Unpredictability and Indeterminism in Human Behavior: Arguments and Implications for Educational Research

Abstract

This essay presents arguments for the view that complex human behavior of the type that interests educational researchers is by its nature unpredictable if not indeterminate, a view that raises serious questions about the validity of a quantitative, experimental, positivist approach to educational research. The arguments are based on (a) individual differences, (b) chaos, (c) the evolutionary nature of learning and development, (d) the role of consciousness and free will in human behavior, and (e) the implications of quantum mechanics. Consequently it is argued that educational research that attempts to predict and control educational outcomes cannot be successful and that educational research should focus on providing descriptions and interpretations of educational phenomena to provide findings that can be used to improve our understanding of learning, development, and education and to facilitate their evolution.

Curriculum Theory as Practiced: Case Studies of Operationalized Value Orientations

“…The theory elaborates a framework of critical components hypothesized to influence both intermediate and long-term decisions. When this model is applied to educational ecosystems (i.e., Cziko, 1989;Sawada & Caley, 1985), learning 372 ENNIS is thought to be influenced by a few strong attractors acting within various learner, instructional, and contextual constraints. Attractors are major, controlling variables that influence or attract surrounding elements or behaviors.…”

Who is winning the paradigm war? The futility of paradigm inflexibility in Administrative Sciences Research

“…They explain that external validity refers to how generalizable research findings are while internal validity applies to experimental or quasi-experimental research and deals with the authenticity of causality. Measurement validity is said to be when an instrument actually measures what it purposes to measure and therefore meaningful inference can be drawn [16]. All these help to lend credibility to the research process [7].…”

“…However, it is argued that human behaviour cannot be measured and that humans react to different situations in different ways [17]. This accounts for the stiff criticisms that greeted the rational approach to consumer behaviour which holds that humans can react in a predictable manner [16]. If human behaviour cannot be measured as upheld by [17], it therefore means that the conclusion drawn by [8] by merely codifying participants" responses may yield a different result with a qualitative approach and therefore makes his conclusion questionable.…”

“…But this standpoint was punctured by [16], who argues that humans respond to situations according to their level of knowledge and prevailing circumstance at the time and that by probing further, the participant is able to reveal things not mentioned earlier that will aid the research process. Furthermore, the quantitative research sees humans and social institutions from the spectrum of physical sciences and therefore creates a static and robotic view to social life [3]; [6].…”

Chaos Science: New Metaphors for Counseling

“…Chronbach (1988) suggested that work in chaos will suggest analogies to those who study human interactions and that this metaphoric use will suggest questions that do not require complex mathematical analyses. This may further legitimize departures from the orthodox "scientific" research perspective that attempts to predict and control to one that attempts to describe, appreciate, interpret, and explain social and individual behavior (Cziko, 1989). Sensitive dependence, turbulence, strange attractors, and iteration are concepts of chaos that provide metaphors for counseling.…”