[csaa-forum] csaa-forum Digest: Thesis Components
Mark Gibson
mark.gibson at monash.edu
Thu Mar 17 13:47:55 CST 2011
I would agree with Tony and Andrew on theory chapters, methodology chapters
etc. I also advise against long, indigestible tracts of theory or
methodological reflection separated out from their points of actual
application.
But I think Amanda may be right about a 'pull towards a single discipline
now'. Yes, we do share many theorists and we are all in some sense 'post-new
humanities'. But disciplinary groupings are still very powerful and often
raid other areas only to shore themselves up. There's a big difference
between a bit of strategic borrowing and a more thorough-going
inter-disciplinarity. The latter is risky and actually much rarer than one
might think.
I've just had another conversation off list about who is putting in general
submissions for ERA on behalf of media and cultural studies. I suspect
no-one (although happy to be corrected). There may be a number of areas
where cultural studies could do with more forceful representation. It would
be a mistake to think that everyone is already with us.
-- Mark
On 17/03/11 11:13 AM, "Tony Mitchell" <Tony.Mitchell at uts.edu.au> wrote:
>
> 1) do you ask your students to include a literature review as a stand alone
> piece
>
> absolutely not. this is surely a formula for a dull, conventional thesis that
> no publisher would want to look at. The literature review should be woven into
> the fabric of the thesis so that it is barely noticeable.
>
> 2) what level of detail in 'methodology' when it mainly
> involves ethnographic work / cultural analysis/ development of theory.
>
> certainly not a theory/methodology chapter, again surely a recipe for
> dullness. and think of the poor examiners. Reading about people's
> methodologies is boring, unless they are doing something highly unusual, like
> interviewing animals. Findings are always paramount.
>
> 3) Does anyone really require write a 'theory' chapter?
>
> obviously some people do, but again in the interests of formulaic,
> programmatic theses destined for oblivion.
>
> 4) How do you manage these issues in an interdisciplinary thesis where there
> are different expectations for each discipline?
>
> isn't everybody interdisciplinary? is it even possible to be mono-disciplinary
> any more? isn't everybody using the same theorists to say basically the same
> thing? everything is
> complex/multivocal/polyphanous/intertextual/pluralist/diverse/etc.
>
>
> 'The revolution will not be twittered'
>
> the Darlo barber
>
> Dr. Tony Mitchell
> Senior lecturer
> Cultural Studies
> Arts & Social Sciences
>
> UTS
> P.O.Box 123 Broadway
> NSW 2007
> Australia
> Tel. 61-2-95142335
>
> ________________________________________
> From: csaa-forum-bounces at lists.cdu.edu.au
> [csaa-forum-bounces at lists.cdu.edu.au] On Behalf Of Andrew Hickey
> [Andrew.Hickey at usq.edu.au]
> Sent: Wednesday, 16 March 2011 4:48 PM
> To: csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au
> Subject: Re: [csaa-forum] csaa-forum Digest: Thesis Components
>
> Hi Amanda,
> I recently supervised an autoethnographically based thesis that steered away
> considerably from the usual '5 chapter' structure of a PhD. Having said that
> though, there was clear connection with the literature throughout the work,
> and similarly, the methods applied were articulated expertly by the candidate
> (particularly the epistemological implications of autoethnographic work). One
> thing we did give considerable thought to was the list of examiners we might
> contact once the thesis was completed and ready to send out. We explicitly
> selected folks we knew would be up to speed with the alternative structure of
> the thesis and who would appreciate the creativity the thesis contained. While
> we were'nt looking for an easy ride (and the candidate will adamantly confirm
> that she wanted to have the thesis examined on its merits as an academic
> work), we felt it was vitally important to go for examiners who would
> appreciate its structure. (As it happened, she got through with 'flying co
> lours' and was highly commended by the examiners).
