Reflexivity for what? A response to Gewirtz and Cribb on the role of values in the sociology of education

Hammersley, Martyn (2008). Reflexivity for what? A response to Gewirtz and Cribb on the role of values in the sociology of education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29(5) pp. 549–558.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01425690802263718

Abstract

This article is a reply to Gewirtz and Cribb's argument for ethical reflexivity, presented in a previous issue of this journal. These authors compared their views with mine, suggesting a way in which the differences between our positions could be overcome. I argue that, while there is certainly substantial agreement, there are also some fundamental differences between us, notably about the goal of research. Indeed, in my view, what they recommend involves a greatly increased danger of bias and a version of scientism. At issue here is, in large part, the kind of ethical reflexivity that is appropriate in sociological work.

Viewing alternatives

Metrics

Item Actions

Export

You can export this page using these formats Digital Object Identifier - DOI

About

• Item ORO ID
• 15750
• Item Type
• Journal Item
• ISSN
• 0142-5692
• Keywords
• reflexivity; fact and value; research and practice; bias; scientism
• Academic Unit or School
• Faculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language Studies (WELS) > Education, Childhood, Youth and Sport > Education
  Faculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language Studies (WELS) > Education, Childhood, Youth and Sport
  Faculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language Studies (WELS)
• Depositing User
• Colin Smith