{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015197568389057751, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.788659793814433, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Second‐order theoretical analysis: a method for constructing theoretical explanation

In this paper a model is offered that allows for the construction of a theoretical explanation on the basis of data accumulated in the field for the purpose of constructing a meaningful description. In this endeavour a distinction is proposed between two methods of theoretical analysis: first‐order analysis and second‐order analysis. First‐order theoretical analysis is the process of constructing a theoretical explanation that we arrive at by way of directly translating descriptive categories into theoretical categories. Second‐order theoretical analysis is a process of constructing theoretical explanation through a conversion of the descriptive categories based on the less than ideally dense data pool we already have. The theory that qualitative researchers attempt to construct is ‘low level theory’ that evolves from the study of a phenomenon in a particular situational context and is applicable to immediate and specific situations. In this paper, the second‐order theoretical procedure will be explained and exemplified in an analysis of teachers’ images, which is presented as a theoretical model for understanding teachers’ conceptions of the pedagogical encounter between teachers and students in Bible classes.