Difference between a field in education and a discipline?

Answer 1

In relation to education,

1. there is the educational process,
2. there is the activity of conducting research or inquiry about the educational processin order to produce knowledge about the educational process,
3. there are the rules of evidence and proof which must be followed to support the claims that the statements produced by the research or inquiry about the educational process are true or warranted and
4. there is knowledge about the educational process which is produced by successful, disciplined research or inquiry about the educational process.

Confusion is caused by people (academics in universities, researchers who conduct inquiry about the educational process, teachers, people in general) using the terms field and disciplineinterchangeably to name these four different things.

Confusion in discourse about the educational process can be dispelled if you sort out the four critical categories as follows.

1. Field of phenomena:A field of phenomena is a set of occurrences which happen or exist. In the field of phenomena which we name with the term education, there are teachers guiding students in their study, students following the guidance of their teachers in their study, some content being taught and studied, some learning goals being pursued, some methods of teaching and studying being used, some cultural, social and physical setting in which the teaching and studying takes place, etc. Research or inquiry can be conducted about the field or parts of the field of the educational process. Examples of parts of the educational process include early childhood education, primary education, secondary education, tertiary education, vocational education, special education, physical education, mathematics education, science education, education for social equity, education for women, etc.
2. Activity of conducting research or inquiry about the educational process. Various people (university academics, professional researchers) conduct research about the educational process. They do this by asking and answering questions about the educational process. They seek evidence to substantiate their answers so that the answers qualify as warranted assertions (or knowledge) about the educational process. Researchers intend to produce true statements about the educational process which can be shown to be true with the appropriate, necessary and sufficient evidence.
3. Discipline for conducting inquiry. The discipline followed by the researchers in their inquiry is the set of rules of proof and the methods of evidence gathering which they must follow in order to present warranted knowledge claims about the educational process. At least three broad rules of proof are used. They are the rules for proving analytic, normative and empirical knowledge claims about the educational process.
4. Fund of knowledge.Successful research or inquiry produces true statements or knowledge. The collection of true statements which can be made about the educational process makes up the total fund of knowledge about the educational process. A useful name for the total fund of knowledge about the educational process is the term educology. The use of the term educology avoids the confusion of mistaking the educational process (education) for knowledge about the educational process (educology). The total fund can be organized into smaller collections or subfunds of knowledge about the educational process. For example, there can be scientific knowledge about the educational process (i.e. knowledge about existing states of affairs in the educational process, or scientific educology). There can be praxiological knowledge about the educational process (i.e. knowledge about effective practices of teaching, studying, counseling, etc. in the educational process, or praxiological educology). There is historical knowledge about the educational process (i.e. knowledge about past states of affairs in the educational process, or historical educology). There can be normative philosophical knowledge about the educational process (i.e. knowledge about good and bad states of affairs in the educational process, or normative philosophical educology). There can be analytic philosophical knowledge about the educational process (i.e. knowledge about the meaning of terms and sentences used in discourse about the educational process, or analytic philosophical educology).

An excellent example of how the terms field and discipline can be made to malfunction through ambiguity and shifts in their meaning are given in the following remarks:

"'Field' is a branch of knowledge with its distinct scientific methods, conferences, traditions, etc. For example, field of computer science, field of cryptography, etc. A field may have sub-fields. For example, number theory is a sub-field (or simply the field) within the field of mathematics."

In the above sentences, the term field is functioning in the sense of a fund of knowledge.This can be made apparent by the following word substitution of field for fund of knowledge.

"[A subfund of knowledge] is a branch of knowledge with its distinct scientific methods, conferences, traditions, etc. For example [the fund of knowledge named by the term] computer science, [the fund of knowledge named by the term] cryptography, etc. A [fund of knowledge] may have [subfunds]. For example, number theory is a [subfund of knowledge] (or simply [the fund of knowledge]) within the [fund of knowledge named by the term] mathematics."

In the following sentence, the term field is again functioning in the sense of a fund of knowledge.

"Different fields may also overlap, in terms of knowledge."

This can be made apparent by the words substitution of fund of knowledge for field.

"Different [funds of knowledge] may also overlap, in terms of knowledge."

In the following set of sentences, the terms field and discipline are made to function with the same meaning, i.e. fund of knowledge.

"When a field becomes big enough then it may get the status of 'Discipline'. Note that 'Disciplines' are defined by academics; e.g., some universities consider the classic field of Mass Communication to be a discipline and therefore have a separate department, faculty members, administrative staff for this discipline; while some universities do not give the field of mass communication the status of discipline and therefore it is taught within other departments such as computer science, informatics, etc. In short, 'field' is from theoretical knowledge point of view, while 'discipline' represents recognized academic point of view by universities."

The meaning of this set of sentences can be clarified to some extent with term substitution of fund of knowledge for the terms field and discipline.

"When a [subfund of knowledge] becomes big enough then it may get the status of [an important] [ fund of knowledge]. Note that [important] [funds of knowledge] are defined by academics; e.g., some universities consider the classic [fund of knowledge about] mass communication to be a[n] [important] [fund of knowledge] and therefore have a separate department, faculty members, administrative staff for this [important] [fund of knowledge]; while some universities do not give the [fund of knowledge] [about] mass communication the status of [an important] [fund of knowledge] and therefore it is taught within other departments such as computer science, informatics, etc. In short, [a less important] [subfund of knowledge] is from a theoretical knowledge point of view, while [an important] [fund of knowledge] represents recognized academic point of view by universities."

The sentences quoted above are the very sorts of statements which lead to confusion of field and discipline in relation to the educational process and which lead to the question of what is the difference between field and discipline. You can sort all of this confusion out by maintaining the basic four critical distinctions of

1. the educational process as a field of phenomena about which research and inquiry can be conducted,
2. conducting research about the educational process as the activity of asking questions, answering questions and substantiating the answers with the necessary and sufficient evidence to warrant the answers as being true, i.e. as being knowledge,
3. discipline for conducting research as the set of rules of proof and the methods of evidence gathering which researchers must follow in order to present warranted knowledge claims about the educational process and
4. fund of knowledgeas the true statements about the educational process which are produced by sound, well disciplined research and inquiry, following the rules of proof and evidence gathering.