Identifying a Theoretical Framework

If the role of the theoretical framework is to underpin the nature of the goals that can

be pursued and the research claims that can be made, the selection of an appropriate

theoretical framework to facilitate is critical (Twining et al., 2017). The theoretical

framework has been described as the ‘blueprint’ for a study ‘the guide on which to

build and support your study, and also provides the structure to define how you will

philosophically, epistemologically, methodologically, and analytically approach the

should therefore link clearly to the research aim and objectives, but also my own

position as a researcher. Firstly, the research aims and objectives are considered,

before moving on to discuss my influence on the research.

3.4.1 The Research Aim and Objectives

In Chapter 2, the development of the aim and objectives of this study informed by the

desire to study the new visualisation tool in WBA and a review of relevant published

literature is described. The overall research aim: To explore how the introduction of a novel Visualisation Tool affects the workplace-based assessment practices of pharmacy interns and tutors in Ireland reflects that my primary interest in this research is in practice. It is exploratory, reflecting the fact that from the literature reviewed it is clear

that relatively little is known about WBA practices in general. The objectives (listed

below) reflect steps taken to ensure the research aim is comprehensively addressed.

Objective 1: To explore current practices, strengths, and challenges in WBA in the NPIP, including the role of technology (Chapter 4)

Objective 2: To explore how interns and tutors use compass technology with(out) the Visualisation Tool as part of WBA (Chapter 5)

Objective 3: To explore how using theory contributes to the study of WBA practice (Chapters 3 and 6)

3.4.2 My Influence on this Research

The aim and objectives of this thesis indicate that I intended to explore practices in the ‘real world’, examine the impact of a new technology, and consider the role of theory. Of course, I as the researcher have influenced the research aim and objectives through

my personal interest in WBA, my role in the development of the Visualisation Tool,

and my findings from the literature review. It is important to take account of how my

(Grant & Osanloo, 2014, p. 19). I was personally interested in how the Visualisation

Tool might workin the real world, and how it might address some of the concerns of

the interns and tutors discussed in Chapter 2. I did not want to narrowly evaluate user

satisfaction with the new tool, intern/tutor perspectives on the process, or address a

single element of WBA practice (e.g. rating scales) as I had found this frustratingly

predominant in the literature. Instead, I wanted to establish current practice no matter

how “messy” (Schön, 1987, p. 4).

These statements provide indications of my own ontological and epistemological

positions as a researcher, and it is necessary to consider how this impacts this thesis

(Grant & Osanloo, 2014). My previous professional training and practice in health

sciences represented a mainly positivist, quantitative tradition. In contrast, my

doctoral training in Part 1 of this PhD programme had introduced me to the world of

interpretivism and subjectivity. I do not fully accept or reject the philosophical stance

of either, and believe that both have merit and value in particular circumstances. I

have previously used both approaches (albeit separately), and believe that the most

important consideration is that a theoretical framework is appropriate for the nature of

the research being undertaken and it is used consistently in terms of its own particular

epistemological and ontological basis.

This stance reflects a pragmatic ontological (reality is the practical effects of ideas)

and epistemological position (any way of thinking/doing that leads to pragmatic

solutions is useful). The pragmatic worldview is not committed to any one system of

philosophy or reality, allows research freedom of choice in terms of approaches, and

recognises that research occurs in the social, historical, political, and other contexts

(Creswell, 2009, pp. 10-11). Furthermore, the pragmatic paradigm is often associated

interests in research. I identify with the “classic” form of pragmatism that considers

events in social and cultural contexts, and is not specifically tied to particular research

approaches described as follows:

Classic pragmatism is not a methodology per se. It is a doctrine of meaning, a theory of truth. It rests on the argument that the meaning of an event cannot be given in advance of experience. The focus is on the consequences and

meanings of an action or event in a social situation.

–Denzin (2012, p. 82)

More recently, pragmatism is increasingly associated with mixed methods research,

crudely interpreted as merely basing methodological decisions on the basis of “what

works” (Morgan, 2014). As Denzin (2012) explains, this problematic approach forgets

to take consideration of important paradigm, ontological, epistemological and

methodological differences when combining theories and methods. I believe that

theory should be used consistently in terms of its own norms, and ensured I

considered this in my research design. Therefore, I identify with the description

provided by Denzin (2012, p. 85) of a ‘theoretical bricoleur’. He suggests that while

such a person may use theory from different traditions, they may not feel that

paradigms can be “mingled, or synthesized”. That is paradigms as overarching

philosophical systems denoting particular ontologies, epistemologies, and

methodologies cannot be easily moved between”.

The combination of my own interests and pragmatic position led me to seek out a

theoretical framework upon which to base the study that would help me try to

understand the role of the Visualisation Tool in practice, reflect the complexity of the

real world, and yet allow me to focus sufficiently on the Visualisation Tool itself

broadly based on those described by Grant and Osanloo (2014, p. 19) that led to the

identification of the theoretical framework used in this research.