Analysis of epistemological congruence in Final Works of Concentration UCAB Guayana


  • Gilberto Resplandor Barreto
  • Jesús Medina Maldonado



Philosophical congruence, ontological, epistemological and methodological perspectives


This documentary research has had 56 Final Concentration Works as references, prepared by the students of Social Communication from the UCAB (extension Guayana) in the academic periods 2017-2018 and 2018-2019, which are a requirement to qualify for the degree. An analysis of their philosophical congruence related to ontological, epistemological and methodological perspectives was performed. The dynamics were developed in several stages: first the 97 TFCs, that are stored in the University Library, were reviewed; secondly, the work was classified according to the methodology used. 56 reports were obtained under the qualitative methodology, in which the phenomenological and hermeneutic methods prevailed. The analysis carried out through a matrix developed for this purpose, showed that the lack of knowledge related to the principles and characteristics of the qualitative paradigm, this led to the approach of objectives far from the purposes of this type of research by not assessing the nature of the object of study in its just dimension. While there is coherence between the research question, the overall objective and the specific objectives, the reports, in this first part, are associated with the quantitative methodology more than the qualitative methodology. The lack of theoretical support represented for the most part by the background of the research and some basic definitions did not allow the theoretical-praxis contrast typical of this type of research. The gaps highlighted in the methodological approach leave clear evidence of a great weakness by not clarifying in detail the design of the research, presenting a procedure that did not specify how the data was obtained and how it was analyzed. As a product of the analysis carried out, it is concluded that the reports submitted do not have philosophical consistency in the absence of correspondence between the perspectives considered.