>
> My own thoughts on the structure of the thesis are that, yes, it must contain
> evidence of a connection to the literature and field, and must articulate
> clearly how its data were collected and analysis performed (both as a
> pragmatic discussion of what was done 'in the field' as well as the
> epistemological orientations of the researcher). A PhD, as the highest
> qualification, must represent the scholar's 'license to practice'; a
> demonstration of the candidate's capacities for rigorous research and
> scholarship. Whether or not this needs to be done within clearly delineated
> chapters I'm not so certain. I take Jipson and Paley's (now aging) idea of
> 'daredevil research' on board here and actively encourage those candidate's I
> work with to think creatively about how they might present their work- in many
> instances, the usual 5 chapter approach isnt the best way to convey what needs
> to be conveyed. But again, dealing with institutions and examiners who often
> have very fixed ideas abou
> t what a thesis should look like must be a consideration.
>
> Apologies for prattling on, but I hope this adds something to your query,
>
> Andrew
>
> Andrew Hickey
> Senior Lecturer- Cultural Studies and Social Theory
> Faculty of Education
> University of Southern Queensland
> TOOWOOMBA QUEENSLAND 4350
>
> (07) 46 31 2337
> hickeya at usq.edu.au
> www.andrewhickeyweb.blogspot.com
>
> "At a time when the mainstream media leave out half of what the public needs
> to know,
> while at the same time purveying oceans of official nonsense, the public needs
> an alternative source of news"
> (Jonathon Schell, 2010)
> ________________________________________
> From: csaa-forum-bounces at lists.cdu.edu.au
> [csaa-forum-bounces at lists.cdu.edu.au] On Behalf Of
> csaa-forum-request at lists.cdu.edu.au [csaa-forum-request at lists.cdu.edu.au]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 3:17 PM
> To: csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au
> Subject: csaa-forum Digest, Vol 83, Issue 14
>
> Send csaa-forum mailing list submissions to
> csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> csaa-forum-request at lists.cdu.edu.au
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> csaa-forum-owner at lists.cdu.edu.au
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of csaa-forum digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Formal elements of the PhD thesis (Amanda Wise)
> 2. Digital Humanities International Perspectives (Kylie Brass)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 15:44:21 +1100
> From: Amanda Wise <amanda.wise at mq.edu.au>
> Subject: [csaa-forum] Formal elements of the PhD thesis
> To: aasnet at anu.edu.au, csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTincJQmd+_RVgnRt-4WKnXvPOm1Y9d6HnYVgopWt at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hello Anthropology and cultural studies colleagues,
>
> I am having a debate with a colleague at the moment (a sociologist) about
> the required elements of a PhD thesis. She is of the view that there always
> needs to be stand alone 'Literature Review' and 'Theory' chapters.
>
> What to do with interdisciplinary work. My work is interdiscipinary as is
> most of my students' research (in migration, transnational, multicultural
> studies, ethnicity, identity). Recently I supervised a student, whose work
> on labour migrants involved 8 months of in-depth fieldwork, drew on
> anthropology, cultural studies, sociological theories and work in cultural
> geography. We had two sociologists of migration mark it, and one social
> anthropologist. The two sociologists wanted a lot more detailed exposition
> of 'method' (OK), and a stand alone literature review chapter. My
> sociologist colleague also feels our students should have a 'theory'
> chapter.
>
> My PhD was in cultural studies (co-supervised by an anthropologist) and
> neither of these were required. Either I had dodgy supervision (I don't
> think so) or there simply are different expectations. I feel that such a
> rigid structure can sometimes (depending on the thesis) disrupt the
> narrative flow of a thesis and that theory/lit review is just as happily
> embedded throughout the chapters.
>
> So, I wanted ask the opinion of cultural studies people and anthropologists:
>
> 1) do you ask your students to include a literature review as a stand alone
> piece
> 2) what level of detail in 'methodology' when it mainly
> involves ethnographic work / cultural analysis/ development of theory.
> 3) Does anyone really require write a 'theory' chapter?
> 4) How do you manage these issues in an interdisciplinary thesis where there
> are different expecations for each discipline?
>
> On top of the ERA, I can't help feeling of late there is more and more pull
> towards a single discipline now.
>
> Thanks for your thoughts and reflections.
> Amanda
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Dr Amanda Wise
> Senior Research Fellow
> Centre for Research on Social Inclusion,
> Macquarie University NSW 2109
> Ph: +61 2 9850-8835
> Email: amanda.wise at mq.edu.au
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/pipermail/csaa-forum/attachments/20110316/8434e525/att
> achment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:17:35 +1100
> From: Kylie Brass <kylie.brass at humanities.org.au>
> Subject: [csaa-forum] Digital Humanities International Perspectives
> To: <csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au>
> Message-ID: <C9A69321.8DDE%kylie.brass at humanities.org.au>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> ===============================================
> DIGITAL HUMANITIES: INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES
> ===============================================
>
> TUESDAY 22 MARCH 2011, 11.30AM-1PM,
> AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
> HEDLEY BULL LECTURE THEATRE (HB 1)
>
> Two leading international figures in the digital humanities discuss future
> research directions in this ground-breaking field.
>
> Sponsored by the Australian Academy of the Humanities, in association with
> the National Centre of Biography, Australian National University. This free
> event is open to the public. No booking required.
>
> Professor Ray Siemens (University of Victoria, Canada)
> 'Enacting a Vision for the Future of Digital Humanities'
>
> Dr Patrik Svensson (Ume? University, Sweden)
> 'The Digital Humanities as a Trading Zone'
>
> RAY SIEMENS is Canada Research Chair in Humanities Computing and Professor
> of English at the University of Victoria with cross appointment in Computer
> Science. Editor of several renaissance texts and founding editor of the
> journal Early Modern Literary Studies, he has written numerous articles on
> computational methods and literary studies and is co-editor of Blackwell?s
> Companion to Digital Humanities and Companion to Digital Literary Studies.
> Chair, Alliance of Digital Humanities Organisations? Steering Committee, he
> is also incoming Vice President of the Canadian Federation for the
> Humanities and Social Sciences.
>
> PATRIK SVENSSON is Director of HUMlab at Ume? University, Sweden, where he
> is Senior Lecturer in humanities and information technology. He is author
> and editor of books in English and Swedish including on language education,
> linguistics and digital technology. Svensson has a long-term interest in the
> intersections between technology, learning, collaboration, innovation and
> creativity in the humanities. His recent articles in Digital Humanities
> Quarterly, OHumanities Computing as Digital Humanities? and OThe Landscape
> of Digital Humanities?, survey the international field.
>
> ENQUIRIES Email paul.arthur at anu.edu.au or kylie.brass at humanities.org.au,
> Phone 02 6125 2676
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/pipermail/csaa-forum/attachments/20110316/801bf9cb/att
> achment.html
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: Digital Humanities poster.pdf
> Type: application/pdf
> Size: 260441 bytes
> Desc: not available
> Url :
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/pipermail/csaa-forum/attachments/20110316/801bf9cb/att
> achment.pdf
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________
>
> csaa-forum
> discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
>
> www.csaa.asn.au
>
> change your subscription details at
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
>
> End of csaa-forum Digest, Vol 83, Issue 14
> ******************************************
>
> This email (including any attached files) is confidential and is for the
> intended recipient(s) only. If you received this email by mistake,
> please, as a courtesy, tell the sender, then delete this email.
>
> The views and opinions are the originator's and do not necessarily
> reflect those of the University of Southern Queensland. Although all
> reasonable precautions were taken to ensure that this email contained no
> viruses at the time it was sent we accept no liability for any losses
> arising from its receipt.
>
> The University of Southern Queensland is a registered provider of
> education with the Australian Government (CRICOS Institution Code No's.
> QLD 00244B / NSW 02225M)
>
>
> _______________________________________
>
> csaa-forum
> discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
>
> www.csaa.asn.au
>
> change your subscription details at
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
>
> UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F
> DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain
> confidential information.
> If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate,
> distribute or copy this message or
> attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the
> sender immediately and delete
> this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
> sender, except where the
> sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the
> University of Technology Sydney.
> Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects.
>
> Think. Green. Do.
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
> _______________________________________
>
> csaa-forum
> discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
>
> www.csaa.asn.au
>
> change your subscription details at
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
More information about the csaa-forum
mailing list