradigms. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 6(5), 956–962.
Interpretive research. (2020). Pridobljeno s https://usq.pressbooks.pub/socialscienceresearch/chapt-er/chapter-12-interpretive-research/ (Dostopno 20. 10. 2020.)
Introduction to Qualitative Research. (2020). Pridobljeno s https://www.blackwellpublishing.c-om/content/BPL_Images/Content_store/Sample_chapter/9780632052844/001-025%5B1%5D.pdf (Dostopno 15. 10. 2020.)
Johnson, R. B., in Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: a paradigm whose time has to come. Educational Researcher 33(14), 14–26.
Jungwirth, H., Steinbring, H., Voigt, J., in Wollring, B. (2020). Interpretative classroom research in teacher education (str. 49–56). Pridobljeno s http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/ebook/e/gdm/19-96/jungwirth.pdf (Dostopno 30. 3. 2020.)
Kaushik, V., in Walsh, A. C. (2019). Pragmatism as a Research Paradigm and Its Implications for Social Work Research. Social sciences, 8(9), 255.
Keeves, J. P. (1997). Educational research methodology and measurement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kivunja, C., in Kuyini, A. B. (2017). Understanding and Applying Research Paradigms in Educational Contexts. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(5), 26–41.
Kordeš, U. (2008). Fenomenološko raziskovanje v psihoterapiji. Kairos, 2(3–4), 9–12.
Kreiner, G. E., in Hollensbe, E. C. (2009). Balancing Borders and Bridges: Negotiating the Work-Home Interface Via Boundary Work Tactics. Academy of Management Journal, 25(4), 704–730.
KU LEUVEN (2020). Interpretative Approaches in Educational Research. Pridobljeno s https://onderwijsaanbod.kuleuven.be/syllabi/e/P0T32AE.htm#activetab=doelstellingen_idp1624608&bl=all (Dostopno 15. 1. 2020.)
Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Lincoln, Y. S., Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, T. D., Voegtle, K. H. (2006). Methods in Educational Research. Pridobljeno s http://stikespanritahusada.ac.id/wpcontent/uploads/2017/04/Marguerite_G._Lodico_Dean_T._Spaulding_KatherinBookFi.pdf (Dostopno 15. 1. 2020.)
Maarouf, H. (2019). Pragmatism as a Supportive Paradigm for the Mixed Research Approach: Conceptualizing the Ontological, Epistemological, and Axiological Stances of Pragmatism. International Business Research 12(9), 1–12.
Makombe, G. (2017). An Expose of the Relationship between Paradigm, Method and Design in Research.The Qualitative Report, 22(12), 3363–3382.
Mažgon, J. (2000). Akcijsko raziskovanje kot alternativa tradicionalnemu empiričnemu pedagoškemu raziskovanju ali kot njegova nadgradnja: magistrsko delo. Ljubljana: Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta.
Mažgon, J. (2001). Utemeljevanje akcijskega raziskovanja na kritiki tradicionalne metodologije in postavkah ´spora okoli pozitivizma. Sodobna pedagogika, 2, 36–48.
Mažgon, J. (2006). Ali paradigmatski relativizem lahko preseže dihotomijo med kvalitativno in kvantitativno paradigmo v raziskovanju? Sodobna pedagogika, 2, 94–106.
Mažgon, J. (2008). Razvoj akcijskega raziskovanja na temeljnih postavkah kvalitativne metodologije. Ljubljana: Znanstvenoraziskovalni inštitut Filozofske fakultete.
McQueen, M. (2002). Language and power in profit/nonprofit relationships: A grounded theory of inter-sectoral collaboration. Pridobljeno s http://au.geocities.com/dr_meryl_mcqueen/phd/mcqueench3.-htm (Dostopno 15. 12. 2019.)
Mesec, B. (1998). Uvod v kvalitativno raziskovanje v socialnem delu. Ljubljana: Visoka šola za socialno delo.
Milton, D. L. (2007). Sociological Theory: An Introduction to Interpretivism. Pridobljeno s https://kar.ken-t.ac.uk/62742/1/Interpretivism%202007.pdf (Dostopno 10. 11. 2019.)
Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained. Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 48–76.
Mužić, V. (1994). Atributi kvalitativne in kvantitativne paradigme pedagoškega raziskovanja. Sodobna pedagogika, 1–2, 39–51.
