Some may be interested to read what Pierce Butler thought on
theoretical frameworks
which was originally published in 1933 in his book 'An Introduction to
Library Science'

originally published in 1933, by The University of Chicago.  Reissued
in 1961 under the Phoenix Books imprint  of the University of Chicago
Press, and reprinted in Appendix E of Dr. John V Richardson Jr.'s  The
Gospel of scholarship: Pierce Butler and a critique of American
librarianship  1992 The Scarecrow Press -Metuchen NJ   /  excerpt
below from pp 234-236
Again, sharing for anyone who may be interested......best, kw

"Excerpt from Butler's Chapter 5: Practical Considerations"

II :

"The development of library science may be expected to do more for
professional practice than even the undoubted benefits which will
accrue from a clear definition of the professional motives.  It will
establish that theoretical framework without which no deliberate
extension of knowledge is possible.  Modern man's acceptance of
science is characterized by two distinct phases: He believes that the
knowledge which he has is of the utmost usefulness; he is likewise
possessed of an optimism that it can be increased, with the same rate
of value, almost indefinitely.  He may carp at the apparent futility
of particular investigations but his faith in research, as such, is
unshaken. Yet in spite of the strength of these convictions he usually
has a conception of the scientific methods of exploration which is
hopelessly mistaken.  One may suspect in turning over the pages of
almost any library journal that the recurrent demand for research in
librarianship involves only too often a presumption that nothing will
be required for this except time and industry.  In reality there is no
such thing as scientific research until a theoretical hypothesis has
been formulated.  Chemists do not make random mixtures to see what
will happen.  Biologists do not thrust under their microscopes the
first living organism at hand.  Educators do not rush to the nearest
classroom or sociologists to the nearest jail.  Before there can be
scientific observation there must be intellectual consideration.
Chronologically experiment comes after hypothesis, not before it."

"There are many factors in the present state of scientific studies
which obscure the real nature of science itself.  The most potent
perhaps is that in the multitude of activities popularly called
scientific so conspicuous a part is taken by what are merely
pedagogical techniques.  For every laboratory that is devoted to
research there are hundreds which serve no other purpose than to
establish in students a direct knowledge of phenomena and the habit of
scientific procedure.  To a lesser degree this is also true of many of
the investigations which are carried out by candidates for the higher
education degrees.  The student himself is still too ignorant of the
field to discover a serious problem; his teacher is usually so
harrassed by the same need in each of his long series of pupils that
his imagination cannot produce one on the spur of the moment.  Indeed,
some fields that have long been worked it is almost impossible to
discover a reasonable dissertation subject that has not already been
used.  And, after all, the interests of both the candidate and his
director are concentrated on the question of method.  It is therefore
neither surprising nor deplorable that much of the output of this kind
of research should be superficial, a mere collection of obvious facts
discussed with every possible pomposity of scientific manipulation and
technical jargon."

"Fortunately science does not depend upon this sort of thing for its
sustenance.  It continues its progress in spite of, rather than by
virtue of, the multitude of its votaries.  Only those may assist in
the process who conceive their quest with reference to its general
significance, and for this an intellectual theory is prerequisite.
But unfortunately, to the neophyte and the layman what is most
conspicuous is found most impressive.  Because vast numbers of those
who are studying science are busily engaged in counting and weighing
and measuring the details of things as they are, it would seem that to
open a new field of research all that is necessary is to commence in
that area also these same operations. "

" Yet the obstinate fact remains that before even observation can
become scientific there must be a science, at least in the form of
hypotheses.  This is most eminently true of librarianship.  There can
be no search until the searcher has decided what he shall look for.
And this must have a scientific importance. "  Pierce Butler (orig
pubd 1933)  Chapter 5: Practical considerations (Section) II  - from
The Gospel of Scholarship, JV Richardson Jr, pp. 234-6 Appendix E
(1992: Scarecrow Press)

-----------------
On 4/6/11, [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Two incidents in the past month lead me to raise a question on this list
> about doctoral studies. I want to be very careful to frame the question so
> that it is clear that I am seeking to understand expectations not to
> criticize them.
> At a recent doctoral student presentation the candidate was asked about the
> theoretical framework for the study. The response was that the institution
> did not require a theoretical framework (for some of us this is a
> distinguishing feature between master's and doctoral work). Is this the case
> at your institution? Is this a change?
> Today a doctoral student from another institution asked me about recent
> research in a specific area. The institution "requires that I use research
> no further back than the year 2006." (I will set aside whether there is any
> relationship between the topic of study and the date prescription.) Again,
> is this the case at your institution? Is this a change?
> I have not encountered these before and wonder if there are changes underway
> or I am less aware of expectations elsewhere or whether these are unique.
> Thank you.
> [cid:3384940994_50458785]
> Ken Haycock
> voice: 778-689-5938
>
----------------------------
Karen Weaver, MLS, Electronic Resources Statistician, Duquesne
University, Gumberg Library, Pittsburgh PA email: [log in to unmask] /
Gmail: [log in to unmask]