What are the criteria that you set as a researcher to distinguish a good theory that serves your research and provides you with data for the development of your practical side as a professor?
A good hypothesis is one that is testable, where you can design experiments to test its validity or invalidity. If you can't actually test the hypothesis then it isn't useful. Note that I am purposely using hypothesis instead of theory here, a theory is a concept that is generally well supported and already presumed to be correct.
As a researcher in education and scientific research, the criteria for evaluating a theory can vary depending on the research question and objectives. However, some common criteria that are often used to distinguish a good theory include:
Relevance: The theory should be relevant to the research problem and align with the research questions and objectives.
Parsimony: A good theory should be simple and straightforward, yet comprehensive enough to explain the phenomena under investigation.
Empirical Evidence: The theory should be supported by empirical evidence from previous studies and data collected from current research.
Predictive Power: The theory should be able to make predictions about future events or outcomes and be tested through empirical evidence.
Generalizability: The theory should be generalizable to other populations, cultures, and settings, and be applicable to a variety of real-world situations.
Coherence: The theory should be coherent and logically consistent, and not contain any contradictions.
Parsimony: A good theory should be simple and straightforward, yet comprehensive enough to explain the phenomena under investigation.
Open-endedness: The theory should allow for further refinement, adaptation and testing based on new data and evidence.
These criteria help researchers to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of a theory, and determine whether it is a useful tool for advancing their research and practice in education and scientific research.