BUILDING THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS FOR

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH REPORT IN EDUCATION

Samson O. CHUKWUEDO

Industrial Technical Education Unit, onyeluka.chukwuedo@uniben.edu

+2348029026002/+2348163389989

&

Ekemini E. UKO-AVIOMOH, Ph.D.

Professor, Home Economics Education

aviomoh_uko2002@yahoo.com

Department of Vocational and Technical Education, Faculty of Education, University of Benin,

Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria

Abstract

The paradigm shift in the conduct and the contents of research reports in universities has

continued to create challenges to many researchers. In recent times the gradual obligatory and

academic demands to include theoretical and conceptual frameworks in every quantitative

research reports have been described by many students as addition to research rigors. In some

cases some supervisors may find it difficult to guide their students. However it may appear, the

importance of theoretical and conceptual frameworks in quantitative research reports cannot be

overlooked because research variables depend largely on existing theories and interrelated

concepts. This paper therefore reviewed and suggested how theoretical and conceptual

frameworks can be developed for quantitative research reports. The paper also made attempt to

give clearer views on the conceptualization of theories, variables, models, constructs, and

concepts, theoretical and conceptual frameworks. The components of theoretical and conceptual

frameworks for quantitative research reports were presented, and attempts were made to show

how the frameworks are applied in a research. It was therefore concluded that theoretical and

conceptual frameworks are necessary and useful ingredients of a sound quantitative research

report. Recommendations were made, one of which was that both frameworks should be used

simultaneously in every quantitative research report.

Key Words: Theories, concepts, theoretical and conceptual frameworks, quantitative research.

Introduction

University education is an important level of education that is expected in any nation to

contribute significantly to the nation’s development through manpower development and

generation of useable research results. It takes the lead in all other tertiary levels of education,

African Journal of Studies in Education, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2015. Pp. 83-101

even in research reports. In recognizing the importance and contribution of University education

to national development, the Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004) proposed that University

education should develop high level manpower for the nation; its research should be relevant to

the nation’s development and universities should be encouraged to disseminate their research

results to both government and industries. This, no doubt, is similar to many other nations in the

21st Century; hence University education research findings should be able to make remarkable

contributions to the national development of any country.

There are many courses offered in the Universities and other tertiary levels of education all over

the world, but research report, commonly termed project, thesis or dissertation, is a crucial

course that every students must undertake and pass in order to graduate successfully irrespective

of the programme the students are undertaking (First Degree, Master or Ph.D.). This explains the

fact that research results should be relevant to the University in particular and the nation at large.

Research reporting can take students ample number of months or years to graduate, especially

amongst postgraduate students. This is a situation in Nigerian University education that is very

worrisome. This can be traced from the fact that such students possess inadequate skills in

conducting and reporting research probably because they do not adopt the logical procedures in

research report. According to Knobloch (2003) the logical chain of reasoning used to support the

argument of a research is a thread that provides the researcher a way to connect the problem

situated in a context, to the purpose and assertions, conceptual and theoretical framework, the

need for the study, the research design, the data sources and analysis, the findings and data claim

and to the implications and recommendations. These links, which may serve as difficult puzzles

to researchers, are the central links of a good research report. Researchers usually struggle to

provide clarity to the conceptual and theoretical frameworks in their study simply by adding the

headings to a review of literature, and this does not actually make it theoretical and conceptual

frameworks (Dyer, Haase-Witler & Washburn, 2003; Knoblocch, 2003; Eboh, 2009). As a result

of paucity literature on how to develop the frameworks, researchers are bound to struggle; hence

this paper attempts to demonstrate how to build the frameworks.

Research, according to Best (1989), is a systematic activity directed towards discovery and

development of an organized body of knowledge. In a similar vein, Gall, Gall and Borg (2007)

conceptualized educational research as an organized, professional approach to inquiry. The

general implication is that research involves careful, intelligent and relatively accurate measures

towards enquiries. In the context of this discourse, education research is an organized and careful

inquiry into educational problems or phenomena, with a view to providing and reporting possible

solutions, means or information that can be used to solve such problems if its results are

effectively employed and used for the needed situation. It is therefore not very ideal for research

scholars, supervisors or reviewers to always argue that a particular research finding must

completely solve an identified problem. Research findings can therefore provide a means

towards addressing a problem, serve as a guide towards further inquiry and/or solve the

identified problem, depending on the research condition, hence the need for applicable

conceptual and theoretical frameworks in a research report to provide a defined focus.

Whatever are the conditions towards conducting a particular research (for academic or grant

purpose), every research process requires an intellectual and comprehensive research report. The

format of reporting a research may differ slightly based on its purpose but the ingredients needed

in any research report must be provided to prove the worth of that research. It is therefore

expected that both research scholars and novices should be able to adopt good theoretical and

conceptual frameworks to provide a reasonable and acceptable research report. Conducting and

reporting a quantitative research results with appropriate theoretical and conceptual frameworks

usually give researchers less rigors to puzzle the research process and explain the research results

respectively.

