276 Educational Psychology
in motivational theories has grown tremendously over the
past decade, and it is common for many current publications
and textbooks in the field of educational psychology to in-
clude substantial text devoted to both the theory and practice
of motivation and the regulation of motivation (Alexander,
2000).
Much of the contemporary conflict within the discipline of
educational psychology can be better understood when dif-
ferences in epistemological stances are taken into account
(O’Donnell & Levin, 2001). As O’Donnell and Levin sug-
gest, there are essentially two epistemological stances, result-
ing in two different research traditions. Some educational
psychologists take the positivistic or postpositivist position.
These researchers emphasize explanation, prediction, and
control, and research often focuses on hypotheses and exper-
iments. Researchers with a preference for critical theory and
constructivism have more interest in arriving at an under-
standing of the construct under study. Because the method
used in this research is frequently qualitative, the increased
understanding of the construct often occurs on the part of
both the researcher and the participant (McCaslin & Hickey,
2001; O’Donnell & Levin, 2001). As Pintrich (2000b) notes,
educational psychologists should, however, be well beyond
the quantitative-qualitative debate. Instead, our concern
should now be on providing valid and reliable evidence that
supports our conceptual models and conclusions.
THE FUTURE
In American society now more than ever, educational psy-
chology is moving into the public’s consciousness and into the
classroom. For example, typing the term “strategic learning”
into a public computer search engine (i.e., not PsychINFO or
a similar database) yields more than 5,000 hits; the term “self-
regulated learning” produces almost 3,200 additional hits.
The future of educational psychology is bright and full of
exciting challenges. The dawn of the Information Age is chal-
lenging our most fundamental conceptions of learning, in-
struction, assessment, and appropriate outcomes in relation
to education and training. The importance of core research
and development areas in educational psychology, such as
motivation, self-regulation and strategic learning is expand-
ing rapidly. These are exciting times to be an educational
psychologist.
REFERENCES
Alexander, P. (2000). Humble beginnings, ambitious ends: Special
issue on motivation and the educational process. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 25,1–2.
American Psychological Association. (2000). Membership dues
statement(No. 7). Washington, DC: Author.
Ball, S. (1984). Educational psychology as an academic chameleon:
An editorial assessment after 75 years. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 76(6), 993–999.
Berliner, D. C. (1993). The 100-year journey of educational psy-
chology: From interest to disdain, to respect for the practice. In
T. K. Fagan & G. R. VandenBos (Eds.), Exploring applied psy-
chology: Origins and critical analyses(pp. 41–78).Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association.
Berliner, D. C., & Calfee, R. C. (Eds.). (1996).Handbook of educa-
tional psychology.New York: Macmillan Library Reference USA.
Brownlee, S., Leventhal, H., & Leventhal, E. A. (2000). Regulation,
self-regulation, and construction of the self in the maintenance of
physical health. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner
(Eds.),Handbook of self-regulation(pp. 369–416). San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.
Charles, D. C. (1976). A historical overview of educational psychol-
ogy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 1,76–88.
Creer, T. L. (2000). Self-management of chronic illness. In M.
Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-
regulation(pp. 601–630). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Dewey, J. (1913). Interest and effort in education.New York:
Houghton Mifflin.
Dewey, J., & Dewey, E. (1915). Schools of tomorrow.New York:
Dutton.
Endler, N. S., & Kocovski, N. L. (2000). Self-regulation and dis-
tress in clinical psychology. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, &
M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation(pp. 569–600).
San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Farley, F. (1989). Challenges for the future of educational psychol-
ogy. In F. Farley & M. C. Wittrock (Eds.), The future of educa-
tional psychology(pp. 19–29). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gage, N. L. (1964). Theories of teaching. In E. R. Hilgard (Ed.),
Theories of learning and instruction(63rd yearbook of the
National Society for the Study of Education, Pt. 1, pp. 268–285).
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Garcia, T., & Pintrich, P. R. (1994). Regulating motivation and
cognition in the classroom: The role of self-schemas and self-
regulatory strategies. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman
(Eds.),Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and
educational applications(pp. 127–153). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Glazer, R. (1962). Training research and education.Pittsburgh, PA:
University of Pittsburgh Press.
Glover, J. A., & Ronning, R. R. (1987). Historical foundations of
educational psychology.New York: Plenum Press.
Good, T. L., & Levin, J. R. (2001). Educational psychology yester-
day, today, and tomorrow: Debate and direction in an evolving
field.Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 69–72.
Grinder, R. E. (1989). Educational psychology: The master science.
In F. Farley & M. C. Wittrock (Eds.), The future of educational
psychology(pp. 3–18). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.