Myers, M. D. (1997). Qualitative Research in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 21(2), 241–242.
Myers, M. D. (2001). Myers, M., in Klein, H. K. (2001). A classification scheme for interpretive research in information systems. Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2857924-8_A_classification_scheme_for_interpretive_research_in_information_systems (Dostopno 15. 10. 2020.)
Patel, S. (2015). The research paradigm – methodology, epistemology and ontology – explained in simple language. Pridobljeno s http://salmapatel.co.uk/academia/the-research-paradigm-methodology-epistemology-and-ontology-explained-in-simple-language/ (Dostopno 9. 10. 2020.)
Patterson, M. E., in Williams, D. R. (2002). Collecitng and Analyzing Qualitative Data: Hermeneutic Principles, Methods, and Case Examples. Champaign, Illinois: Sagamore publishing.
Patton, M. Q, (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd Ed. California: Sage publication.
Peter-Koop, A., in Wollring, B. (2001). Student Teacher Participation in Interpretative Classroom Research Projects. Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237528143_Student_T-eacher_Participation_in_Interpretative_Classroom_Research_Projects (Dostopno 5. 11. 2019.)
Pham, L. (2018). A Review of key paradigms: positivism, interpretivism and critical inquiry. Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324486854_A_Review_of_key_paradigms_positivism_interpretivism_and_critical_inquiry (Dostopno 6. 11. 2019.)
Punch, K. (2005). Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. London: Sage.
Rehman, A., in Alharthi, K. (2016). An Introduction to Research Paradigms. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 3(8), 51–59.
Reiners, M. G. (2012). Understanding the Differences between Husserl’s (Descriptive) and Heidegger’s (Interpretive) Phenomenological Research. Nursing & Care, 1(5). Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271099372_Understanding_the_Differences_between_Husserl's_Descriptive_and_Heidegger's_Interpretive_Phenomenological_Research (Dostopno 10. 11. 2019.)
Sagadin, J. (1991). Kvalitativno empirično pedagoško raziskovanje. Sodobna pedagogika, 7–8, 345–355.
Sagadin, J. (1993). Kvalitativna analiza podatkov pri študiji primera. Sodobna pedagogika, 3–4, 115–123.
Sagadin, J. (2001). Pregledno o kvalitativnem empiričnem pedagoškem raziskovanju. Sodobna pedagogika, 2, 10–25.
Scott, D., in Usher, R. (2010). Researching Education (2nd Ed.). London, England: Continuum.
Stritih, B., idr. (1977). Prostovoljno preventivno in socialnoterapevtsko delo z otroki – Rakitna: akcijskoraziskovalna naloga – socialnoterapevtska kolonija. Sociološke raziskave v zdravstvu. Ljubljana: Inštitut za sociologijo in filozofijo.
Štemberger, T. (2015) Paradigme v pedagoškem raziskovanju. V Grušovnik, Tomaž (ur.). Obzorja učenja: vzgojno-izobraževalne perspektive (str. 131–145). Koper: Univerza na Primorskem, Znanstveno-raziskovalno središče, Univerzitetna založba Annales.
Taylor, P. C., in Medina, M. N. D. (2013). Educational research paradigms: From positivism to multiparadigmatic. International Journal of Meaning Centred Education. Pridobljeno s: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264196558_Educational_research_paradigms_From_positivism_to_multiparadigmatic (Dostopno 10. 11. 2019.)
Terhart, E. (1982). Interpretative approaches in educational research: A consideration of some theoretical issues — with particular reference to recent developments in West Germany. Cambridge Journal Of Education, 12, 141–160.
Terre Blanche, M., in Durrheim, K. (1999). Histories of the present: Social science research in context. V M. Terre Blanche, K. Durrheim (ur.), Research in practice: Applied methods for the social sciences (str. 1–16). Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.
Tobin, K. (2000). Interpretive research in science education. V A. E. Kelly, R. Lesh (ur.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (str. 487–512). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Vogrinc, J. (2008). Kvalitativno raziskovanje na pedagoškem področju. Ljubljana: Pedagoška fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani.
Wand, Y., in Weber, R. (1993), On the ontological expressiveness of information systems analysis and design grammars. Information Systems Journal, 3, 217–237.
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Wicks, A. C., in Freeman, R. E. (1998) Organization studies and the new pragmatism: Positivism, anti-positivism, and the search for ethics, Organization Science, 9(2), 123–140.
