| Abstract: | Those who see research as structured by ‘paradigms’ of inquiry are often unclear about the precise nature of these paradigms due to the complexity of the concept. It is argued that there are competing understandings of paradigm, not simply different substantive paradigms. A ‘strong’ or socio‐historical account associated with Kuhn's work is contrasted with a ‘weak’ or philosophical account of paradigm that has become influential in educational circles. This analysis is applied to adult education as an academic field, which in terms of the ‘strong’ account of paradigm is not a unified scholarly enterprise but one animated by divergent, institutionalised research traditions. Three traditions are discussed in detail: participation studies, adult learning theory and participatory research. It is concluded that the field will be advanced by recognising the paradigmatic depth of its scholarly conflicts, and relating these differences to developments in other fields of human inquiry. |
