As a very near ABD at the University of Arizona, I can say that I am not aware of any official proclamation from the graduate college but can assure you that all of my advising conversations and proposals with faculty, both in my major and my minor departments, confirm that my dissertation research must be fundamentally grounded in a theoretical framework and must incorporate appropriate defensible research methodologies. These may be quantitative or qualitative (or mixed), and may involve grounded approaches or other research approaches, but the notion of a research agenda that is not based on some theoretical framework is not anything I believe would be acceptable either to my committee or the graduate college. And I wouldn’t have it any other way.

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.

Ken Haycock
voice: 778-689-5938