LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for JESSE Archives


JESSE Archives

JESSE Archives


JESSE@LISTSERV.UTK.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

JESSE Home

JESSE Home

JESSE  April 2011

JESSE April 2011

Subject:

Re: Doctoral Expectations and Frameworks-Pierce Butler (1933)

From:

[log in to unmask]

Reply-To:

Open Lib/Info Sci Education Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 11 Apr 2011 18:25:20 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (132 lines)

I cannot agree.

When the microscope itself was discovered, no one had any idea what it 
would reveal! The view the privileges theory  is comfortable for those who 
do not confront refractory reality every day.

[sorry, it's been a bad day]

-paul



NEW EMAIL: [log in to unmask]  please use this from now on,
Paul B. Kantor, Rutgers. (v)732.932.7500x8216  (FX)732.932.1504
Office: Cecilia Gal 732 932 7500 x8220. Details: http://scils.rutgers.edu/~kantor

On Sun, 10 Apr 2011, Karen Weaver wrote:

> 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]
>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995
August 1995
July 1995
June 1995
May 1995
April 1995
March 1995
February 1995
January 1995
December 1994
November 1994
October 1994
September 1994
August 1994
July 1994
June 1994
May 1994
April 1994
March 1994
February 1994
January 1994

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.UTK.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager