Paradigms in Physics Education Research

TL;DR

This paper compares two main paradigms in physics education research—recurrence-oriented and case-oriented—highlighting their assumptions, aims, and research designs through theory, interviews, and published examples.

Contribution

It clarifies the distinct assumptions and methodologies of recurrence- and case-oriented PER, linking social science research paradigms to physics education research practices.

Findings

Recurrence-oriented PER seeks reproducible, representative patterns.

Case-oriented PER aims to develop theory through case analysis.

Researchers often combine both paradigms in practice.

Abstract

In this paper, we describe two paradigms in physics education research (PER): recurrence-oriented and case-oriented PER. We connect theory on research methodologies in the social sciences to interviews with physics education researchers and examples of published PER to articulate the specific assumptions of recurrence- and case-oriented PER. We show that the different assumptions made in these two paradigms bear out in specific aims and research designs taken up by physics education researchers. In particular, recurrence-oriented research seeks reproducible, representative patterns and relationships; human behavior is modeled as governed by lawful (albeit probabilistic) relationships. Case-oriented research, in contrast, seeks to refine and develop theory by linking that theory to cases; human action is assumed to be shaped by the meanings that participants make of their local environments. We briefly offer examples in which researchers take up both the recurrence- and case-oriented research paradigms.