Pedagogical innovation, evidence strength, and theoretical grounding in physical geography higher education: a systematic review

The expansion of pedagogical innovation in physical geography higher education has not been accompanied by equivalent theoretical consolidation, raising questions about the epistemic maturity of the field. This systematic review synthesises 64 peer-reviewed studies using PRISMA informed procedures to examine the relationship between empirical evidence strength and levels of theoretical articulation. Studies were classified through a dual analytical framework according to Evidence Strength (low to strong) and Theory Level (T0: none; T1: implicit; T2: applied; T3: integrated). The findings indicate a predominantly practice-led research culture in which 79.7% of studies lack explicit theoretical framing. Cross-tabulation reveals patterned tendencies linking empirical robustness and theoretical articulation, with studies employing more analytically transparent or multi-source designs proportionally more likely to demonstrate applied or integrated theoretical engagement; however, this association does not reach statistical significance, suggesting partial coupling rather than structural dependency. In response, the study advances a Layered Epistemic Model that conceptualises pedagogical development as the interaction of practice, learning mediation, conceptual transformation, and disciplinary epistemology, offering an interpretive lens for strengthening alignment between empirical rigor and conceptual grounding in physical geography education.