Scientific-Based Research and Randomized Controlled Trials, the 'Gold' Standard? Alternative Paradigms and Mixed Methodologies
Dados Bibliográficos
AUTOR(ES) | |
---|---|
AFILIAÇÃO(ÕES) | University of Bridgeport, Hamden, CT, USA |
ANO | 2014 |
TIPO | Artigo |
PERIÓDICO | Qualitative Inquiry |
ISSN | 1077-8004 |
E-ISSN | 1552-7565 |
EDITORA | SAGE Publications |
DOI | 10.1177/1077800413508523 |
CITAÇÕES | 6 |
ADICIONADO EM | 2025-08-18 |
MD5 |
62bebe93cf871dd97226391642c098b1
|
Resumo
This article addresses three controversial issues related to mixed methods research and policy. First, 'Scientific-Based Research' promoted by 'No Child Left Behind' (NCLB) reinforces diametrically opposed paradigmatic views and research methodologies. As policy, NCLB prioritizes specific methodologies prescribing what counts as scientific evidence. Second, from a critical stance, federal policies shape and control decisions that funding agencies make regarding methodologies (Randomized Controlled Trials—Gold Standard). Third, top-down policies are currently framed in postpositivist ontological and epistemological conceptions and should include constructivist, critical, transformative, and emancipatory paradigms supporting alternative methodologies. This article challenges current practices of prioritizing specific research methodologies used to evaluate interventions. As an alternative, logical purpose statements and research questions should be the standard used to guide decisions about appropriate methodologies and procedures.