Page 88 - EDU_Programme_Handbook
P. 88
APPENDICES
Appendix 5: Writing in Education
Differences between Science and Education
As an expert in your field, it can be bewildering to encounter an academic discipline that is so different to the
one you are accustomed to working in. This is intended as a brief summary, and to orientate you as to some of
the differences you are likely to encounter throughout the PG Certificate, Diploma and Master’s in University
Learning and Teaching.
Theodosius Dobzhansky (1973) wrote
‘Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution’.
In the same way that Newtonian theory unifies much of Physics, evolution underpins modern Biology. By
contrast, Education as a discipline has no comparable unifying theory. Rather, there are a multiplicity of
theories, which are not exclusive and do not necessarily contradict each other. A behaviourist and social
constructivist interpretation of, say students doing experiments in the lab may both be equally valid but will
have very different conclusions. The absence of a grand theory of Education highlights other differences such
as:
• the importance of positioning;
• how data is collected;
• how evidence is used;
• reading and writing in Education.
In science, the ideal is objectivity – to remove the personal from the data so as to present results without bias.
In Education, the I is important, as this provides a context for both work and argument. Use of the first person
in educational writing is common and key to understanding the author’s perspective and interpretation of their
data. Again, where one might seek to use controls, or a double-blind controlled experiment, this is simply not
possible within an educational context. To do so would be the equivalent of attempting to control research in
the field – it may be possible to remove certain factors, but the complexity of people and situations mitigates
against this. In a similar way, if you are used to the scientific paper format of Abstract, Methods, Results,
Discussion interspersed with figures and tables, then a first encounter with the educational literature can be
disconcerting, as it is more difficult to pick out headlines in the same way you might be used to. In education,
the argument itself is a fundamental part of the writing, and as most educational research is qualitative rather
than quantitative, graphs and dense tables will be largely absent. In their place you will often find quotes
taken from interviews, or the results of surveys or observational data. Anecdotes, or a small sample size,
which would be seen as a negative in science are comparatively normal in education. Analysis of a single
interview could provide the basis for a paper, however most writing in Education is on a larger scale. It is far
more common to publish books than in science. Partly because of this, and partly because a new theory does
not negate an old one, a book published 100 years ago is often a valid and, indeed, necessary citation.
86 EDU © Imperial College London 2014-15
Appendix 5: Writing in Education
Differences between Science and Education
As an expert in your field, it can be bewildering to encounter an academic discipline that is so different to the
one you are accustomed to working in. This is intended as a brief summary, and to orientate you as to some of
the differences you are likely to encounter throughout the PG Certificate, Diploma and Master’s in University
Learning and Teaching.
Theodosius Dobzhansky (1973) wrote
‘Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution’.
In the same way that Newtonian theory unifies much of Physics, evolution underpins modern Biology. By
contrast, Education as a discipline has no comparable unifying theory. Rather, there are a multiplicity of
theories, which are not exclusive and do not necessarily contradict each other. A behaviourist and social
constructivist interpretation of, say students doing experiments in the lab may both be equally valid but will
have very different conclusions. The absence of a grand theory of Education highlights other differences such
as:
• the importance of positioning;
• how data is collected;
• how evidence is used;
• reading and writing in Education.
In science, the ideal is objectivity – to remove the personal from the data so as to present results without bias.
In Education, the I is important, as this provides a context for both work and argument. Use of the first person
in educational writing is common and key to understanding the author’s perspective and interpretation of their
data. Again, where one might seek to use controls, or a double-blind controlled experiment, this is simply not
possible within an educational context. To do so would be the equivalent of attempting to control research in
the field – it may be possible to remove certain factors, but the complexity of people and situations mitigates
against this. In a similar way, if you are used to the scientific paper format of Abstract, Methods, Results,
Discussion interspersed with figures and tables, then a first encounter with the educational literature can be
disconcerting, as it is more difficult to pick out headlines in the same way you might be used to. In education,
the argument itself is a fundamental part of the writing, and as most educational research is qualitative rather
than quantitative, graphs and dense tables will be largely absent. In their place you will often find quotes
taken from interviews, or the results of surveys or observational data. Anecdotes, or a small sample size,
which would be seen as a negative in science are comparatively normal in education. Analysis of a single
interview could provide the basis for a paper, however most writing in Education is on a larger scale. It is far
more common to publish books than in science. Partly because of this, and partly because a new theory does
not negate an old one, a book published 100 years ago is often a valid and, indeed, necessary citation.
86 EDU © Imperial College London 2014-15
