Limits of Generalizing in Education Research: Why Criteria for Research Generalization Should Include Population Heterogeneity and Uses of Knowledge Claims

by Kadriye Ercikan & Wolff-Michael Roth 2014

Context: Generalization is a critical concept in all research designed to generate knowledge that applies to all elements of a unit (population) while studying only a subset of these elements (sample). Commonly applied criteria for generalizing focus on experimental design or representativeness of samples of the population of units. The criteria tend to neglect population diversity and targeted uses of knowledge generated from the generalization.

Objectives: This article has two connected purposes: (a) to articulate the structure and discuss limitations of different forms of generalizations across the spectrum of quantitative and qualitative research and (b) to argue for considering population heterogeneity and future uses of knowledge claims when judging the appropriateness of generalizations.

Research Design: In the first part of the paper, we present two forms of generalization that rely on statistical analysis of between-group variation: analytic and probabilistic generalization. We then describe a third form of generalization: essentialist generalization. Essentialist generalization moves from the particular to the general in small sample studies. We discuss limitations of each kind of generalization. In the second part of the paper, we propose two additional criteria when evaluating the validity of evidence based on generalizations from education research: population heterogeneity and future use of knowledge claims.

Conclusions/Recommendations: The proposed criticisms of research generalizations have implications on how research is conducted and research findings are summarized. The main limitation in analytic generalization is that it does not provide evidence of a causal link for subgroups or individuals. In addition to making explicit the uses that the knowledge claims may be targeting, there is a need for some changes in how research is conducted. This includes a need for demonstrating the mechanisms of causality; descriptions of intervention outcomes as positive, negative, or neutral; and latent class analysis accompanied with discriminant analysis. The main criticism of probabilistic generalization is that it may not apply to subgroups and may have limited value for guiding policy and practice. This highlights a need for defining grouping variables by intended uses of knowledge claims. With respect to essentialist generalization, there are currently too few qualitative studies attempting to identify invariants that hold across the range of relevant situations. There is a need to study the ways in which a kind of phenomenon is produced, which would allow researchers to understand the various ways in which a phenomenon manifests itself.

To view the full-text for this article you must be signed-in with the appropropriate membership. Please review your options below:

Store a cookie on my computer that will allow me to skip this sign-in in the future.
Send me my password -- I can't remember it
Purchase this Article
Purchase Limits of Generalizing in Education Research: Why Criteria for Research Generalization Should Include Population Heterogeneity and Uses of Knowledge Claims
Individual-Resource passes allow you to purchase access to resources one resource at a time. There are no recurring fees.
Become a Member
Online Access
With this membership you receive online access to all of TCRecord's content. The introductory rate of $25 is available for a limited time.
Choose this to join the mailing list or add an announcement.
Print and Online Access
With this membership you receive the print journal and free online access to all of TCRecord's content.

Cite This Article as: Teachers College Record Volume 116 Number 5, 2014, p. 1-28 ID Number: 17429, Date Accessed: 2/24/2018 1:05:57 PM

Purchase Reprint Rights for this article or review