This document provides an overview of conceptual frameworks for doctoral research into open education. It begins with an introduction to the Global OER Graduate Network (GO-GN) and its goal of supporting doctoral research in open education. It then discusses the rationale for creating a conceptual frameworks handbook, including perspectives on conceptual frameworks from academic literature. Next, it explores appropriate applications of conceptual frameworks for doctoral research. The document also provides an overview of different conceptual frameworks contributed by GO-GN members. It concludes with next steps for future GO-GN publications.

1. Conceptual Frameworks for
Doctoral Research into
Open Education
PG Ed Tech Group, University of Cape Town
Dr. Robert Farrow
Open Education Research Hub
Institute of Educational Technology
The Open University, UK
rob.farrow@open.ac.uk
@philosopher1978

2. 2
01
Why a Conceptual Frameworks Handbook?
Rationale and concept
02
03
Conceptual Frameworks: Perspectives
What has been written about conceptual frameworks?
04
Use Cases and ‘Doctorateness’
Appropriate application of conceptual frameworks
05
Overview of Conceptual Frameworks
What’s in the Guide?
Introduction to GO-GN
Background on the Global OER Graduate Network and its
members
06
What’s next?
Next steps for GO-GN publications
07
Presentation & Style
Aiming for accessibility

3. 3
SUPPORTING DOCTORAL RESEARCH IN OPEN EDUCATION
GLOBAL OER GRADUATE NETWORK
http://go-gn.net/

4. 4
GLOBAL OER GRADUATE NEWORK
GO-GN started in 2013 as an initiative from Fred Mulder, UNESCO Chair in OER at the Dutch Open
Universiteit, in collaboration with Rory McGreal, UNESCO / COL Chair in OER at Athabasca
University (Canada).
GO-GN is currently funded through the OER programme of TheWilliam and Flora Hewlett
Foundation and administered by the Open Education Research Hub from the Institute of
Educational Technology atThe Open University, UK.
The aims of the GO-GN are:
• to raise the profile of research into open education,
• to offer support for those conducting PhD research in
this area, and
• to develop openness as a process of research.
More than 100 doctoral and post-doctoral researchers
form the core of the network with more than 200 experts,
supervisors, mentors and interested parties forming a
community of practice

5. Why a Conceptual
Frameworks Handbook?
Rationale and concept

6. 6
Farrow, R., Iniesto, F.,Weller, M.
& Pitt., R. (2020). The GO-GN
Research Methods Handbook.

7. 7
• A companion volume focused on
theoretical perspectives
• Collaborative, open practices
• Contributions from 20 researchers
• Overview of perspectives on
conceptual frameworks and their role in
research
• Testimony about using a range of
different frameworks in open education
research
• A range of tips and guides to best
practice
https://go-gn.net/project-outputs/

8. Presentation & Style
Aiming for accessibility

9. 9

10. 10

11. 11

12. 12
Farrow, R. and Mathers, B. (2020).
Conceptualising Research Methodology for
Doctoral Researchers in Open Education (with
penguins). InternationalJournal of Management
and Applied Research,Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 349-359.
349-359. https://doi.org/10.18646/2056.73.20-025

13. 13
Illustration concepts:
• Conceptual Frameworks as vehicles
• Workshop/homebrew engineering
• ‘Wacky Races’ / Gumball Rally

14. Perspectives: Conceptual
Frameworks
What has been written about conceptual frameworks?

15. 15

16. 16
PROBLEM STATEMENT
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES
““[P]roblematic for many students is the inability to articulate differences between
theory, theoretical framework and a conceptual framework for a proposed research
project” (Kivunja, 2018)
Ph.D candidates’ comprehension of conceptualising research
(Leshem &Trafford, 2007:104)

17. 17
1. No framework!
The reader cannot clearly understand the theoretical, conceptual,
assumptions that underlie a study
2. Inappropriate framework
The chosen framework does not align theories with data appropriately
3. Framework/data misalignment
Framework does not connect with the rest of the study
4. Imbalance between a framework and data
Big ideas, big concepts… but without the data to support them
5. Incomplete, superficial or inconsistent treatment of a framework
Inconsistency in theoretical focus
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES
10 PROBLEMS WITH CONCEPTUAL/THEORETICAL FRAMING (CASANAVE & LI, 2005)

18. 18
10 PROBLEMS WITH CONCEPTUAL/THEORETICAL FRAMING (CASANAVE & LI, 2005)
6. Misinterpretation of a theory
Relying on buzzwords instead of developing a thorough understanding
7. Lip service
Using big names and big concepts without evidence of understanding
8. Attraction to popular theories
Popular theories still need to fit a study well
9. Conspicuous absence
Influential name or concept missing, suggesting failure to read widely
10.Methodology missing
Failure to explain underlying principles of inquiry; epistemological stance
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES

19. 19
WHAT IS A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK?
“[W]hile personal interests and goals, social location and positionality, topical research, and
theoretical frameworks are what comprise a conceptual framework, we would never expect to see
them organized according to these elements. In finished form, a conceptual framework is organized
and expressed as an argument. Each step of that argument is a proposition justified by the topical
and/or theoretical literature.” (Ravitch and Riggan, 2017:13)
Conceptual frameworks are generally treated more flexibly than ‘theory’ and may be used to bring
together a range of different perspectives and ideas that are important to a research project.
• Because this is often highly contextual, there aren’t really any general rules that cover how to
create and/or use conceptual frameworks.
• Conceptual frameworks can bring together topical research and theoretical insights.
• Their value is in practical application rather than the most complicated / comprehensive approach.
Two fundamental approaches:
1. Conceptual framework as organising principle: operationalising and metacognising
2. Conceptual framework as part of a mesh of different ‘constructs’ used in research
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES

20. 20
METAPHORS
Categorisation of conceptual framework metaphors
(based on Leshem &Trafford, 2007:104)
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES

21. 21
POSITIONALITY
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES
Elements of a Conceptual Framework
(Adapted from Rogers, 2016:1710)

22. 22
UNDERPINNING CONSTRUCTS
Passey (2020) instead sees conceptual frameworks as one possible perspective rather than the
defining or guiding point of orientation for other aspects of a study. Multiple ‘constructs’ might
be used for different purposes in a study
• Model – A model holds for a given case or stated population, arising from context-specific
context-specific research, often indicating main features of influence or contribution
• Conceptual Framework – Conceptual frameworks tend to be more flexible and descriptive,
descriptive, identifying factors or criteria that have influence on a particular field within the
more major features
• Theoretical Framework – A theoretical framework arises from outcomes beyond a single study,
a single study, based on one or more theories
• Theory -Theories consider a broader and deeper concern or context, suggesting the detail of
the detail of what might be more general, beyond a given context
Passey presents a stronger link between ‘constructs’ and epistemological and methodological
stance; the relationship between conceptual framework and method is ideally going to be close,
explicable and defensible.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES

23. 23
UNDERPINNING CONSTRUCTS
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES
Underpinning Description Examples
Model A model holds for a given case
or stated population, arising
from context-specific research,
often indicating main features
of influence or contribution
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1989)
Diffusion of Innovation (Rogers, 2003)
Pathways to Implementing Change (Corbett & Rossman,
1989)
Conceptual Framework Conceptual frameworks tend to
be more flexible and
descriptive, identifying factors
or criteria that have influence
on a particular field within the
more major features
Technological, Pedagogical and Content knowledge (TPACK) (Mishra &
& Koehler, 2006)
Discovery Learning (Bruner, 1961)
Experiential Learning (Kolb, 1984)
Theoretical framework A theoretical framework arises
from outcomes beyond a single
study, based on one or more
theories
Social Creative Constructivism (Passey, Dagien, Atieno &
Baumann, 2019)
Human Motivation (Maslow, 1943)
Theory Theories consider a broader and
deeper concern or context,
suggesting the detail of what
might be more general, beyond
a given context
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology
(UTAUT) (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis & Davis, 2003)
Social Constructivism (Vygotsky, 1978)
Constructionism (Papert, 1986)
Behaviourism (Skinner, 1953)
Examples of forms of underpinning constructs (Passey, 2020:3)

24. 24
UNDERPINNING CONSTRUCTS
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES
Uses ofTheory in Research (based on Passey, 2020)

25. 25
DECONSTRUCTING THE CONCEPT
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES
Jabareen (2009) offers a post-structuralist account of ‘concepts’ as historical and
defined by their component parts and relation to other concepts.
A conceptual framework is here understood as a collection of linked concepts
which represents an interpretation of social reality.

26. 26
DECONSTRUCTING THE CONCEPT
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES
Jabareen (2009) emphasizes the multivalent nature of conceptual frameworks
and sees this as a way to bring together important ideas from different
disciplines or sectors.
Jabareen’s response to the vagueness or ambiguity around conceptual
frameworks is to reserve them for qualitative attempts to draw an
understanding from several “texts” through a process of theorization.

27. 27
NETWORK ANALYSIS
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES
An alternative approach is to take a more quantitative, neutral stance and
through data mining and analysis, allow a framework to emerge. One such
approach is to use citation or social network analysis (SNA).
Timeline Visualisation of Distance Education
(Bozkurt, 2019)

28. 28
NETWORK ANALYSIS
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES
What these analyses have in common is that they do not impose a framework on the
literature, but rather allow one to emerge from the relationships between citations. (A
conceptual framework may also be applied to interpret the emergent structure, however.)
This technique can be used to provide quantitative support for claims about discourse over
time, or to describe how paradigms and practices evolve. One effective approach can be to
combine network analysis with more traditional analysis in order to triangulate or contrast
perspectives.
Examples: Bozkurt (2019); Dawson, Gašević, Siemens and Joksimovic (2014); Weller et
al. (2018)