Commonly, education researches are usually classified as qualitative or quantitative research.

The qualitative research has to do with researches that are inductive in approach and are meant to

understand social phenomena, generate theory, evolves during study and employ narrative

description and interpretation for data analysis (Ary, Jacobs & Razavie, 2002; Gall et al, 2007;

Anyakoha, 2009). In most cases, this type of research generates theory, hence emphases are not

usually placed on use of theoretical and conceptual frameworks to guide and explain the study.

Conversely, the quantitative researches are deductive. They test theories, study relationships,

cause and effect and employ statistical tools for numeric data analysis (Ary et al, 2002; Gall et al,

2007; Anyakoha, 2009). Since quantitative research is guided by concepts to show relationships,

cause and effect, and test theory to show the application of its findings in a real situation,

emphases are usually placed on the use of theoretical and conceptual frameworks to report such

study. This implies that quantitative research reports in education need theoretical and

conceptual frameworks to guide the study and explain the process and findings of the study.

Statement of the Problem

Writing research reports is so crucial that virtually every human endeavor depends on and make

use of it for progress. In education, research report is unavoidable since it is one of the major

courses that its requirements must be met by a student before certification. In most Universities,

emphases are mostly placed on quantitative research, but there seems to be paucity of research

texts comprehensively explaining how to build and employ theoretical and conceptual

frameworks at students’ disposal for research report. Most quantitative research reports in

education are usually appreciated by research scholars and assessors, and are preferably

published most often in journals. In order that students are completely tested for their total

knowledge in research and statistics, quantitative researches are also demanded in education

programmes. Sometimes it is believed that the findings of quantitative researches are more useful

for generalization and to solve a broad problem.

In recent times, the paradigm shift in the conduct and reporting of quantitative research in the

University has created challenges to researchers. Presently most of the researches carried out in

the University, for journal publication and for grants sometimes demand that the study be guided

and reported with either theoretical framework, conceptual framework or both, but, according to

Knobloch (2003) the abstract nature of building conceptual and theoretical frameworks makes

research a difficult and onerous process. Majority of postgraduate students have described this

situation as addition to research rigors, and sometimes overlook them in reporting their theses

and dissertations. The formative and research evaluation experiences of the researchers have

shown that it is usually difficult for most postgraduate students and beginning lecturers to

employ good theoretical and conceptual framework in reporting quantitative researches.

The study of Camp (2001) showed that a major stumbling block for many researchers in

conceptualizing research is the development of theoretical framework for the study; equally

daunting is the problem of verbalizing the theoretical framework for the purpose of publication

in the research literature. However these may look, the importance of theoretical and conceptual

frameworks in quantitative research reports cannot be overlooked because quantitative research

variables depend largely on existing theories and interrelated concepts for the study. There are

many literature suggesting and critiquing the need for conceptual and theoretical frameworks in

research, yet there are paucity of literature on the practical examples on how to develop

conceptual and theoretical framework in research (for instance Camp, 2001; Rojewski, 2002;

Dyer et al, 2003; Knobloch, 2003; Sinclair, 2007; Lashem & Trafford, 2007; Jabareem, 2009;

Ocholla & Roux, 2011). From our formative and supervisory experiences, the use of conceptual

and theoretical frameworks in students’ project and for journal publication has not received

remarkable seriousness. Dyer et al (2003) also found that 29% of the articles published in Journal

of Agricultural Education had appropriate theoretical frameworks, and 87% had appropriate

conceptual framework. Based on the problems arising thereof, this paper therefore attempt to

make contributions on how to develop and employ theoretical and conceptual frameworks for

reporting quantitative researches in education by tracing the links from the conceptualization of

concept, construct, variable and theory.

Overview of Concepts, Constructs and Variables in Research

No research can be carried out without considering the inherent concepts, constructs and

variables. These are meant to give researchers the direction towards the conceptualization of

every chapter or section in a research report. Many beginning and inexperienced researchers

however, have misconceived the use of concepts, constructs and variables in research report. The

three terms have been used interchangeably, but they do not mean exactly the same. An attempt

is made in this paper to distinguish among the three terms so that the conceptualization of

models, theories, conceptual and theoretical frameworks will be made clearer in this paper.

A concept, as commonly used, is an idea that can explain an abstract situation. In specific term,

concepts may be described as the building blocks of a theory. According to Eboh (2009) a

concept is an idea, thought or devolution of abstract system of thoughts, by which science

investigates, interprets and understands particular segments of reality of phenomena. Concepts

are therefore derived from mental images (conceptions) that summarize collection of seemingly

related observations, impressions and experiences. This implies that in defining a concept in a

research report, the researcher should device mental images for the purpose of clarity, even in

communication. To make the definition of a concept more specific in a research report, Deleuze

and Guattari (1991) hold that every concept has components and is defined by them.

