© Kamla-Raj 2014 J Soc Sci, 38(2): 185-195 (2014) Is There a Conceptual Difference between Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks? Sitwala Imenda University of Zululand, Faculty of Education, Department of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, P/Bag x1001, KwaDlangezwa, South Africa Telephone: +27 35 902 6348/9; Mobile: +27 82 888 3606 E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] KEYWORDS Research. Theory. Theoretical Framework. Conceptual Framework ABSTRACT This is an opinion piece on the subject of whether or not ‘theoretical’ and ‘conceptual’ frameworks are conceptual synonyms, or they refer to different constructs. Although, generally, a lot of literature uses these two terms interchangeably – suggesting that they are conceptually equivalent, the researcher argues that these are two different constructs – both by definition and as actualised during the research process. Thus, in this paper, the researcher starts by developing his argument by examining the role of theory in research, and then draws a distinction between areas of research that typically follow deductive versus inductive approaches, with regard to both the review of literature and data collection. The researcher then subsequently argues that whereas a deductive approach to literature review typically makes use of theories and theoretical frameworks, the inductive approach tends to lead to the development of a conceptual framework – which may take the form of a (conceptual) model. Examples depicting this distinction are advanced. INTRODUCTION particular, her literature review was located within the theories and empirical research findings re- It is not controversial to state that three peo- lated to social relations amongst young people ple coming from different walks of life, watching living on the streets, socio-economic home back- the same event, are likely to come up with differ- grounds and social relations in the home, as well ent interpretations of that event. Certainly, de- as parental structure (that is, single versus two- pending on “the spectacles” each one of them parent homes). is “wearing” in viewing the event, they would The second student explained that he was each have a different “view” of the event. Each interested in finding out the psychological fac- person’s view-point, or point of reference, is his/ tors and consequences attendant to living on her conceptual or theoretical framework. In the streets, with respect to the children living essence, the conceptual or theoretical framework away from parental guidance. He located his is the soul of every research project. It deter- study within developmental and cognitive psy- mines how a given researcher formulates his/ chological thoughts and theories – as well as her research problem – and how s/he goes about empirical studies on the subject, but located with- investigating the problem, and what meaning s/ in the psychological frame of reference. he attaches to the data accruing from such an On her part, the third student came up with a investigation. rather unique angle to the incidence of street One lived exemplar which stands out in my children. She was an Education student, and experience was a time when the researcher she said to me, “I think many children are out on worked with three students – all of them work- the streets because of school”. At first, the re- ing on the same topic: street children. The first searcher thought that he had not understood student explained that her area of interest was the student correctly, until after she had repeat- sociology, and wondered about the social and ed her statement several times. Her perspective sociological factors at play prior to, and during, hit the researcher heavily and unexpectedly be- the time a child finds himself (only boys were cause up until that time, he had regarded school living on the streets of this town) on the streets. as a solution to the problem of street children – Thus, in the development of her research prob- and had not seen school as a possible contrib- lem, her review of literature and everything else uting factor towards children ending up on the centred around the broad area of sociology. In streets. On her part, the student was convinced 186 SITWALA IMENDA that there was something about schooling that ic, controlled, empirical, and critical investiga- repelled some children, and because of relent- tion of [natural / social] phenomena, guided by less pressure from home (amongst other factors) theory and hypotheses about the presumed re- forcing them to keep attending school, the af- lations” among such phenomena. (Parenthesis fected children rather ended up on the streets. and emphasis added). Accordingly, in research, So, in developing her research problem, she lo- subjective beliefs are “checked against objec- cated her thinking within a number of theoreti- tive reality” (de Vos et al. 2005: 36). Quite signif- cal perspectives, including school governance, icant to this paper is the highlighted portion of school curriculum, curricular relevance and im- this definition, which specifically states that re- plementation, the teacher-learner interface, ac- search is “guided by theory”. The suggestion cessibility of schools (for example, distances the here is that without ‘theory’ research would lack children had to travel, usually walking, to and direction – and this explains why in every re- from school), school environment – including search, one is expected to present one’s ‘theo- possibilities of bullying, as well as school sup- retical’ framework – as the students in the above port and sensitivity to learners’ individual and exemplar did. collective needs. However, whereas theory directs systematic As one may expect, these three studies, car- ‘controlled, empirical’ research, the place of the- ried out on the same accessible population, dif- ory in ‘less-controlled’ and ‘non-empirical’ types fered in more respects than they were similar – of research could be conceptually different (Lie- from problem statements and research questions, hr and Smith 1999). In fact, most generative re- all the way to their findings, conclusions and search is conceptually different from research recommendations. The main reason for this was based on hypothesis-testing or hypothetico- that they each “looked at the circumstances of deductive reasoning. In effect, most generative the same street children from different ‘points of research often seeks to develop theories that view’ or ‘theoretical / conceptual frameworks’.” are ‘grounded in the data collected’ and arising from discovering ‘what is really going on in the Objective field’ (Liehr and Smith 1999). As Cline (2002: 2) observes, “in the case of qualitative studies, a This paper explores the two terms: theoreti- theoretical framework may not be explicitly ar- cal and conceptual frameworks, with a view to ticulated since qualitative inquiry typically is shedding some light on their respective mean- often oriented toward grounded theory devel- ings, within the context of research in both the opment in the first place”. However, although natural and social sciences – particularly with the place of theory in different research para- reference to conceptual meaning, purpose, meth- digms may vary, still ‘theory’ appears to be cen- odology and scope of application. tral to all forms of research. The question is: what then is ‘theory’? Understanding the Key Concepts Theory In attempting to address the objective of this study, a closer look at the following terms is Aspects such as ‘explaining’ and ‘making essential, namely, theory, concept, conceptual predictions’ are among the most common fea- framework and theoretical framework. This will tures of the definition of ‘theory’. For example, help decipher if any conceptual differences ex- Fox and Bayat (2007: 29) define theory as “a set ist among these terms. However, since these of interrelated propositions, concepts and defi- terms are to be defined within the context of nitions that present a systematic point of view research, it is deemed necessary to start with a of specifying relationships between variables definition of research, before these terms are with a view to predicting and explaining phe- defined and discussed. nomena”. Likewise, Liehr and Smith (1999: 8) opine the following about theory: Research A theory is a set of interrelated concepts, which structure a systematic view of phenome- Many definitions of research abound. De na for the purpose of explaining or predicting. Vos et al. (2005: 41) see research as a “systemat- A theory is like a blueprint, a guide for model- THEORETICAL VERSUS CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS 187 ing a structure. A blueprint depicts the elements which the theory is applicable, (c) a set of rela- of a structure and the relation of each element tionships amongst the variables, and (d) specif- to the other, just as a theory depicts the con- ic predictive claims. Putting all these elements cepts, which compose it and the relation of con- together, a theory is therefore a careful outline cepts with each other. of ‘the precise definitions in a specific domain Further, Liehr and Smith (1999: 2) make a con- to explain why and how the relationships are nection between theory and practice in their logically tied so that the theory gives specific contention that the former guides the latter while, predictions” (Wacker 1998: 363-364). Thus, a on the other hand, “practice enables testing of good theory is taken to be one which gives a theory and generates questions for research; very clear and