I have noticed in several articles in Education that they don’t use a special theoretical framework for studying teacher attitudes, however I consider it is important to analyse the data based on a theoretical framework. I have realised that most of the studies in the field of medicine use the theory of planned behaviour for studying the link between attitudes and behaviour. I wonder if this theoretical framework can be used for studying only attitudes towards teaching science and not the relation between attitudes and behaviour ?
On the other hand, I found a new theoretical framework for studying teacher attitudes toward teaching science developed by van Aalderen-Smeets, S. I., Walma van der Molen, J. H., & Asma, L. J. F. (2012). This framework fits well to my research, but the framework hasn’t been widely used. What should I do? I have heard that it is supposed to use widely acceptable frameworks when we do research.
Note: my interview questions fit well for both theoretical frameworks. And I intend to do a qualitative research.
Thank you for your comments
One option might be to make your qualitative interview general enough to cover both options, and at the same time set up the interview to help you decide which theory is a better fit to your data. This kind of "competing theories" framework is a popular way to set up a conceptual framework.
But, the theory of planned behavior is so general that it might be hard to demonstrate that it is not occurring. There have been any number of studies that have examined it with qualitative interviewing, so if you do a Google search on "theory of planned behavior" and qualitative, you will get some examples of what others have done in this regard.
Another consideration about choosing between your two theoretical frameworks is where you want to publish and who your audience would be. If it is other educators, then a lesser know theory from the field of education might be a good choice.
Dear DAVID, thank you so much for your comments. I will have a look at the application of theory of planned behaviour from a qualitative perspective.
It does sound like the educational theory is a better fit as you would be able to identify it as the guiding framework for you study, instead of trying to adapt one that doesn't quite fit (removing the behavior link). You may also want to further examine the research on this topic though, as I've read of others theories used to explore this topic.
David L Morgan Hi, David. I'm currently working on a case study for my master degree's project. The topic is about student and faculty perception of video conference-based lecture and also to investigate their intention and reason to the future adoption of VC in learning. The data resources may come from the questionnaire and interviews. Now I need help with the literature review, especially the theoretical framework and the questionnaire. From my recent review of literature, there are UTAUT model, TAM and also the theory of planned behavior, but I'm still confused which one should be adapted into my own study.
Shudan Ma a lot depends on the goals you have for your qualitative and quantitative methods, and how you plan to integrate the results from both of them. So, you need to explicit about what purpose each method will serve within your overall design, and how you will connect what you learn with both methods.
There are a number of widely used scales for quantitative assessment of UTAUT model, TAM, and the theory of planned behavior. So ,the first thing I would do is read through the items in those scales and use their content to decide which measure is most relevant to your needs.
I also know that there are qualitative studies that investigate the theory of planned behavior, but I don't know about the technology models. For all of them, you can search Google Scholar, for example ["theory of planned behavior" qualitative] etc.
Thank you so much, David.
I have read some articles that adopted TPB in their qualitative study. To elaborate, the goal of my qualitative research is to conduct a case study of video conference-based lectures in my undergraduate university under this Pandemic Scenario (COVID-19). It's the first time for learning and teaching to be held fully online and on such a large scale.
Two main questions for that are 1)what are the student and teacher experience and perception of VC? (also to know any differences in attitudes towards it or even online learning before and after this attempt) ; 2) whether they will still adopt it in the future classroom, like, as a form of the flipped classroom. what factors influence their intention? how and why?
For time limit () Now I intend to use TPB as a framework for knowing about their perception and predicting future adoption (intention\behavior) of VC. I'll conduct in-depth interviews for students and teachers which will be informed by their responses to the questionnaire.
How do you think about these ideas or what suggestions you would make for me? (like, how many interviews I shall conduct at least?)
Later, I'll draw a concept map on MindMeister to make myself more clear of it and revise the questionnaire further.
Constructivist Theory (Jerome Bruner)
https://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/constructivist/
Please Go To This link:
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1183646.pdf
Theoretical framework
Self-efficacy theory (Bandura’s self-efficacy theory).
Social-Cultural Theory(Vygotsky’s theory).
Cognitive consistency approach: Balance theory,
Cognitive-affective consistency, Cognitive dissonance theory
Conceptual Framework
Independent variable: Teachers’ attitude: Cognitive, Affective, Behavioral.
Intervening variable: Reward system, Recognition, Motivation, Education policies.
Dependent variables: Affective Commitment: emotional attachment,
involvement, identification.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Qualitative Research