.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Empirical versus Theoretical?: Education Faculty's Scholarly Publications without IRBs
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
H
H
K
M
M
S
P
T
DOI：10.61882/johepal.6.4.155.png)
.png){kind=icon}
Original request for help.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) play a vital role in education research by upholding ethical standards and protecting human subjects. However, critics argue that many IRBs lack the expertise to properly assess social science research and may favor quantitative methods. This article engages with the ongoing debate between empirical and theoretical literature in education, drawing on studies such as Carpenter et al. (2023), who analyzed the balance of these types of scholarship in academic journals. Research shows that theoretical and empirical works often cite within their own domains, highlighting their distinct but complementary contributions. The importance of practical, practitioner-focused articles is also emphasized, as they help bridge theory and real-world application despite sometimes lacking empirical data. Systematic and scoping literature reviews further contribute to educational knowledge through rigorous analysis and synthesis of existing research. Overall, a balanced, methodologically pluralistic approach that values both empirical and theoretical work in teaching and learning.
Keywords:
Academic Culture
Faculty Scholarship
Knowledge Exchange
Methodological Pluralism
Interdisciplinary Collaboration
Institutional Review Board (IRB)
Journal
J
IF:
0.7
Papers:
22
Citations:
0
Organization
Cited Papers