Kenneth R. Howe's paper challenges the incompatibility thesis, which argues that quantitative and qualitative methods in educational research are fundamentally incompatible due to their underlying epistemological paradigms. He contends that this thesis is based on a pragmatic philosophical perspective, emphasizing the practical effectiveness of methods rather than abstract epistemological considerations. Howe argues that the distinction between quantitative and qualitative methods is often blurred in practice, and that the differences between them are more about research interests and judgments than about fundamental epistemological differences. He suggests that paradigms should be evaluated based on how well they inform and are informed by research methods, rather than imposing one paradigm on all research. Howe concludes that the debate between quantitative and qualitative methods should be closed, and that combining these methods is both possible and beneficial, as they are inherently intertwined in research practice. He also addresses criticisms of pragmatism, arguing that it does not lead to relativism or irrationalism but rather provides a flexible approach to knowledge and inquiry.Kenneth R. Howe's paper challenges the incompatibility thesis, which argues that quantitative and qualitative methods in educational research are fundamentally incompatible due to their underlying epistemological paradigms. He contends that this thesis is based on a pragmatic philosophical perspective, emphasizing the practical effectiveness of methods rather than abstract epistemological considerations. Howe argues that the distinction between quantitative and qualitative methods is often blurred in practice, and that the differences between them are more about research interests and judgments than about fundamental epistemological differences. He suggests that paradigms should be evaluated based on how well they inform and are informed by research methods, rather than imposing one paradigm on all research. Howe concludes that the debate between quantitative and qualitative methods should be closed, and that combining these methods is both possible and beneficial, as they are inherently intertwined in research practice. He also addresses criticisms of pragmatism, arguing that it does not lead to relativism or irrationalism but rather provides a flexible approach to knowledge and inquiry.