The meaning and interpretation of concepts in research reports are usually influenced by their

context, especially in a situation where a particular phenomenon is studied in different

dimensions and perspectives. This is likely the basic reason why it is advisable that researchers

should make effort to give contextual meaning of certain concepts in their study. This will help

identify the components of the concepts and for proper identification of constructs and variable

that are necessary in the study, especially for conceptual and theoretical frameworks. Examples

of concepts include energy, force, intelligence, performance, motivation, hatred, behavior, just to

mention but a few. The deliberate use of these in research makes them constructs.

A construct is not exactly the same as a concept, as usually misused by many beginning

researchers. As defined in Omorogiuwa (2006), a construct is a concept that the scientist

deliberately and consciously invents or adopts for a specific purpose to explain a variety of

observable behavior. The implication is that a construct is an implied and transformed concept.

Gall et al. (2007) assert that a construct is a concept inferred from commonalities among

observed phenomena and that can be used to explain those phenomena. In theory development,

the authors state that a construct is a concept that refers to structure or process that is

hypothesized to underlie particular observable phenomena. According to the U.S. Department of

Health and Human Service (2005), constructs are concepts developed or adopted for use in a

particular theory. In order to transform a concept to a concept (for instance performance,

motivation, behavior, metal, weight) the researcher deliberately and consciously assign meaning

to the concepts by specifying the activities or operations that can measure them. This therefore

means that constructs are less abstract in defining concepts. Constructs are therefore concepts

that can be assigned meaning by specifying the activities or operations necessary to measure

them. Consider a situation where a food nutritionist is carrying out a study and takes obesity (a

construct) as one of the concepts. The researcher may make weight and height as measures for

obesity as a construct (concept) in that study. In the same vein weight and height can also be

measured as variables when classified or categorized.

A variable is a construct that is capable of taking different numerical values. Variables can be

typified as independent, dependent, categorical, moderator, control, intervening, continuous and

extraneous (Ezeji, 2004; Gall et al., 2007; Uzoagulu, 2011). An independent variable is one that

occur prior in time and has influence on another variable (dependent variable, while a dependent

variable is one that occur after, and as a result of, another variable (independent) variable (Gall et

al., 2007). A moderator variable is a secondary independent variable, which is selected by a

researcher to determine if it will affect the relationship between independent and dependent

variables (Ezeji, 2004). Consider a research on Work-related basic needs satisfaction (WBNS) as

a predictor of Work engagement, Burnout and Job satisfaction of Technical Educators, the

independent variable is WBNS while the dependent variables are work engagement, burnout and

job satisfaction. If a researcher considers marital status, family size and socio-economic status of

the technical educators as the variables that may influence the hypothesized predictions in the

research, then they are considered as the moderator variables. All other variables that the

researcher can control to cancel out or neutralize any effect they might otherwise have on the

observed phenomenon are the control variable. Conversely, internal and unobservable

psychological processes that influence the research are the intervening variables. According to

Gall et al. (2007) extraneous variable is any aspect of the situation in experiments, other than the

treatment variable that can influence the dependent variable and if not controlled, it makes it

impossible to effect of treatment variable on the dependent variable. It is important to state here

that the understanding of these variables in a research helps in selecting appropriate

model/theory for theoretical framework, and in incorporating the necessities of conceptual

framework.

Uzoagulu (2011) defined variables as features possessed by members of a population in a study.

According to Gall et al. (2007) variables are quantitative expressions of a concept that can vary

in quantity and quality in observed phenomena. The U.S. Department of Health and Human

Service (2005) stated that variables are the operational forms of constructs, and they define the

way a construct is to be measured in a specific situation. If a researcher considers a construct

such as age in a study, the researcher may symbolize age as young and old such that young and

old take nominal values of 1 and 2 respectively. In such a case the construct age becomes a

categorical variable because of its nominal scale. Similarly academic performance, in terms of

range of scores takes interval values that a researcher may use to classify students into pass or

fail, or into letter grades (A, B, C, D, E or F). These scores are the continuous variables.

The conclusive statement from the discussion so far is that all constructs are concepts but not all

concepts are constructs. Similarly, all variables are constructs (concept) but not all constructs are

variables. This calls for the attention of all researchers to note that there is distinction among

concepts, constructs and variables, even if there are similarities amongst the three terms. It is

necessary to state that a clearer understanding of these terms enhances researchers’ skills in the

adoption and use of theories, models, conceptual and theoretical frameworks in research report.