Willis, J. (1942). Foundations of qualitative research: interpretive and critical approaches. London: Sage.
Akhtar, I. (2016). Research design. Research in Social Science: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 68–84. Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308915548_Research_Design (Dostopno 23. 11. 2020.)
Al Riyami, T. (2015). Main Approaches to Educational Research. International Journal of Innovation and Research in Educational Sciences, 2(5), 2349–5219.
Alvermann, D. E., in Mallozzi, C. A. (2010). Interpretive research. V A. McGill-Franzen in R. L. Allington (ur.), Handbook of Reading Disability Research (str. 488–498). New York: Routledge.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2019). Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices. Pridobljeno s https://courses.lumenlearning.com/atd-herkimer-researchmethodsforsocialscience/cha-pter/chapter-12-interpretive-research/ (Dostopno 13. 2. 2020.)
Blaikie, N. (2009). Designing social research. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Cao Thanh, N., Thi Le Thanh, T. (2015). The Interconnection Between Interpretivist Paradigm and Qualitative Methods in Education. American Journal of Educational Science, 1(2), 24–27.
Cencič, M. (1992). Učitelj raziskovalec in predlogi za uspešno komuniciranje in vedenje učitelja raziskovalca. V F. Žagar (ur.), Kaj hočemo in kaj zmoremo: zbornik s posveta o problemih in perspektivah izobraževanja učiteljev, str. 108–112. Ljubljana: Pedagoška fakulteta.
Chalmers, D.J., Manley, D., in Wasserman, R. (2005). Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Pridobljeno s http://bespalovseminar.narod.ru/literature/MetaX2.pdf (Dostopno 15. 3. 2020.)
Comte, A. (1856). A general view of positivism. London: Smith Elder & Co.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. London: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2006). Five Qualitative Approaches to Inquiry. Pridobljeno s http://williamwolff.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/cresswell-chapter4-5approaches.pdf (Dostopno 15. 10. 2020.).
Crossman, A. (2019). How to Understand Interpretive Sociology. Pridobljeno s https://www.thoughtco.c-om/interpretive-sociology-3026366 (Dostopno 17. 3. 2020.)
Decrop, A. (2006). Vacation decision making. Wallingford: CABI publishing.
Durkheim, E. (1964). The Rules of Sociological Method. New York, The Free Press.
Elliott, R., in Timulak, L. (2005). Descriptive and interpretive approaches to qualitative research, 11, 147–159.
Erciyes, E. (2020). Paradigms of Inquiry in the Qualitative Research. European Scientific Journal, 16(7), 188–200.
Everington, J. (2013). The Interpretive Approach and Bridging the “Theory-Practice Gap”: Action Research with Student Teachers of Religious Education in England. Religion & Education, 40(1), 90–106.
Finnis, J. (1980). Natural Law and Natural Rights. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., in Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7th Ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Goldkuhl, G. (2012). Pragmatism vs interpretivism in qualitative information systems research. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(2), 135–146.
Grondin, J. (2017). The Hermeneutical Circle. V N. Keane and C. Lawn (ur.), A Companion to Hermeneutics (str. 299–305. Oxford: Blackwell.
Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29(1981), 75–91.
Gunasekare, T. (2015). Mixed Research Method as the Third Research Paradigm: A Literature Review. International Journal of Science and Research, 4(8), 361–367.
Hall, R. (2013). Mixed Methods: In search of a paradigm. Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/pub-lication/259045135_Mixed_Methods_In_search_of_a_paradigm (Dostopno 10. 10. 2020.)
Hussain, M. A. (2015). In the Labyrinth of Research: Critiquing Research Studies Conducted in Contrasting Paradigms. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 6(5), 956–962.
Interpretive research. (2020). Pridobljeno s https://usq.pressbooks.pub/socialscienceresearch/chapt-er/chapter-12-interpretive-research/ (Dostopno 20. 10. 2020.)
Introduction to Qualitative Research. (2020). Pridobljeno s https://www.blackwellpublishing.c-om/content/BPL_Images/Content_store/Sample_chapter/9780632052844/001-025%5B1%5D.pdf (Dostopno 15. 10. 2020.)
Johnson, R. B., in Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: a paradigm whose time has to come. Educational Researcher 33(14), 14–26.
