A conceptual framework is an important part of a doctoral research project and provides a clear outline of the process of a study in terms of its proposed aims, constructs and concepts to be explored and variables under investigation (Berman & Smyth, 2015). In a study, it may be explicit in the form of a diagram which “specifies the variables of interest and the expected relationships between them” (Bickman & Rog, 2009, p. 7) or implicit in the form of operational definitions and variables. Berman and Smyth (2015)
state that in a doctoral research, the explanation of a conceptual framework is “often implicit, however the role is more explicit” (p. 126). A conceptual framework can be considered as a knowledge organising and analysing tool that can present essential themes, features and processes of a research study. Green (2014) describes a conceptual framework as a map of a study that provides a rationale for the development of research questions and hypotheses and helps researchers in focussing “their minds on what the research is trying to achieve” (p. 35). It generally summaries the research aims, hypotheses, and operational definitions, essential and related concepts that could inform the whole research process.
Maxwell (2009) describes a conceptual framework as “a system of concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs and theories that supports and informs your research” (p. 222). This definition suggests that a conceptual framework, in addition to presenting important theoretical concepts, also outlines a researcher’s beliefs, assumptions and outcome expectations. Similarly, Punch and Oancea (2014) consider a conceptual framework as something that shows the conceptual status among the central concepts of a piece of research. Shields and Rangarajan (2013) define a conceptual framework as “the way ideas are organised to achieve a research project’s purpose” (p. 24). The authors describe the meaning and functioning of a conceptual framework using the metaphor of American football play. Shields and Rangarajan (2013) argue that like the football play has a plan of action which is tangled to a particular and timely purpose, the conceptual framework connects the research purposes, hypotheses, data gathering and analysis tools. Therefore, these authors suggest an idea of conceptual framework- research purpose pairing in order to help doctoral researchers in developing their research designs.
Although the terms theoretical and conceptual framework are often used interchangeably in the academic world, they refer to two different concepts. The former is derived from or based on an existing theory or theories (e.g. theory of motivation and learning) and has a more theoretical orientation. The latter, in contrast, is an organised and planned outline (generally in the form of a diagram) of some or all of the concepts, constructs and variables that the relevant theory/theories emphasize/function with, and has a more practical orientation. Green (2014) describes the confusion prevalent in the academic literature between the two terms and suggests that researchers should not get
hung up on the terminology. Doctoral students can get easily confused because very little is written about the explicit difference between these frameworks and available literature does not provide much help (H. E. Green, 2014). Green (2014) argues that some research approaches such as Grounded theory, might not even appear using a conceptual or theoretical framework because of the nature of the approach in which the theory is generated on the basis of data gathered. The common conclusion that Green (2014), Berman and Smyth (2015) and other scholars provide is the usefulness of designing and drafting the conceptual framework in a study. Therefore, these researchers encourage emerging researchers especially doctoral students to design and refine their conceptual framework as the research process proceeds.
In line with the Maxwell’s (2009) definition and Berman and Smyth’s (2015) guidelines, the conceptual framework of this study was designed (displayed in figure 2.2 below) in terms of the key theoretical concepts, their perceived relationships, researcher’s beliefs, assumptions and expected outcomes of the research.
Procedure Learning in small groups following the ‘Group Norms’ and using CCCM. Supporting others’ learning and motivation to learn Context Specific Domain of Science Teaching-Learning- Assessment
(Based on constructivist, social- cognitive and information processing theories: ZPD, collaborative learning and affective approaches)
Learning Sciences (Cognitive, collaborative and affective aspects: Learning and Thinking Together, CSCL)
CM, CCM and CCCM
Collaborative learning using CM
Assessment for learning (CM for formative assessment-
monitoring progress, and
diagnosing by making learning visible and providing feedback)
Theoretical underpinnings
Secondary school Science Education
Science learning is a
cognitive, affective and social process aimed at enhancing scientific literacy through: knowledge (Factual, Conceptual, Conditional and Procedural), skills (LOCS, HOCS, collaboration, ICT and communication), interest, attitudes, Understanding and their applications Outcomes (anticipated) (Enhanced) Knowledge Skills Attitudes Motivation to learn Science Achievement Action
Figure 2.2 Conceptual framework of the study
The left hand side box in figure 2.2 describes the nature of secondary school science learning as a process of improving science learning as a result of enhanced knowledge, skills, interest and attitudes, understanding and applications of all of these to achieve the scientifically valid understanding of science concepts. This box, in other words, indicates the context of the research project. The middle box in the diagram shows the teaching-learning-assessment approach proposed as an integration of different theories and strategies of teaching and learning. This box outlines some of the strategies based on some recent theories and approaches which have been reported as worthwhile in the science learning and teaching literature. In other words, this box provides a theoretical description of the research. The small right hand side upper box in the diagram shows the intervention in terms of application of CCCM and its constituent/supplementary components. The lower box on the right hand side of the figure outlines the expected outcomes of the study as a result of intervention. Overall, the focus of the research on conceptual learning and motivation towards science learning is made explicit in the conceptual framework at every stage of the process. The procedures, plan of action and the expected outcomes address the research purpose as shown by the arrows in the diagram.