Use of Models and Theories in Research Report

The abstract nature of some phenomena or situations may be understood when a comprehensive

mode is used to illustrate such phenomena. In most cases the model is usually illustrated

schematically or diagrammatically in order to understand the abstraction in question. This is

what a model is to a theory. Theories are not exactly the same as models, however in research

reports many researchers consciously adopt the use of model as theory for presentation of

theoretical framework.

Models tend to be more prescriptive, specific and with narrow scope (Stetler, 2010). Models are

symbolic representations of phenomena, they depict a theory or conceptual scheme through the

use of symbols or diagram. A model is a representation of a system that allows for investigation

of the properties of the system and, in some cases, prediction of future outcomes. Models are

often used in quantitative and technical analyses, and sometimes also used in fundamental

analysis, and they are useful to researchers because they use a minimum amount of words, which

tend to be ambiguous, in representing reality. According to Stachowiak in Kuhne (2005) a model

needs to possess three features which are mapping feature - model is based on an original;

reduction feature - a model only reflects a (relevant) selection of the original's properties; and

pragmatic feature - a model needs to be usable in place of the original with respect to some

purpose. Examples of models are the Job Demand-Resources (JD-R) model by Maslach &

Jackson, (1986), and Kentucky Vocational Education Evaluation model, cited in Okoro (2005).

Models have been typified or classified by many scholars but in research, models are of two

types. These are mathematical or statistical models and schematic model or conceptual maps.

The adoption of any one of these in a research report largely depends on the nature and scope of

the research. In education, it is common to employ the schematic models except for researches

that have to do with mathematical related issues or problems.

A theory is an abstraction of some phenomena, usually ‘real’ but sometimes imagined in a form

that makes the simplification or abstraction clear, but a model is a simplification of reality which

takes the theoretical abstractions and puts it into a form that can be manipulated. The basic

components of a theory are concepts, and it consists of statements, each of which expresses a

relationship between or among concepts. Therefore a theory is an abstract generalization that

systematically explains or predicts the relationships among phenomena (Ennis, 1999; Fox &

Bayat, 2007; Gall et al, 2007; Jabareen, 2009; Kitchel & Ball, 2014; Imenda, 2014). A theory is a

proposed explanation for how a set of natural phenomena will occur, capable of making

predictions about the phenomena for the future, and capable of being falsified through empirical

observation. The definitions of theory depict its relevance in research since research is also

geared towards discovery and development of an organized body of knowledge which may be

relatively applicable in a given situation.

The relevance of theory in education cannot be overemphasized as Thomas (1997) affirmed that

theory is central to educational research; hence the need to acknowledge the types (Camp, 2001)

or levels (Neuman, 2003) of theories. Camp (2001) noted that Creswell posited that theories

could be grouped into three types based on the degree of the theory’s generality or specificity,

and these are grand, middle-range and substantive theories.

Grand (Macro-level) theories are used to explain major categories of phenomena and

are more common in the natural sciences. These theories attempt to describe large

segments of the environment. In education research, caution must be taken in employing

grand theories, except where the study intends to cover wider phenomena or situation.

This is because when applying a grand theory the researcher loses opportunity to connect

the findings to solve a more specific problem. In addition the researcher potentially loses

a clear direction for further research (Kitchel & Ball, 2014). In education and behavioral

science, the Maslow theory of motivation is an example of grand theory.

Middle-range (Meso-level) theories fall somewhere between the working hypotheses of

everyday life and grand theories. They are the link between macro and micro level

theories. They are more specific in certain phenomena than the grand theories; hence

these levels of theories are encouraged for use in education research for building

theoretical frameworks. An example of middle range theory is the self-determination

theory ((SDT) by Deci and Ryan (1985).

Substantive (Micro-level) theories offer explanations in a restricted setting and are

limited in scope, often being expressed as propositions or hypotheses and are utilized for

a very specific context. These are the most specific in a certain phenomenon. They are

sometimes used as conceptual models or conceptual frameworks. These categories are

also encouraged for application in education research. Examples of the SDT mini-

theories that can be grouped under micro-level theory are Cognitive Evaluation Theory

(CET), Organismic Integration Theory (OIT), Causality Orientations Theory (COT),

Basic Psychological Needs Theory (BPNT) and Goal Contents Theory (GCT) by Deci

and Ryan (1985).

Identifying the type of theory to be adopted by a researcher is very necessary in the building of

theoretical framework so that the researcher does not misuse the theory in research report. This

may be why Kitchel and Ball (2014) identified three different ways researchers misuse theories

in Agricultural Education research, which is also applicable to general education research. These

include inaccurate use of grand theory, mere semantic use of theory and mismatch of theory to a

study. Additionally, researchers should understand that it is not appropriate to use theories that

are not highly developed or have not been rigorously tested for building theoretical frameworks.