Jungwirth, H., Steinbring, H., Voigt, J., in Wollring, B. (2020). Interpretative classroom research in teacher education (str. 49–56). Pridobljeno s http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/ebook/e/gdm/19-96/jungwirth.pdf (Dostopno 30. 3. 2020.)
Kaushik, V., in Walsh, A. C. (2019). Pragmatism as a Research Paradigm and Its Implications for Social Work Research. Social sciences, 8(9), 255.
Keeves, J. P. (1997). Educational research methodology and measurement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kivunja, C., in Kuyini, A. B. (2017). Understanding and Applying Research Paradigms in Educational Contexts. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(5), 26–41.
Kordeš, U. (2008). Fenomenološko raziskovanje v psihoterapiji. Kairos, 2(3–4), 9–12.
Kreiner, G. E., in Hollensbe, E. C. (2009). Balancing Borders and Bridges: Negotiating the Work-Home Interface Via Boundary Work Tactics. Academy of Management Journal, 25(4), 704–730.
KU LEUVEN (2020). Interpretative Approaches in Educational Research. Pridobljeno s https://onderwijsaanbod.kuleuven.be/syllabi/e/P0T32AE.htm#activetab=doelstellingen_idp1624608&bl=all (Dostopno 15. 1. 2020.)
Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Lincoln, Y. S., Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, T. D., Voegtle, K. H. (2006). Methods in Educational Research. Pridobljeno s http://stikespanritahusada.ac.id/wpcontent/uploads/2017/04/Marguerite_G._Lodico_Dean_T._Spaulding_KatherinBookFi.pdf (Dostopno 15. 1. 2020.)
Maarouf, H. (2019). Pragmatism as a Supportive Paradigm for the Mixed Research Approach: Conceptualizing the Ontological, Epistemological, and Axiological Stances of Pragmatism. International Business Research 12(9), 1–12.
Makombe, G. (2017). An Expose of the Relationship between Paradigm, Method and Design in Research.The Qualitative Report, 22(12), 3363–3382.
Mažgon, J. (2000). Akcijsko raziskovanje kot alternativa tradicionalnemu empiričnemu pedagoškemu raziskovanju ali kot njegova nadgradnja: magistrsko delo. Ljubljana: Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta.
Mažgon, J. (2001). Utemeljevanje akcijskega raziskovanja na kritiki tradicionalne metodologije in postavkah ´spora okoli pozitivizma. Sodobna pedagogika, 2, 36–48.
Mažgon, J. (2006). Ali paradigmatski relativizem lahko preseže dihotomijo med kvalitativno in kvantitativno paradigmo v raziskovanju? Sodobna pedagogika, 2, 94–106.
Mažgon, J. (2008). Razvoj akcijskega raziskovanja na temeljnih postavkah kvalitativne metodologije. Ljubljana: Znanstvenoraziskovalni inštitut Filozofske fakultete.
McQueen, M. (2002). Language and power in profit/nonprofit relationships: A grounded theory of inter-sectoral collaboration. Pridobljeno s http://au.geocities.com/dr_meryl_mcqueen/phd/mcqueench3.-htm (Dostopno 15. 12. 2019.)
Mesec, B. (1998). Uvod v kvalitativno raziskovanje v socialnem delu. Ljubljana: Visoka šola za socialno delo.
Milton, D. L. (2007). Sociological Theory: An Introduction to Interpretivism. Pridobljeno s https://kar.ken-t.ac.uk/62742/1/Interpretivism%202007.pdf (Dostopno 10. 11. 2019.)
Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained. Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 48–76.
Mužić, V. (1994). Atributi kvalitativne in kvantitativne paradigme pedagoškega raziskovanja. Sodobna pedagogika, 1–2, 39–51.
Myers, M. D. (1997). Qualitative Research in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 21(2), 241–242.
Myers, M. D. (2001). Myers, M., in Klein, H. K. (2001). A classification scheme for interpretive research in information systems. Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2857924-8_A_classification_scheme_for_interpretive_research_in_information_systems (Dostopno 15. 10. 2020.)
Patel, S. (2015). The research paradigm – methodology, epistemology and ontology – explained in simple language. Pridobljeno s http://salmapatel.co.uk/academia/the-research-paradigm-methodology-epistemology-and-ontology-explained-in-simple-language/ (Dostopno 9. 10. 2020.)
