You cannot build a house if you do not have a blueprint, especially if you want it to stand (Grand & Osanloo, 2014). Given that I would like my research (i.e., my house) to be strong, I need a sound theoretical framework on which to build.
As I reviewed the theoretical frameworks, I thought that Technology Acceptance Model was the one that best fits my research question: In what ways might educational technology contribute to training volunteers at non-profit organizations?
As I read more about it, I realized that I am looking at whether or not technology could play a role, not what role it can (or should play) so Technology Acceptance Model is not the right blueprint for this work. I think it may be a good theoretical framework for any work I do on this subject after this research.
I believe that activity theory is a good fit for my blueprint. My topic will include looking at what activities are present in training volunteers and how technology may have an effect the learning they experience. According to Jonassen & Rohrer-Murphy (1999) “activity cannot be understood or analyzed outside the context in which it occurs” (p. 62). In order to learn what effects may be present, I will need to understand their context and the Activity theory framework will allow me to focus my research on the goal of the training and what needs to happen to accomplish the goal and if technology can be helpful.
I am looking forward to seeing your comments and suggestions for other theoretical frameworks.
References
Grant, C. & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint for you ‘house’ . Administrative Issues Journal: Connecting Education, Practice, and Research. DOI: 10.5929/2014.4.2.9.
Jonassen, D. & Rohrer-Murphy, L. (1999). Activity theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(1), 61-79.
Hi Kathy,
You’ve piqued my interest with your post. Would you mind unpacking “educational technology” a bit more for me? I’m curious if you mean online, blended or something else.
Thanks!
Sue
Thank you for your comment Sue. By educational technology, I mean any piece of technology that can aid in learning. I can be online or blended learning, so a tool that I don’t know of yet.
Hi Kathy,
I am using Technology Acceptance Model as one of my frameworks and I could see it applying to your “blueprint” – as maybe technology itself could be a deterrent in regard to training/being trained. With the Technology Acceptance Model, you can discuss certain barriers that are encountered when training new staff/volunteers and maybe the fact that they are volunteering their time to the NGO, they do not want to take additional time learning software too (just a thought).
I understand why you decided to go with Activity Theory. I did not know anything about activity theory until this course, but the fact that it emphasizes the activity being performed by what tools are being used (Jonassen & Rohrer-Murphy 1999) makes sense as to how this framework will help with your overarching question: In what ways might educational technology contribute to training volunteers at non-profit organizations? When I was researching what framework would suit me best, I found a link which broke activity theory into 6 components:
file:///C:/Users/ksharples/Downloads/ParkChoYoonHan2013.pdf
I too am intrigued by Sue’s question and am curious to see your answer.
References
Jonassen, D. & Rohrer-Murphy, L. (1999). Activity theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(1), 61-79.
Hi Kathy – I think activity theory could be a good choice for your research. You’ll need to look at how you describe it ‘simply’ as there are a lot of sometimes abstract or more complicated components, however, you should be able to distill it to those key parts and I like that you’ve already identified the link to the 6 key parts. I’m looking forward to seeing where and how you see the key fit with your research – e.g., more connected to one or two of those components? or more from the larger systems perspective? And I think you can have it work and work well as your background piece.