By examining the respective contributions of Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn to the philosophy of science, the author highlights some prevailing problems in this article with the methods of so-called scientific research in education. The author enumerates a number of reasons why such research, in spite of its limited tangible return, continues to gain institutional momentum in colleges and faculties of education. Furthermore, the author argues that the various identified problems, when considered collectively, effectively reduce many claims emerging from scientifically designed education research to the realm of logically invalid hypotheses and questionable circumstantial evidence insulated from academic criticism by various professional and institutional interests. (Contains 1 note.)