People generally agree that different methods should be used to study educational administration. However, in reality, researchers may consciously or subconsciously lose sight of this position, they develop a preference for and favor certain methods in their field of work to the exclusion of others. This is similar to the case of an old person who is skilled in writing with a brush, who knows the wonders of pens and computers, but is reluctant and even hates to use such writing instruments in place of the brush. Colleen A. Capper accurately described such "bias," maintaining that the majority of researchers and practitioners in educational administration use certain methods, or, in other words, work under the guidance of "certain paradigms." On the surface, they acknowledge the legitimacy of other theoretical frameworks, but, in their hearts, they implicitly and explicitly maintain the ontological, epistemological, or methodological supremacy of their preferred paradigm, which they deem as independent and supersedes other methods and paradigms.1