On Tue, 03 Oct 2000 11:13:13 -0400 "Lubomir S. Popov"
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Just borrowing methodological elements and standards for
> professional behavior from two opposing paradigms does not make research
> designs better.
You are of course right to be concerned about this. What I think is
possible, and where I agree with the 'eclectic' part of the definition
I originally offered, is that it is possible to 'borrow' appropriate
methods and techniques as long as the research has a coherent underlying
methodology which is used to integrate these methods into the research
design.
The key words are 'appropriate' and 'integrated'. There is
little point in simply picking a little of what you fancy from whatever
area you like if you can not integrate or synthesise the methods into a
coherent whole. To my mind this is what methodology does.
Paul
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
P.M. Gutherson
[log in to unmask]
Tel: 01782 294669
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
__
Advanced Research Institute / \ | | )
School of Art & Design ____ \ __ /
Staffordshire University / \ | \ |
Stoke on Trent, ST4 2XN, UK _/ _\ _| _\ _|
tel +44(0)1782 294602 fax +44(0)1782 294873 [log in to unmask]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|