G’day,
Interesting discussion. The answers in my (albeit limited) experience
would be no, and no. However, the discussion makes me question whether
the responses from the students may be subliminally linked. Most theory grows
and develops from earlier theory, or has, at least, some relationship
with other theories. To really understand theory one needs to engage with past
writing - the original on the theory and subsequent developments. To not go
back beyond 2006, how could one engage thoughtfully and in an informed way with
(almost) any theory or theoretical framework? Certainly most would be unable to
be read in the original .... Or perhaps in another sense - I have
heard a student claim that they were using grounded theory and so didn’t
need a theoretical framework (which of course provoked an interesting
discussion itself). And finally J, perhaps the first
student was only understanding theory, or theoretical frameworks in the
narrowest possible sense...
Cheerio
Mary Anne
--
Mary Anne Kennan, PhD
School of Information Studies
Charles Sturt University
Locked Bag 588
Wagga Wagga NSW 2678
AUSTRALIA
Phone: +612 6933
4893 | email: [log in to unmask]
Recent publications: http://tiny.cc/aqjt4
From: Open Lib/Info Sci Education Forum
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 2:23 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Doctoral Expectations and Frameworks
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