A Casual Analysis in Research on History of Education

• Authors: Leonid Vakhovskyi , Tetiana Ivchenko , Svitlana Sechka

Abstracts

EN

Aim. The purpose of the study is to reveal the cognitive potential and limitations of causal analysis in historical and pedagogical research and to consider alternative methods of explaining historical and pedagogical facts. Methods. Methodological significance for the study were the principles of historicism, objectivity, historiographical tradition, taking into account the totality of facts. To implement the goal a set of theoretical methods was used: analysis, synthesis, comparison, generalisation, and systematisation of scientific positions, historical-genetic, historical-comparative, historical actualisation of the problem. Results. The essence of causality as one of the most important forms of interconnection and interdependence of phenomena and processes of being, expressing a special genetic relationship between them, reveals the specificity of functional and stochastic (random) causality. Historical forms of determinism were characterised: classical (linear), non-classical (non-linear) and neoclassical (fractal). Conclusion. The search for monocausal determination in the study of historical and pedagogical processes seems unproductive. To get a more complete and reliable picture of the cause-effect relations the causal analysis should be complemented by teleological analysis, which will make it possible to find out not only why, but also for what purpose certain actions were carried out. Only in this case is it possible to provide scientific and objective historical explanations and interpretations, the adequacy of understanding of historical and pedagogical facts, to find ideas and meanings in the past experience, which will help to solve contemporary educational problems, to predict the development of education in the future.

Keywords

EN

causality; determinism; causal analysis; teleological analysis; cause; effect; history of education

• Publisher: Fundacja Pro Scientia Publica
• Journal: Journal of Education Culture and Society
• Year: 2022
• Volume: 13
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 253-262

Dates

published

2022

Contributors

author

Leonid Vakhovskyi

• Educational and Research Institute of History, Department of Social Work, International Relations and Socio-Political Sciences, Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University 36003, 3 Koval St., the City of Poltava, Ukraine

• https://orcid.org/0000000341632453

author

Tetiana Ivchenko

• Educational and Research Institute of History, Department of Social Work, International Relations and Socio-Political Sciences, Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University 36003, 3 Koval St., the City of Poltava, Ukraine

• https://orcid.org/0000000256466091

author

Svitlana Sechka

• Department of Foreign Languages, Donbas State Pedagogical University 84100, 19 General Batiuk St., Sloviansk, Ukraine

• https://orcid.org/0000000172047316

References

• Albulescu, I. (2018). The historical method in educational research. American Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Research (AJHSSR), 2(8), 185-190.
• Alexander, R. (2008). Essays on pedagogy. Routledge.
• Baldwin, P. (2004). Comparing and generalizing: Why all history is comparative, yet no history is sociology. In D. Cohen, M. O’Connor (Eds.), Comparison and History: Europe in Cross-National Perspective (pp.1-22). Routledge.
• Blyukher, F. (2004). Philosophical problems of historical science. IFRAN (in Russian).
• Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University.
• Bryzgalova, S. (2003). Introduction into scientific and pedagogical research. KGU (in Russian).
• Chapman, A. (2015). Developing historical and metahistorical thinking in history classrooms: reflections on research and practice in England. Diálogos – Revista do Departamento de História e do Programa de Pós-Graduação em História, 19(1), 29-55.
• Heckman, J. J. (2005). The scientific model of causality. Sociological methodology, 35, 1-97.
• Klyuyeva, Y. (2014). Fundamentals of Research Activity in Education. NNGU (in Russian).
• Liedtke, M. (1972). Evolution und Erziehung. Ein Beitrag zur integrativen pädagogischen Anthropologie [Evolution and education. A contribution to integrative pedagogical anthropology]. Vandenhoek & Rupprecht.
• Lukatsky, M. (2012). Pedagogical science: History and modernity. GEOTAR-Media (in Russian).
• Lyon, B. (1987). Marc Bloch: Historian. French Historical Studies, 15(2), 195-207. https://doi.org/10.2307/286263.
• Menchikov, G. (2014). The problem of determinism and its solution: Three types of determinism, fractal determinism. Bulletin of Kazan State University of Culture and Arts, 1, 10-17 (in Russian).
• Morrison, K., & Werf, G. (2016). Searching for causality in educational research. Educational Research and Evaluation, 22(1-2), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2016.1195081.
• Pearl, J. (2009). Causality: Models, reasoning and inference. Cambridge University Press.
• Schneider, B., Carnoy, M., Kilpatrick, J., Schmidt, W. H., & Shavelson, R. J. (2007). Estimation causal effects: Using experimental and observational designs. American Educational Research Association.
• Spirtes, P., Glymour, C., & Scheines, R. (2000). Causation, prediction, and search. The MIT Press.
• Suppes, P. (1970). A probabilistic theory of causality. Acta Philosophica Fennica, 24, 5-130.
• Woodward, J. (2003). Making things happen: A theory of causal explanation. Oxford University Press.
• Wright, G. H. (1984). Philosophical papers of Georg Henrik von Wright. Blackwell.

Identifiers

DOI

10.15503/jecs2022.2.253.262

Biblioteka Nauki

18105024