Challenging Paradigmatic Homogeneity in Special Education Research: A Systematic Review

The field of special education has privileged positivistic paradigms and, consequently, has underutilized qualitative methods. For those skeptical of this claim or curious about its accuracy, the purpose of this literature review was to: (a) understand the prevalence of qualitative methods within the broader context of the research methods published in top special education journals and (b) compare quantitative and qualitative features of the qualitative research published in those journals. Using a positivistic lens historically privileged in special education, we demonstrate in this review that quantitative methods remain the most prevalent method in special education research and that quantitative ways of knowing often infiltrate qualitative research in top special education journals. Thus, rather than solely focusing on increasing the diversity of methods used, the more impactful and pressing need is to increase the diversity of thought (i.e., paradigms) represented in the researchers, reviewers, editors, and gatekeepers that determine the paradigms that are present and privileged in special education research.