...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of mixed methods research >Paradigms Lost and Paradigms Regained
【24h】

Paradigms Lost and Paradigms Regained

机译:范式迷失与范式复归

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Almost a year since my inaugaral editorial: Managing Movement, Leading Change (Freshwater, 2012) where I highlighted the importance of challenging philosophical and epistemological stances; we are taking the opportunity to do just that in relation to the elusive concept of "paradigm" through the highly versatile and dialogic form of the editorial. Conceptualizing the concept of paradigms as "elusive" is an important metaphor and one to which we will allude througout this editorial. In our editorial: Why Write (Freshwater & Cahill, 2012), we put into tension some competing definitions of paradigm in order to open up the debate on what constitutes a paradigm and to outline why we felt it is important for this debate to be held in the mixed methods community. Since that editorial, we have had a very interesting response from the coeditor, Donna Mertens: What Comes First? The Paradigm or the Approach? (Mertens, 2012).
机译:自就职演说以来将近一年:“管理运动,领导变革”(Freshwater,2012年),我在其中强调了挑战哲学和认识论立场的重要性。我们正借此机会通过高度通用和对话的社论形式,就难以捉摸的“范式”概念做到这一点。将范式的概念概念化为“难以捉摸”是一个重要的隐喻,在这篇社论中我们将对它进行暗示。在我们的社论:《为什么写作》(Freshwater和Cahill,2012年)中,我们对范式的一些相互竞争的定义施加了张力,以便就构成范式的辩论展开讨论,并概述为什么我们认为举行这场辩论很重要在混合方法社区中。自那篇社论发表以来,我们得到了编辑唐娜·梅尔滕斯(Donna Mertens)的非常有趣的回应:首先是什么?范式还是方法? (Mertens,2012年)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号