It is therefore important to note that adequate knowledge of the conceptualization of theories

enhances a researcher’s skill in building theoretical frameworks with much reduced inaccuracies

and research rigors in research reports.

Formulating Theoretical Framework in Research Reports

Development of theoretical framework is a fundamental consideration in research puzzles. The

process of formulating a theoretical framework for an informed research is developmental and

experiential (Sinclair, 2007). This explains why a broad review of literature enhances the

researcher’s ability to select the appropriate theory for theoretical framework. A framework may

be defined as the structure of a particular system, such that every aspect of the system gives the

true picture, function, components and application of the system. Liehr and Smith (1999) defined

a framework for research as a structure that provides guidance for the researcher as study

questions are fine-tuned, methods for measuring variables are selected and analyses are planned.

Until a theory is applied in line with these definitions, it is not a theoretical framework in

research. It is therefore important that every researcher should note that a theory, as it is, is not

the same as theoretical framework.

A theoretical framework in a research report is more than stating one or more theories, their

proponents, their tenets and a brief explanation of the theories, but must also be applied totally in

the research. According to Ocholla and Roux (2011), the theoretical framework of a study is the

structure that holds and supports the theory of a research work, while Sinclair (2007) stated that a

theoretical framework can be thought of as a map or travel plan. Ennis (1999) earlier noted that

the theoretical framework grows out of research focus, guides the design of individual studies

and structures your research presentations and publications. A theoretical framework according

to Imenda (2014) is the application of a theory or a set of concepts drawn from one and the same

theory to offer an explanation of an event or shed some light on a particular phenomenon or

research problem. In the context of this paper, a theoretical framework in a research report

should by implication identify the specific and relevant theory or theories that can explain the

purpose of the study; justify the study’s statement of the problem as well as the variables; explain

the research questions/hypotheses of the study; give the guide to review of pertinent literature;

determine the need for the study and the methodology adopted, and explain the findings of the

study. The implication is that in formulating a good theoretical framework in research report, the

researcher should ensure that such a framework contains all or majority of the elements that must

be part of the framework in that study. Table 1 (developed by the authors of this article) shows

the summary of the elements and the requirements of a theoretical framework.

Table 1: Elements and Requirements of a Theoretical Framework for Research Reports

Elements Requirements

Theory Identification Identify the relevant theory or theories for the study. State the

proponent(s), the year(s), and the tenet/proposition (what the theory

states). The researcher can briefly give additional explanation of the

tenet of the theory/theories.

Relatedness/Relevance Explain how the identified theory/theories is/are relevant or related to

the study. The researcher must make attempt to carry out this task so

that the theoretical framework will not be characterized with misuse of

theory for the study.

Variable Identification The variables of the study should be derived or inferred from the

theory. In writing the theoretical framework attempts must be made to

explain how the concepts of the theory/theories are related to or can

measure the variables of the study from the research topic to the

research questions/hypotheses.

Literature Review The theoretical framework should demonstrate other related empirical

studies/findings that further explain or support the tenet of the theory.

This is usually avoided in most research because of its rigors, but it is

necessary in research reports. Hence to carry out this task, detailed and

additional literature must be reviewed.

Methodology The nature, tenet and scope of the theory should help to infer and

determine the research methodology to be employed. This can be traced

from further explanations made in an attempt to explain the tenet of the

theory, and/or from the attempt made when other empirical

studies/findings are used to support the tenet of the theory.

Research

Data/Findings

The concepts or tenet of the theory for the study should be used to

explain, support or disprove the research data/findings. The researcher

must show how the theory is related to the findings of the study.

Source: Formative and research supervisory experiences of the authors over the years.

The information provided in Table 1 serves as a guide for reporting a good theoretical

framework in research. However, flexibility should be employed in assessing research beginners

in this context. In order to explain the requirements in reporting a theoretical framework, Herek

(1995: 85) determined the elements of a theoretical framework. The author stated that a

theoretical framework should consist of:

1. An explicit statement of the hypothesis or theoretical assumptions on which the research

is based and the relevant research method that will guide the researcher in his or her

attempt to test the assumption - the why and how of the research. Here the researcher

should identify important omissions and limitations, such as whether undue emphasis is

being placed on a particular type of variable or relationship.

2. A clear explanation of how the hypothesis connects the researcher to existing knowledge

(the literature review). In other words, to what extent does the research build upon

existing research or knowledge?

3. A clear articulation of the theoretical assumption or supposition on which the research is

based; the why and how of the research and how it permits you to move from simply

describing a phenomenon to generalizing about various aspects of that phenomenon

through observation.

4. A comprehensive explanation of the research method (basic, applied, explanatory,

confirmatory, quantitative and qualitative research) to be used and how it proceeds from a

theoretical hypothesis or theory to an empirical hypothesis or theory.