29. 29
USE AN EXISTING FRAMEWORK, OR CREATE A NEW ONE?
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: PERSPECTIVES

30. Use Cases and
‘Doctorateness’
Appropriate application of conceptual frameworks

31. 31
USE CASES AND ’DOCTORATENESS’
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS
Leshem &Trafford (2007) see one of the main benefits of using conceptual frameworks
in doctoral research as introducing more granular and explicit descriptions into the
research process.This can include things like:
• modelling relationships between theories;
• reducing theoretical data into statements or models;
• explicating theories that influence the research;
• providing theoretical bases to design, or interpret, research;
• creating theoretical links between extant research, current theories, research
design, interpretations of findings and conceptual conclusions.
The research process is more focused and holistic when an effective conceptual
framework is in place.
Passey (2020) suggests that selecting a conceptual framework could be considered a
characteristic challenge of doctoral research

33. Leshem &Trafford suggest that higher order cognition is required to
successfully navigate the process of moving through practical stages such
as the analysis and interpretation of data, and the conceptual level is
where the reflective and meta-reflective advances are made.
They present this metacognitive aspect as the essence of doctoral
learning which is explored in a viva: “doctoral candidates who raise their
levels of thinking beyond descriptive and content aspects of research will
increasingly display doctorateness” (Leshem &Trafford, 2007:102).
Conversely, research which produces data which is descriptive of some
phenomenon but doesn’t reflectively connect this to wider concepts
might be seen as failing to meet the standards expected.
USE CASES AND ’DOCTORATENESS’
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS

34. Technical, practical and conceptual aspects of doctoral research
(based on Leshem &Trafford, 2007:103)

35. Overview of Conceptual
Frameworks
Brief descriptions and reflections from GO-GN members

36. 36
OVERVIEW OF CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS
ActivityTheory Equity Online Collaborative Learning
Big & Little OER Learning Analytics Online Engagement
Framework
Boundaries Linguistic Accessibility Open Educational Practices
Capability MOOC Accessibility PRAXIS Framework
Cathedral/Bazaar MOOC Learner-Centred
Outcomes
Rhizomatic Learning
Community MOOC Knowledge
Framework
Social Justice
Connectivism NetworkTheory Social Realism
COUP Framework OER Adoption TPACK Framework
Design Thinking OER Impact Unified Theory of Acceptance
and Use ofTechnology
(UTAUT)
Diffusion of Innovations OER Reuse Value Creation Framework

37. 37
ADDITIONAL THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS
(Adapted from Mittelmeier (n.d.) on a CC BY licence.
https://internationalpedagogies.home.blog/potential-theoretical-frameworks/)
LearnerTransitions and Experiences – ecological systems theory; multidimensional
multidimensional transition theory; academic resilience; student engagement model;
liminality
Identity Development and Selfhood – student agency theory; identity theory; capability
theory; capability approach; possible selves; intersectional theory; critical race theory;
gendered radicalization
Pedagogies – critical pedagogies; engaged pedagogy; academic hospitality; Bernstein’s
hospitality; Bernstein’s pedagogic devices; transformative learning
Curricula – hidden curriculum; internationalization of curriculum; glocalisation; tourist

38. 38
ADDITIONAL THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS
(Adapted from Mittelmeier (n.d.) on a CC BY licence.
https://internationalpedagogies.home.blog/potential-theoretical-frameworks/)
Learning – communities of practice; figured worlds; cultural-historical activity theory
activity theory
SociologicalTheories of Power - Bourdieu; Foucault; Gramsci
Decolonization / Postcolonialism – orientalism; subjugation; third space / hybridity;
hybridity; double consciousness
Mobilities – spatial theories; migration infrastructures

39. 39
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS
Many thanks to everyone who contributed!
Suggested citation: Farrow, R., Iniesto, F.,Weller, M., Pitt., R., Algers,A., Baas, M.,
Bozkurt, A., Cox, G., Czerwonogora, A., Elias,T., Essmiller, K., Funk, J., Lambert, S.,
Mittelmeier, J., Nagashima,T., Rabin, E., Rets, I., Spica, E.,Vladimirschi,V. &Witthaus,
G. (2021). GO-GN Guide to Conceptual Frameworks. Open Education Research Hub.The
Open University, UK. CC-BY 4.0. http://go-gn.net/gogn_outputs/conceptual-
frameworks/

40. What’s Next?
Next steps for GO-GN publications

41. 41
2021 - Publish Conceptual Frameworks Guide (Sept)
Publish Research Review 2021 (Nov)
Publish Annual Review 2021 (Dec)
2022 - Publish Research Review 2022
2nd edition of Research Methods Handbook
2nd edition of Conceptual Frameworks Guide
The GO-GN Open Education Research Manual (titleTBC)

42. THANK YOU
rob.farrow@open.ac.uk
@philosopher1978
go-gn.net
oerhub.net