Invisible Paradigms: A Critical Realist Analysis of Ontological, Epistemological, and Axiological Positioning in Three Engineering Education Research Journals

Engineering education research (EER) draws on a wide range of philosophical traditions, yet the ontological, epistemological, and axiological (OEA) commitments that shape how knowledge is produced are rarely made explicit in published work. This study investigated the prevalence and nature of OEA positioning across a purposive sample of 54 papers published in 2024 in three Q1 engineering education journals: the Journal of Engineering Education, the European Journal of Engineering Education, and the Australasian Journal of Engineering Education. Using critical realism as a metatheoretical framework, we developed an OEA coding instrument and applied it through an AI-assisted abductive coding process, assigning ontological, epistemological, and two-level axiological codes to each paper and assessing their internal coherence. The overwhelming majority of papers carry implicit rather than declared OEA commitments, a pattern consistent across journals and methodologies. The field is genuinely philosophically plural, with ontological positions ranging from naïve realism to social constructionism and critical realism, but the lack of clarity in this space potentially has consequences for knowledge transfer to practice, cumulative knowledge-building, and the coherence of individual studies.