Often the problem is that an author fails to justify his/her research effort with a theoretical framework. Many individuals have a rather narrow conception of what constitutes a theoretical framework or that it is somehow distinct from a conceptual framework.
The distinction on lack thereof is a story for another day.
Clearly quantitative research paradigms are couched in a realist perspective and qualitative research paradigms are couched in an idealist perspective (Bogdan & Biklen, ).
The discussion here is focused on theoretical frameworks at a much more specific and localized perspective with respect to the justification and conceptualization of a single research investigation. Indeed, the answers to these questions are the substance and culmination of Chapters I and II of the proposal and completed dissertation, or the initial sections preceding the Methods section of a research article.
At this point, the doctoral student has become quite familiar with two distinct lines of educational research.
The research on the effectiveness of questioning has established that there is a problem.
Additionally, a large proportion of doctoral theses do not fit the narrow definition described.
The argument here is not that various research paradigms have no overarching philosophies or theories about knowing.
Other than the poor or non-existent validity and/or reliability of data collection measures, the lack of a theoretical framework is the most frequently cited reason for our editorial decision not to publish a manuscript in the .
A poor or missing theoretical framework is similarly a critical problem for manuscripts submitted to other journals for which Norman or Judith have either served as Editor or been on the Editorial Board.