This article examines different conceptions of causation and their implications for understanding educational phenomena and conducting educational research. Specifically, I discuss four research designs for pursuing questions about causation in education. Two of these research designs take a variance approach to causation , while the other two take a process approach . The point of the discussion is to illustrate, first, their respective strengths and, second, their necessary interdependence. Ultimately, I argue that just as both hammers and saws are needed (...) to build a good house, both variance and process approaches are needed to build a good understanding of causation in education. (shrink)

This essay offers a diagnosis of what may be at stake in the current preoccupation with defining science‐based educational research. The diagnosis unfolds in several readings: The first is a charitable and considerate appraisal that draws attention to the fact that advocating experimental methods as important to a science of educational research is not an inherently evil thing to do. Subsequent readings are grimmer, suggesting more deleterious consequences of the science‐based research movement for the entire enterprise of educational practice and (...) research. The central thesis of the essay is that making arguments about method and science the focal point in the current quarrel may be largely beside the point. Instead, educational researchers should join the political and public conversation about the place of educational science in society and about how science is both implicated in and confronts the politics of what counts as knowledge. (shrink)

The ascendant view in the current debate about education science —experimentism— is a reassertion of the randomized experiment as the methodological gold standard. Advocates of this view have ignored, not answered, long‐standing criticisms of the randomized experiment: its frequent impracticality, its lack of external validity, its confinement to a regularity conception of causality, and its externalization of politics. This article rehearses these criticisms and then adumbrates the alternative of experimentalism. In contrast to experimentism, experimentalism is expansive and variegated in its (...) conception of scientific method, seeing methodology as itself an object of experimentation. Experimentalism also includes a central role for intentional causation and self‐consciously incorporates progressive political values. (shrink)