Deriving from these elements, it can be said that theoretical framework plays significant roles in

research report; hence its relevance in research report cannot be overlooked. Having a theory

helps the researcher identify the limits of the generalizations to be made in a study. A theoretical

framework thus specifies which key variables influence a phenomenon of interest, it alerts you to

examine how those key variables may or may not differ and under what circumstances and thus

helps to define the scope of the study (USC LibGuide, 2011). It is therefore necessary that

theoretical framework be part of every quantitative research report in education as this will help

bring the research to focus and validates the concepts of the study.

In order to introduce an example of a theoretical framework, consider a research topic on Work-

related Basic need Satisfaction (WBNS) as a predictor of Work engagement, Burnout and Job

satisfaction of Technical Educators. One macro theory that can be used here is the Maslow

theory of need but caution must be taken because all the segment of the theory will not be

specific to this study. It is therefore better to use the Self-determination theory (SDT) by Deci

and Ryan (1985) as a meso-theory or more specifically, the BPNT can be employed as a micro

theory. Additionally, the Job demand-resources (JD-R) model can also be employed here for

theoretical framework. Specifically the SDT and JD-R will form the theoretical framework for

such study. The SDT proposes that the adoption of intrinsic motivation over extrinsic motivation

depends on the satisfaction of the three basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence and

relatedness. The JD-R theory assumes that every job is associated with certain physiological or

psychological costs or demands. These theories will explain the concepts and findings that are

related mainly to the independent and dependent variables of the research topic. Because of the

scope of this paper, it will not be convenient to demonstrate the practical example in detail;

however the researcher should follow the approach measures presented in Table 1, ensuring that

the elements and the requirements of a theoretical framework are carefully adopted to present a

sound and acceptable theoretical framework.

Developing Conceptual Framework for an informed Research Report

The similarities that exist between conceptual and theoretical frameworks have led many

researchers to assume that they are exactly the same, but they differ in research. When concepts

are contextually linked in a research to explain the variable and the findings of the study, a

conceptual framework is formed. Eboh (2009) defined a conceptual framework for research

purpose as a schematic description and illustration of the causative mechanisms and relationship

deducible from the research problem. It spells out the context and forms of relationship or

interactions between phenomena, as well as the process or flow associated with the interactions.

Imenda (2014) stated that a conceptual framework is an end result of bringing together a number

of related concepts to explain or predict a given event, or give a broader understanding of the

phenomenon of interest or simply, of a research problem.

The elemental structure of the conceptual framework of a research should include the dependent

and independent variables from the research topic, the moderator variables, and all other

variables that are measured in the research questions and hypotheses. The conceptual framework

should also integrate the constructs that are inherent in the study, and that will give the readers a

clearer understanding of the study. Additionally, the structure of a conceptual framework should

infer or demonstrate the problem of the study, and the justification of the study. Finally, the

conceptual framework should be linked to or used to explain the findings of the study.

To demonstrate practical example of a conceptual framework, consider a research conducted by

Chukwuedo and Igbinedion (2014) on ICT Competences and Capacity Building needs of

Technical and Vocational Education Lecturers in Nigeria Universities. The study focused on the

lecturers’ competences in the use of ICT application for instructional (teaching), research and

administrative purposes, for effective job performance. Considering the study’s statement of the

problem (the complexity in the responsibilities of lecturers and insufficient manpower in

academics); the variables of interest in the study and the expected outcome in the use of these

applications for job performance, the following conceptual framework was developed:

In building conceptual framework the researcher uses the concepts/variables that are related and

specific to the study; hence building conceptual framework is the researcher’s own idea, or the

researcher may adapt an existing model as conceptual framework if and only if the model is

specific to variables of interest in the study. It is therefore advisable that research supervisors or

assessors should avoid asking students for source through which conceptual framework is

developed, unless if it is adopted or adapted from a model. Leshem and Trafford (2007), Eboh

(2009) and Imenda (2014) also argued that conceptual framework is the idea of the researcher

with respect to the concepts, construct or variables that are under investigation. Conclusively,

there is hardly any quantitative research report in education that cannot have a conceptual

framework since research study involves the study of interrelated concepts.

Differences between Conceptual and Theoretical Frameworks in Research

Theoretical and conceptual frameworks are important tools in quantitative research in education.

Rojewski (2002) stated that both frameworks are the cognitive tools needed to make assertion

and support knowledge claims, and guide the profession towards action. These tools have been

misused in research report, but if well understood by researchers they can be effectively

developed and employed in a research. Imenda (2014) therefore presented the summary of the

conceptual difference between conceptual and theoretical frameworks as shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Differences between Conceptual and Theoretical Frameworks

Variable Conceptual Framework Theoretical Framework

Genesis (a) Created by the researcher from a

variety of conceptual or theoretical

perspectives, with schema in most cases.

