Hello!
I have a question about the discrepancy between conceptualization and operationalization in my study.
I used the concept named 'multicultural teaching competency'(MTC) (Spanierman et al., 2010). In their paper on validating the MTC scale, they conceptualised MTC as awareness, knowledge, and skills.
But when they processed EFA, CFA, and reliability test, the results showed that only knowledge and skills are two sufficient factors to explain MTC.
The authors explained a few reasons why awareness is not one of the factors.
But how can I justify in my dissertation the discrepancy between their original conceptualisation in which they mentioned MTC is composed of awareness, knowledge, and skills, and the outcome of the study which only knowledge and skills are two sufficient factors for MTC?
My question would be why do you feel the need to come up with a justification? Should not the authors of the original work have provided such a (hopefully convincing) justification for retaining 3 factors when their empirical analyses supported only 2?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Research Papers