Search

In the context of the current debate regarding the best school setting (single-sex schooling v. coeducation) several advocates of coeducation have published emblematic papers that implicitly suggest that the debate should be considered as finished and that further research regarding this topic is not needed. This essay aims to refute the combined arguments of those articles using methodological and empirical facts, and show that the debate about this question and research into it should not be seen as complete, but instead should be promoted. At the same time, the essay identifies certain features in the aforementioned articles that present a risk of distorting science by moving towards arguments of an ideological nature, and it underlines the problem this represents for the debate itself and for science in general. The article does not seek to defend single-sex education, only the need for further research into it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is a reply to José Luis Gaviria's paper «The Priority of the Philosophy of Education over the Empirical Disciplines in Educational Research. A response to Gil Cantero and Reyero». The main arguments to be discussed are as follows: Education is an action, not an object, nor a closed mechanism made of programmed inputs and outputs which can be probabilistically considered. Education is essentially constituted by value orientations; the complex reality of the human is not limited by what is real, current or empirical. What is possible is relevant too. Hope takes part of educational knowledge; the hope that what is unexpected finally happens. Judgment in education is a kind of unveiling, it is an empathic adequacy, it is the subjective experience of an educational ideal which appears to us as a whole coherent with a particular sense of reality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]