There are two theoretical frameworks that I would like to explore further as they may relate to my Applied Research Project (ARP).
The first is Engagement Theory (ET). I understand this theory to mean that people are inherently motivated to learn when they can engage with others in problem-based, real-world activities that use cognitive processes (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1998). Some questions that I would like to examine further regarding ET are:
- Does engagement theory translate across all disciplines of instruction?
- Engagement Theory seems to closely align with Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction (2002) instructional design framework, but with the addition of collaboration. Can these two frameworks be interwoven to create effective and engaging learning?
The second theoretical framework that I would like to study further is the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). I understand this theory to mean that people will adopt a new technology if it provides value to them and is easy to use (Davis, 1989). Some questions I have about TAM are:
- How do you make a particular learning technology valuable to all learners?
- With varying degrees of digital literacy, how can instructors assess learners’ proficiency before learning begins in order to ensure they find it easy to use?
References
Davis, F. D. (1989, September). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Kearsley, G. & Shneiderman, B. (1998, September-October). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Educational Technology, 38(5),20-23. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44428478
Merrill, M. D. (2002, September). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02505024
11/27/2023 at 11:41 am
Excellent ideas here Rebecca and I think either will work for your research. Remember that the theoretical framework (TF) is not actually something that you are further exploring in the research – it’s a background piece. Given that X is true and fact, how does your research sort of step forward from that. From what you’ve noted above, it would appear that perhaps you are looking to further explore and understand engagement and its role in your research and so maybe you’d not have it as a TF. Instead you could have a full section on it in the literature review for the proposal and include some of those considerations potentially regarding how your research might address any gaps or contribute to knowledge around engagement. The pieces around TAM seem more straightforward. Looking at how to ensure technology is, or appears to be, valuable and how literacy might be assessed seem to be pieces that are those next steps – i.e., you’re not considering whether or not ease of use and usefulness are important … rather, given that they are, how might these things happen. Good work on this.
11/30/2023 at 1:18 pm
These look like great theoretical frameworks, Rebecca! TAM in particular seems like an important consideration with advanced technologies such as augmented or virtual reality. Some will be ready to embrace it, and others no doubt will be challenged by it. What is the general level of technological literacy among learners in your context? Do you think it will be a barrier, or an opportunity?
Engagement theory is also an interesting choice. Do you see VR and AR as environments where people will collaborate and learn together?