Methodological Insights of Action Research in Doctoral Studies within Education Disciplines: A Systematic Review

Action research (AR) has emerged as a preferred methodology among practice-based doctoral candidates, particularly in education. In conjunction, having a thorough understanding of AR methodology in doctoral studies is a must. Thus, this article investigated the methodology of AR used in doctoral stu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Tee, Tze Kiong, Chia, Swee Yee
Format: Article
Language:en
Published: Rsis 2025
Subjects:
Online Access:http://eprints.uthm.edu.my/12591/1/J19621_0ca6b95c1f531d67bf3e123ff7f82e93%20%281%29.pdf
http://eprints.uthm.edu.my/12591/
https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0084
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1834509266076041216
author Tee, Tze Kiong
Chia, Swee Yee
author_facet Tee, Tze Kiong
Chia, Swee Yee
author_sort Tee, Tze Kiong
building UTHM Library
collection Institutional Repository
content_provider Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
content_source UTHM Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
description Action research (AR) has emerged as a preferred methodology among practice-based doctoral candidates, particularly in education. In conjunction, having a thorough understanding of AR methodology in doctoral studies is a must. Thus, this article investigated the methodology of AR used in doctoral studies within the education disciplines from January 2013 to October 2024. The study included eight ProQuest doctoral dissertations and twelve articles from the Scopus database, selected based on relevance to AR methodology, focus on education disciplines, and methodological rigour. This study focuses on theoretical frameworks, AR models and types, data collection methods, sampling techniques, and sample sizes employed by action researchers. The findings revealed that Grounded Theory was the most commonly utilised theoretical framework, supporting iterative theory development to address complex educational challenges. The flexibility of AR models allows researchers to adapt methodologies to specific contexts, enhancing study efficacy and responsiveness. Traditional AR methods remain widely used due to their seamless integration into professional practices. The duration of AR projects varied, but at least one AR cycle was needed to tailor timelines to issue complexity. Interviews emerged as the primary data collection method, supplemented by questionnaires and focus groups. Most studies employed convenience sampling, with quantitative samples ranging from 25 to 275 participants and qualitative cohorts comprising eight to eleven individuals. This approach aligns with AR’s focus on addressing practical problems and fostering self-improvement, ensuring researchers balance data collection with meaningful insights. Although AR findings are not widely generalisable, their adaptability enables researchers to develop context-specific interventions tailored to the unique needs of educational settings. The iterative nature of AR fosters evidence-based improvements, reflective practice, participatory engagement, and real-time problem-solving. Future research should integrate structured frameworks, adopt mixed-methods approaches, and engage stakeholders to enhance the credibility and applicability of findings, contributing to a deeper understanding and more effective implementation of AR in educational research.
format Article
id my.uthm.eprints-12591
institution Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
language en
publishDate 2025
publisher Rsis
record_format eprints
spelling my.uthm.eprints-125912025-05-30T01:04:18Z http://eprints.uthm.edu.my/12591/ Methodological Insights of Action Research in Doctoral Studies within Education Disciplines: A Systematic Review Tee, Tze Kiong Chia, Swee Yee LB Theory and practice of education Action research (AR) has emerged as a preferred methodology among practice-based doctoral candidates, particularly in education. In conjunction, having a thorough understanding of AR methodology in doctoral studies is a must. Thus, this article investigated the methodology of AR used in doctoral studies within the education disciplines from January 2013 to October 2024. The study included eight ProQuest doctoral dissertations and twelve articles from the Scopus database, selected based on relevance to AR methodology, focus on education disciplines, and methodological rigour. This study focuses on theoretical frameworks, AR models and types, data collection methods, sampling techniques, and sample sizes employed by action researchers. The findings revealed that Grounded Theory was the most commonly utilised theoretical framework, supporting iterative theory development to address complex educational challenges. The flexibility of AR models allows researchers to adapt methodologies to specific contexts, enhancing study efficacy and responsiveness. Traditional AR methods remain widely used due to their seamless integration into professional practices. The duration of AR projects varied, but at least one AR cycle was needed to tailor timelines to issue complexity. Interviews emerged as the primary data collection method, supplemented by questionnaires and focus groups. Most studies employed convenience sampling, with quantitative samples ranging from 25 to 275 participants and qualitative cohorts comprising eight to eleven individuals. This approach aligns with AR’s focus on addressing practical problems and fostering self-improvement, ensuring researchers balance data collection with meaningful insights. Although AR findings are not widely generalisable, their adaptability enables researchers to develop context-specific interventions tailored to the unique needs of educational settings. The iterative nature of AR fosters evidence-based improvements, reflective practice, participatory engagement, and real-time problem-solving. Future research should integrate structured frameworks, adopt mixed-methods approaches, and engage stakeholders to enhance the credibility and applicability of findings, contributing to a deeper understanding and more effective implementation of AR in educational research. Rsis 2025 Article PeerReviewed text en http://eprints.uthm.edu.my/12591/1/J19621_0ca6b95c1f531d67bf3e123ff7f82e93%20%281%29.pdf Tee, Tze Kiong and Chia, Swee Yee (2025) Methodological Insights of Action Research in Doctoral Studies within Education Disciplines: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), ix (iiis). 1117 -1131. ISSN 2454-6186 https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0084
spellingShingle LB Theory and practice of education
Tee, Tze Kiong
Chia, Swee Yee
Methodological Insights of Action Research in Doctoral Studies within Education Disciplines: A Systematic Review
title Methodological Insights of Action Research in Doctoral Studies within Education Disciplines: A Systematic Review
title_full Methodological Insights of Action Research in Doctoral Studies within Education Disciplines: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Methodological Insights of Action Research in Doctoral Studies within Education Disciplines: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Methodological Insights of Action Research in Doctoral Studies within Education Disciplines: A Systematic Review
title_short Methodological Insights of Action Research in Doctoral Studies within Education Disciplines: A Systematic Review
title_sort methodological insights of action research in doctoral studies within education disciplines: a systematic review
topic LB Theory and practice of education
url http://eprints.uthm.edu.my/12591/1/J19621_0ca6b95c1f531d67bf3e123ff7f82e93%20%281%29.pdf
http://eprints.uthm.edu.my/12591/
https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0084
url_provider http://eprints.uthm.edu.my/