(b) Evolves, or ‘takes shape’, from

reviewed literature and/or the data

collected; *and also via models.

(a) Adopted / adapted from a pre-

existing theory or theoretical

perspective.

(b) Evolves or ‘takes shape from

reviewed literature and/or the data

collected; and also via models

Purpose (a) Helps the researcher see clearly the

main variables and concepts in a given

study.

(b) Provides the researcher with a general

approach (methodology – research

design, target population and research

sample, data collection & analysis).

(c) Guides the researcher in the

collection, interpretation and explanation

of the data, where no dominant

theoretical perspective exists.

(d) Guides future research – specifically

where the conceptual framework

integrates literature review and field data.

(a) Helps the researcher see clearly the

main variables and concepts in a given

study.

(b) Provides the researcher with a

general approach (methodology –

research design, target population and

research sample, data collection &

analysis).

(c) Guides the researcher in the

collection, interpretation and

explanation of the data.

Conceptual Meaning Synthesis of relevant concepts, with their

connectivity/direction of flow.

Application of a theory as a whole or

in part.

Process Underlying

Review of Literature

(a) Mainly inductive, especially in social

sciences/education where research

problems cannot ordinarily be explained

by one theoretical perspective;

(b) Some social science research also

gets driven by theories, but theories in

the social sciences tend not to have the

same ‘power ‘as those in the natural

sciences.

(a) Mainly deductive, as in the natural

sciences (in some cases in education)

where hypothesis testing takes place to

verify the ‘power’ of a theory.

Methodological

Approach

(a)May be located in both quantitative

and qualitative research paradigms;

increasingly, mixed-methods approaches

are recommended.

(b) Data mostly collected through both

empirical and descriptive survey

(a) Located mainly in the quantitative

research paradigm;

(b) Data collected mainly through

experimental designs, empirical

surveys and tests.

(c) Efforts made to standardize

instruments, interviews and direct

observations – hence, a preponderance of

qualitative data.

(c) Strong on consideration of context.

context, or else ignore it.

Scope of Application Limited to specific research problem and/

or context; hence not commonly adopted.

Wider application beyond the current

research problem and context.

Source: Adopted from Imenda (2014; p. 193)

A better understanding of the conceptual differences presented in Table 2 will help researchers to

build adequate conceptual and theoretical frameworks for informed research. It also explains the

reason why the two frameworks should occur in a particular qualitative research.

Challenges in Building Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks in Research Reports

Many researchers do not prefer the use of theoretical or conceptual frameworks or both in

research reports, while some have preference for any one of them. This can be traced from the

researchers’ level of ability to build and employ any of them or the two in education research

report, which is derivable from the challenges or difficulties faced in building conceptual and

theoretical framework. Some of the challenges are as follows:

1. Inadequacy of recommendable research textbooks in education that elucidate and

comprehensively treat the measures of building theoretical and/or conceptual frameworks

for research report.

2. The relative controversies among research scholars on the style of adoption and

acceptance of the frameworks. This is also accompanied with the variation and limitation

in knowledge of many research supervisors, assessors and reviewers.

3. Paucity of other literature (even classroom lectures) relevant to developing the skills

required in building the frameworks amongst students.

4. Insufficient knowledge of the researcher in identifying theories relevant for the study for

theoretical framework, as well as inability to schematically demonstrate how

concepts/variables are interrelated in a study for conceptual framework.

5. Misuse of theories, models and concepts for theoretical and conceptual frameworks.

6. Inability of students and beginning researchers to review substantial and exhaustive

literature for detailed information relating to their studies.

7. Even when substantial literature has been reviewed, beginning researchers usually find it

difficult to coherently organize the information from the literature reviewed and their

thoughts in order to develop sound and acceptable theoretical and conceptual

frameworks.

Conclusion and Recommendations

There is gradual consensus amongst institutions on the adoption of theoretical and conceptual

frameworks in reporting students’ research, especially at the postgraduate level. In essence,

conceptual and theoretical frameworks are vital ingredients of a research report that must not be

overlooked in education quantitative research. For a better approach in building conceptual and

theoretical framework, researchers at all levels should have a grasp of certain terminologies such

as concepts, constructs, variables, models and theories. It is therefore concluded that when

adequate conceptual and theoretical frameworks are built in education quantitative research, they

serve as lens to the researcher to view the research. As a result, it is recommended that modern

research text books should be written with practical examples of development of the frameworks.

Additionally, the use of both frameworks simultaneously should be encouraged in quantitative

research in education to help develop contemporary research report skills among students and

beginning researchers.

