 |
 |
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.
[log in to unmask]" width="54" height="37">
Ken Haycock
voice: 778-689-5938