Patterson, M. E., in Williams, D. R. (2002). Collecitng and Analyzing Qualitative Data: Hermeneutic Principles, Methods, and Case Examples. Champaign, Illinois: Sagamore publishing.
Patton, M. Q, (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd Ed. California: Sage publication.
Peter-Koop, A., in Wollring, B. (2001). Student Teacher Participation in Interpretative Classroom Research Projects. Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237528143_Student_T-eacher_Participation_in_Interpretative_Classroom_Research_Projects (Dostopno 5. 11. 2019.)
Pham, L. (2018). A Review of key paradigms: positivism, interpretivism and critical inquiry. Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324486854_A_Review_of_key_paradigms_positivism_interpretivism_and_critical_inquiry (Dostopno 6. 11. 2019.)
Punch, K. (2005). Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. London: Sage.
Rehman, A., in Alharthi, K. (2016). An Introduction to Research Paradigms. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 3(8), 51–59.
Reiners, M. G. (2012). Understanding the Differences between Husserl’s (Descriptive) and Heidegger’s (Interpretive) Phenomenological Research. Nursing & Care, 1(5). Pridobljeno s https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271099372_Understanding_the_Differences_between_Husserl's_Descriptive_and_Heidegger's_Interpretive_Phenomenological_Research (Dostopno 10. 11. 2019.)
Sagadin, J. (1991). Kvalitativno empirično pedagoško raziskovanje. Sodobna pedagogika, 7–8, 345–355.
Sagadin, J. (1993). Kvalitativna analiza podatkov pri študiji primera. Sodobna pedagogika, 3–4, 115–123.
Sagadin, J. (2001). Pregledno o kvalitativnem empiričnem pedagoškem raziskovanju. Sodobna pedagogika, 2, 10–25.
Scott, D., in Usher, R. (2010). Researching Education (2nd Ed.). London, England: Continuum.
Stritih, B., idr. (1977). Prostovoljno preventivno in socialnoterapevtsko delo z otroki – Rakitna: akcijskoraziskovalna naloga – socialnoterapevtska kolonija. Sociološke raziskave v zdravstvu. Ljubljana: Inštitut za sociologijo in filozofijo.
Štemberger, T. (2015) Paradigme v pedagoškem raziskovanju. V Grušovnik, Tomaž (ur.). Obzorja učenja: vzgojno-izobraževalne perspektive (str. 131–145). Koper: Univerza na Primorskem, Znanstveno-raziskovalno središče, Univerzitetna založba Annales.
Taylor, P. C., in Medina, M. N. D. (2013). Educational research paradigms: From positivism to multiparadigmatic. International Journal of Meaning Centred Education. Pridobljeno s: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264196558_Educational_research_paradigms_From_positivism_to_multiparadigmatic (Dostopno 10. 11. 2019.)
Terhart, E. (1982). Interpretative approaches in educational research: A consideration of some theoretical issues — with particular reference to recent developments in West Germany. Cambridge Journal Of Education, 12, 141–160.
Terre Blanche, M., in Durrheim, K. (1999). Histories of the present: Social science research in context. V M. Terre Blanche, K. Durrheim (ur.), Research in practice: Applied methods for the social sciences (str. 1–16). Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.
Tobin, K. (2000). Interpretive research in science education. V A. E. Kelly, R. Lesh (ur.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (str. 487–512). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Vogrinc, J. (2008). Kvalitativno raziskovanje na pedagoškem področju. Ljubljana: Pedagoška fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani.
Wand, Y., in Weber, R. (1993), On the ontological expressiveness of information systems analysis and design grammars. Information Systems Journal, 3, 217–237.
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Wicks, A. C., in Freeman, R. E. (1998) Organization studies and the new pragmatism: Positivism, anti-positivism, and the search for ethics, Organization Science, 9(2), 123–140.
Willis, J. (1942). Foundations of qualitative research: interpretive and critical approaches. London: Sage.
Objavljeno
2022-06-16
Kako citirati
Krmac N. (2022). Interpretativna raziskava in njena uporaba na pedagoškem področju. Revija Za Elementarno izobraževanje, 15(2), 261-284. https://doi.org/10.18690/rei.15.2.261-284.2022
Številka
Rubrike
Znanstveni članki
Copyright (c) 2022 Nina Krmac
To delo je licencirano pod Creative Commons Priznanje avtorstva 4.0 mednarodno licenco.