Print

Print
I'm working on my EdD in Learning & Leadership on an LIS topic right now, but I'm a former Polisci PhD-attempter (in my pre-librarian life) and carry that experience into this one with me. I will say that whereas in some other fields there are established theories which inform variables for quantitative studies, I've found little similar traction on the LIS side, whcih makes it very different from my other experience. (The other was much, much easier.) In some cases it forces me to go to other fields to establish why a variable is a valid measure of X, in other cases where something similar doesn't exist, I have to provide my own justification for including it in the model. In any case, I find that a conceptual foundation is essential, even if there's not a boatload of theory that you might find in other disciplines. I couldnt imagine any committee pushing forth a dissertation without an established base of theory or conceptual framework, though.

Colleen S. Harris

On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Karen Weaver <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
While many may not have experienced this when you have been doctoral
students in your various time frames, I think it is necessary to ask
across the board today especially how this has changed for doctoral
students in library & information science/information studies today.
What was then is not the same as today in terms of changes in the
schools and disciplines within it.

To ask people what it was like in their time, is not how the
experience is today for doctoral students in professional schools for
the doctoral students--different from the masters level students.   It
is an important distinction now  which also directly impacts the
future of the professions as well--and the future of library education
in a bad economy.
Who is the watchdog for doctoral programs in LIS ?
   just some thoughts on this, Karen W

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 2:14 PM, Wallace, Danny <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear Ken,
>
> Both situations are totally outside my experience.
>
> In the first case, if the study was purely empirical and there was no directly associated body of theory, I would probably accept that as an answer but then want to know what related body of theory might pertain.
>
> In the second case, I am constantly encouraging my students, both master's and doctoral, to take a long view and not assume that everything recent is novel.  Paul Otlet and Henri La Fontaine predicted the Internet.  H. G. Well's predicted Wikipedia.  Everything old becomes new again.
>
> Danny
>
>
> On 4/6/11 3:23 PM, "[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:3385026863_43938]
> 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]



--
_