Page 25 - ทฤษฎีและแนวปฏิบัติในการบริหารการศึกษา หน่วยที่ 1

1-15

These definitions are less restrictive than the Feigl definition, yet they are not so
all-encompassing that meaning is lost, and they avoid mixing the “is” and “ought.”

To illustrate briefly the application of this type of definition, consider the school
administrator who begins with the assumption that the morale of a group is related to the
productivity of a group. Once such an assumption is made and observable measures of morale
and productivity are accepted, one is in a position to collect empirical data in specific set-
tings; that is, to observe the extent to which the assumption holds in, say, a school faculty.
If observation in particular settings tends to suggest that the assumption is useful, one is
in a position to extend the assumption. For example, if the school principal will engage in
specified activities, faculty morale will improve and productivity will increase. However, if
observation does not provide support for the assumption that morale and productivity are
related, different assumptions might be made as a basis for observations in different settings.
In this sense theory helps us understand what is or what may be in regard to particular
relationships. However, it does not tell the administrator what should be.

In brief, there is a lack of clarity among scholars about the meaning of theory. The
student of educational administration will find a wide range of pronouncements that are
labeled as theory.

Some Common Characteristics
In spite of differences in definition, there appears to be general agreement in regard to four
essential characteristics of a theory.

1. Because a theory is the creation of the theorist, there is no prescribed procedure
for developing a theory. The theorist may use direct observation, the work of other theorists,
the results of other research, or some combination thereof.

2. Because the postulates that make up a theory are abstract, a theory cannot be
tested directly. Because a theory cannot be tested directly, it is inappropriate to speak of a
theory as being true or false. It is more appropriate to speak of theory in terms of its useful-
ness. On this point, Hall and Lindzey noted:

The theory can be seen as a kind of proposition mill, grinding out related empiri-
cal statements which can then be confirmed or rejected in the light of suitably controlled
empirical data. It is only the derivations or propositions or ideas derived from the theory
which are open to empirical test. The theory itself is assumed and acceptance or rejection
of it is determined by its utility, not by its truth or falsity. In this instance, utility has two
components-Verifiability and comprehensiveness. verifiability refers to the capacity of the