Ontology and epistemology. Sitting within the qualitative tradition, this study takes on three distinctive features of qualitative research in general (Xxxxxx 2008, p.366). Firstly, it adopts an inductive view of the research process whereby the collection and analysis of data is used to develop theory. As such, this study works with the particular experiences and attitudes of participants to produce a generalised theoretical account of their experience. Secondly, the epistemological position adopted is broadly interpretivist, which means that understanding the social world is achieved through greater stress on the interpretation of that world by participants themselves (Shaw and Xxxxx 2015). Lastly, the ontological position adopted is broadly constructivist insofar as social properties (such as power, freedom, and so on) are constructed through social interaction rather than products of the ‘natural’ world (Xxxxxx 1998). In general, qualitative research is characterised by a basic allegiance to these philosophical positions. Differing methodological approaches can be advanced with these positions (Xxxxxx and Xxxxxxx 1999), and here a generic methods approach is adopted. In doing so, the study aims to give participants a voice in the research to identify, define and explain their educational experiences.
Ontology and epistemology. Certain underlying philosophical tensions arise from the range of research fields drawn upon in this study which have ontological and epistemological implications. Within science education, critical realism has become an increasingly popular research paradigm (Xxxx, 2005; Xxxxxxx, 1996), while among branches of science and technology studies, and other cultural studies (for example, museum studies) different forms of social constructivism hold sway (Xxxxx, 2005; Xxxxxxxxx, 1998). The mismatch between paradigms means that while views about the nature of knowledge (epistemology) are similar, there is a difference in how the nature of reality is understood (ontology). To put the epistemological issues simply, both critical realism and social constructivism are based on the idea of knowledge as a social construct. Furthermore, the research questions of this study are concerned with the perspectives and experiences of non-participants in PES. The kind of knowledge the research questions are based on comes from participants’ interpretations of events and their ideas, explored through interactions between research participants and the researcher. The data collected by the study is understood to be generated by the research and research participants, and shaped by their intentions. Thus the theoretical background of the study, the research design and the research participants’ experiences contribute to the data collected. Epistemologically, therefore, this study is interested in socially constructed knowledge. In terms of ontology – the nature of reality under research – critical realism is based on ontological realism, while epistemological social constructivism typically goes hand in hand with ontological constructivism, where reality is viewed as constructed, and different views are positioned as relative and non- hierarchical. Advocates of critical realism propose that while participants may differ in their interpretations of reality, reality none the less exists in a manner that is outside or beyond a human capacity to know about it. The key components of critical realism, argues Xxxxxxx, are ’ontological realism, epistemological relativism and judgemental rationality’ (1998, p. xi). The combination of socially constructed, relativist epistemology with ontological realism, tempered by a view of reality as comprised of several irreducible strata, provides the evaluative means of making rational choices between competing knowledges based on their apparent relat...
