사회과학 연구방법론의 재정립을 위한 개념적 접근

서지정보

ㆍ발행기관 : 한국교육학회 ㆍ수록지정보 : 교육학연구 / 34권 / 5호
ㆍ저자명 : 蔡善姬

목차

《요약》
Ⅰ. 문제의 제기
Ⅱ. 연구방법론에 대한 다차원적 논의
Ⅲ. 질적ㆍ양적 방법의 특징과 두 방법 사이의 관련성
Ⅳ. 결론
〈참고문헌〉
Abstract

한국어 초록

이 글은 기존의 연구방법론을 분류할 때 나타나는 개념상의 혼란이 연구방법론의 ‘다차원 성’을 무시하고 단일한 차원으로 분류하는 것에서 비롯된다는 문제인식에 따라, 규범적(연구 주제의 선택), 인식론적(접근방식), 기술적(자료수집과 자료분석) 차원에서의 다차원적 분류를 통한 연구방법 개념의 명확화를 시도한다. 세 차원 사이에 존재하는 연관성이 필연적으로 내재하지는 않는다는 사실이 이 분류의 기반이 된다. 나아가서 이 글은 방법론 분류에서 중심이 되는 질적ㆍ양적 방법의 통합은 단순히 두 방법을 병렬적으로 혼합하는 것이 가능하다는 이유에서가 아니라 두 방법이 갖는 한계점을 서로의 장점으로 극복할 수 있다는 방법론상의 근본적이고 내재적인 이유에서 비롯됨을 주장하며 그 통합의 한 구체적 모형을 모색함으로써 앞으로 방법론 논의는 보다 바람직한 통합모형을 발전시키는 방향으로 모아질 필요가 있음을 밝힌다.

영어 초록

This paper intends to clarify a conceptual confusion in the classification of educational research methods. Most of current studies on the subject evince the problem of indiscriminate mixture of various levels of methodology. Against this trend I divide research methods in three levels: normative, epistemological, and technical. In the normative level, research methods can be classified in two realms, critical and scientific, according to the value researchers attach to their studies. Critical research method strives for the debunking of oppressive nature of current social structure and the negative contribution of education to its maintenance, while scientific method takes social reality for granted and tries to find factual order as is reflected in data sentences. In the epistemological level, research method can be divided into positivistic and interpretative camps, depending upon how researchers attempt to investigate educational phenomena. Positivistic orientation incorporates the natural scientific methods in the study of social phenomena to establish the universal law, while anti-positivistic orientation refutes the homogeneity of social and natural objects and argues for the usefulness of interpretative methods for the study of peculiarity of human behavior. And in the technical level, research methods can be categorized into qualitative and quantitative methods, by the way researchers collect and analyze empirical data.
Despite theoretical and practical relevance among these three levels, it is absurd to assume the existence of an inherent and necessary connection penetrating them. Rather, we recognize the disjunction between them, as well as within the technical level itself. For instance, though quantitative methods in the technical level are embedded in the positivistic tradition in the epistemological level, we can find some qualitative methods, like ethnographic and ethnoscientifc studies, which purport to attain the goal of generality as in the former. An ignorance of this multi-dimensionality of research methods constitute one important source of the confusion in their classification.
The commonality in the classification of various levels of methods is the division between qualitative and quantitative research methods, as they are applied in the actual processes of educational research. Each method has its advantages and limits. Through quantitative methods we not only exactly discern the relative importance of each independent variable over a dependent variable, but also control the compounding effects of independent variables. However, since these methods detach the variable out of social context it is actually situated, we may draw distorted conclusion when one variable possesses different, often quite contradictory, effect on the dependent variable in different social situation. Furthermore, when they handle the variables with skewed distribution, they often reveal what is known as the universalitic fallacy, discounting its internl variation. On the contrary, qualitative methods generally rely upon the holistic approach and thus are good for the comprehensive analysis of some limited number of cases, which at the same time make up its disadvantage of the particularistic fallacy.
From this discussion of the characteristics of each method we can find the possibility and desirability of their integration into a more encompassing methodological framework. This strategy of integrative methodology starts from the application of qualitative methods. By employing them we can derive out some strategically important independent variable accounting for the dependent variable, without abstracting them from social context. After establishing the potentially general law with them, we need to extend the research to include more extensive number of cases, which will be analyzed by the statistical methods. The repetition of this strategy will ensure both the scientificity of educational research and the establishment of generality of research results. This is the way how we can transcend the limits of both technical methods.

참고 자료

없음