not to others, but at least to me.
I can imagine ( and indeed hope ) that what that doctoral
student actually meant was that his or her institution did not
require that a candidate's theoretical framework be made
explicit or be identified as matter for discussion and/or
basis for assessment. Is it conceivable that any doctoral
study -- or for my part any master's or even undergraduate
study -- could be executed and reported ( i.e. : brought
to a successful conclusion ) *without* a theoretical
framework ? I can't myself easily imagine how. And I
would, ergo, be much surprised if there is any institution
that responds, or could respond, to your first two questions
with anything other than "No. No."
Whether the student concerned is expected by the educators
to make explicit / to justify / to defend / to contextualize this
operative framework is, as above suggested, quite another
matter -- but, even if such is not the case, aren't we entitled to
expect that a student, in the kind of situation you describe,
shouldn't be able to get away with the kind of response that
s/he in fact gave on that occasion to the question "will you
please tell us about the theoretical framework for your study ?"
( or however it was that the question was phrased ) ?
But I would, myself, prefer to hope that there's not even any
institution around nowadays that does not consider the
theoretical framework for a study to be a matter for explicit
attention and discussion -- certainly at the doctoral level, but
preferably also at lower levels.
I am aware that it is possible for a student to complete and
even to report a study without devoting sufficient, or maybe
any, conscious attention to what ( kind of ) theoretical
framework has guided the research and conclusions. The
point is whether responsible educators should allow this to
happen.
As far as using research "no further back than the year
2006" is concerned -- I can understand that such might out
of purely pragmatic pedagogical considerations be imposed
as an arbitrary/artificial ( non-real-world ) limitation for certain
topics under certain circumstances. But if it is indeed being
applied to actual doctoral research, I'd very much like to
hear some more details and some good explanation or
rationale. And all the more so if we're talking here not an
isolated exceptional case in a specific research domain, but
rather ( as you seem to imply ) a more general stipulation.
Apologies for running on at such length. This seems to me a
hardly unimportant matter.
- Laval Hunsuckerto make explicit / to justify / to defend / to contextualize this
operative framework is, as above suggested, quite another
matter -- but, even if such is not the case, aren't we entitled to
expect that a student, in the kind of situation you describe,
shouldn't be able to get away with the kind of response that
s/he in fact gave on that occasion to the question "will you
please tell us about the theoretical framework for your study ?"
( or however it was that the question was phrased ) ?
But I would, myself, prefer to hope that there's not even any
institution around nowadays that does not consider the
theoretical framework for a study to be a matter for explicit
attention and discussion -- certainly at the doctoral level, but
preferably also at lower levels.
I am aware that it is possible for a student to complete and
even to report a study without devoting sufficient, or maybe
any, conscious attention to what ( kind of ) theoretical
framework has guided the research and conclusions. The
point is whether responsible educators should allow this to
happen.
As far as using research "no further back than the year
2006" is concerned -- I can understand that such might out
of purely pragmatic pedagogical considerations be imposed
as an arbitrary/artificial ( non-real-world ) limitation for certain
topics under certain circumstances. But if it is indeed being
applied to actual doctoral research, I'd very much like to
hear some more details and some good explanation or
rationale. And all the more so if we're talking here not an
isolated exceptional case in a specific research domain, but
rather ( as you seem to imply ) a more general stipulation.
Apologies for running on at such length. This seems to me a
hardly unimportant matter.
Breukelen, Nederland
From: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wed, April 6, 2011 10:23:14 PM
Subject: Doctoral Expectations and Frameworks
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