References

Anyakoha, E. U. (2009). An overview of research process. In E. U. Anyakoha (Ed.) Developing

research skills: Concepts and conceptual frameworks (pp. 7-20). Nsukka: Great AP Express

Publisher Ltd.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C. & Razavieh, A. (2002). Introduction to research in education. C.A.,

U.S.A.: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Best, J. W. (1989). Research in education. New Jersey: Practice-Hall.

Camp, W. G. (2001). Formulation and evaluating theoretical frameworks for Career and

Technical Education. Career and Technical Education Research, 26(1), 4-25.

Chukwuedo, S. O. & Igbinedion, V. I. (2014). ICT competences and capacity building needs of

technical and vocational education lecturers in Nigerian universities. African Journal of

Interdisciplinary Studies, 8(1), 19-25.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human

behavior. New York: Plenum Press.

Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F. (1991). What is philosophy? New York: Columbia University Press.

Dyer, J. E., Haase-Witler, P. S. & Washburn, S. G. (2003). Structuring agricultural education

research using conceptual and theoretical frameworks. Journal of Agricultural Education,

44(2), 61-74.

Eboh, E. C. (2009). Developing conceptual framework for empirical research. In E. U. Anyakoha

(Ed.) Developing research skills: Concepts and conceptual frameworks (pp. 21-40).

Nsukka: Great AP Express Publisher Ltd.

Ennis, C. (1999). A theoretical framework: The central piece of a research plan. Journal of

Teaching in Physics Education, 18, 129-140.

Ezeji, S. C. O. A. (2004). Basic principle of research in education. Enugu: Cheston Agency Ltd.

Fox, W. & Bayat, M. S. (2007). A guide to managing research. Cape Town: JUTA and Co. Ltd.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004). National policy on education. Abuja: NERDC

Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P. & Borg, W. R. (2007). Education research: An introduction. New York:

Pearson International Inc.

Herek, G. (1995). How to write a successful research grant application: A guide for social and

behavioral scientists. Retrieved from http://www.springer.com/gp/book/9781475723939

Imenda, S. (2014). Is there conceptual difference between conceptual and theoretical

frameworks? Journal of Social Science, 38(2), 185-195.

Jabareen, Y. (2009). Building conceptual framework: Philosophy, definitions, and procedures.

International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(4), 49-62

Kitchel, T. & Ball, L. (2014). Quantitative theoretical and conceptual frameworks use in

Agricultural Education research. Journal of Agricultural Education, 55(1), 186-199.

Knobloch, N. A. (2003). Building conceptual and theoretical frameworks that inform research.

Retrieved from http://public.iastate.edu

Kuhne, T. (2005). What is a model? Retrieved from

http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2005/23

Leshem, S. & Trafford, V. (2007). Overlooking the conceptual framework. Innovations in

Education and Teaching International, 44(1), 93-105.

Liehr, P. & Smith, M. J. (1999). Middle range theory: Spinning research and practice to create

knowledge for the new millennium. Advances in Nursing Science, 21(4), 81-91.

Neuman, W. L. (2003). Social research methods (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Inc.

Ocholla, D. N. & Roux, J. L. (2011). Conceptions and misconceptions of theoretical frameworks

in Library and Information Science research. A Paper Presented at the 6th Biennial Prolissa

Conference, Pretoria 9-11.

Okoro, O. M. (2005). Programme evaluation in education. Anambra: Pacific Publishers Ltd.

Omorogiuwa, K. O. (2006). Research and applied statistics for the behavioral sciences: An

introduction. Benin City: Mindex Publishing.

Rojewski, J. W. (2002). Preparing the workforce of tomorrow: A conceptual framework for

Career and Technical Education. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 27(1).

Retrieved from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/journals

Sinclair, M. (2007). Editorial: A guide to understanding theoretical and conceptual frameworks.

Evidence Based Midwifery, 5(2), 39.

Stetler, C. B. (2010). Models and frameworks for implementing evidenced-based practice:

Linking evidence to action. Chi-Chester: Wiley Blackwell

Thomas, G. (1997). What’s the use of theory? Harvard Education Review, 67(1), 75-105.

USC LibGuide (2011). Organizing your social science research paper. Retrieved from

http://libguide.usc.edu/contents

U.S. Department of Health and Human Service (2005). Theory at a glance: A guide for health

promotion practice (2nd ed.). U.S.A.: National Institute of Health.

Uzoagulu, A. E. (2011). Practical guide to writing research project reports in tertiary

institutions. Enugu: Cheston Ltd.

Chukwuedo S. O. & Uko-Aviomoh, E. E. (2015). Building theoretical and conceptual

frameworks for quantitative research reports in education. African Journal of Studies in

Education, 10(2), 83-101. An Official Journal of Faculty of Education, University of Benin,

Nigeria. ISSN: 0189-241 X