Developing a convincing argument in your thesis
Richard ThorpeBAM Conference – Portsmouth - September
2015
Doctoral WorkRef: drawn from March and Birch – the nature of Scholarship
Scholarly work Recognised by others working in a similar area
Original Takes a different angle Adopts a different methodology Provides a different explanation
Situated Is located with knowledge of other literatures
Critically reflexive Of other literatures Of its own limitations Of the theories generated
Logically consistent Is not internally contradictory
Methodologically coherent Methods and data collection and analysis support the aims and objectives Offers a critically informed rationale for the selection of particular methods
Synthesis Provides a synthesis of theory and data
Audience Addresses primarily an academic rather than a practitioner audience
What does a Ph.D. contain?Contribution to knowledge
BSC, MSc, Ph.D. Pattern Recognition Generalisability Realism of Context (problem Set) Replicability
Training in research To perfect a Methodology BEING ‘SCIENTIFIC’ COMES NOT FROM WHAT YOU STUDY AND
WHAT YOU DO WITH IT BUT THE METHODOLOGY.
Implications for policy and or practice Dissemination, pathways to impact Impact ? Benefits Knowledge transfer Developed within the thesis but explicitly articulated within the conclusions
with some confidence (candidates often find this difficult for students to do
Coherence– disciplines and paradigmsViews differ on what constitutes proper
research
Different disciplines within the field of management do take a different emphasis
Different stakeholders value different styles Unilateral –vs- collaborative (coproduction) Investigate – vs – Discover Realist vs constructionist (ontology)
Multidisciplinary research often encounters conflict of styles and these can lead to discussions about coherence
Mixed Methods?Reconnecting with Ontological and
Epistemological Commitments
What is being mixed?Is it method within one family (Qualitative or quantitative) or...Between families (Qualitative and quantitative data) or .....Between epistemologies
How data is being assembled - data collectione.g. Triangulation (different perspectives on the same issue)
or..In the facilitation (the sequence; which dominates) or are
methodsFilling gaps?
AnalysisCross dressing – using quantitative data from essentially
qualitative studies
It often depends on what is being mixed.......
POSITIVISM, CONSTRUCTIONISM and MIXED
Ontology and Epistemology
Ontology Realism Internal Realism
Relativism Nominalism
Single Truth
Truth is obscure
Many truths No truth
Facts exist to
be revealed
Facts exist but are hard to uncover
Facts depend on
view of observer
Facts are all created
Epistemology
Positivism
Constructionism
Epistemology and Methodology
POSITIVISM CONSTRUCTIONISM
Positivism / Constructionism
POSITIVISM
Epistemology
‘Hard’ POSITIVISM
Aims Discovery
Starting points
Hypothesis
Designs Experiments
Data types Numbers & data
Analysis Verification & Falsification
Outcomes Confirm theories
Positivism / Constructionism
Epistemology
Soft Positivism
Soft Constructionis
m
Aims Exposure Convergence
Starting points
Propositions
Questions
Designs Large surveys
Cases & small surveys
Data types Numbers and words
Words and numbers
Analysis Correlation Triangulation
Outcomes Test and generate theories
Theory generation
CONSTRUCTIONISM
Epistemology ‘Hard’ CONSTRUCTIONI
SM
Aims Invention
Starting points
Critique
Designs Engagement
Data types Words; experiences
Analysis Sense making; understanding
Outcomes Insights and actions
For:Richer results; more credibility; explaining why;
depth and breadth; longitudinal and cross-sectional; [OK]
Just in caseBetween epistemologies
Against:Ontological incompatibility; conflicting purposes
Issues for and against mixed methods
You need to be aware of consistency in epistemologies both as a judge and when you yourself are being judged.
Its probably OK to mix weak epistemologies, provided you indicate your awareness of what you are doing.
Beware of 50/50 studies, its probably better to lead with one and add value to the study with the other.
Its probably the case that hard epistemologies can’t be mixed
It is also probably the case that adjacent ontologies can be mixed but no further?
Some thoughts on the issue of mixed methods
What is scholarship? Research is not collecting data and packaging a solution
it is justifying your results and explaining why you chose to go down one route rather than another.
Research substantiates, regulates, organises or generates our theories and produces evidence which may challenge our own beliefs and those of society in general
(May, 1993)
GOODTRUTH BEAUTY
USE
Other Issues Offering evidence of
the quality of the data, including caveats
Use of personal voice to bring into the thesis a reflective or reflexive dimension
Consider the innovative nature of the work -high dives and low dives
Stephen Toulmin and Argument Analysis
Issues related to the oral defenceFirstly the forms* (university of Leeds –PhD)
That the degree of PhD be awarded That, subject to minor editorial corrections, the
degree of PhD be awarded That, subject to the correction of stated minor
deficiencies, the degree of PhD be awarded That the application be referred for resubmission
for the degree of PhD
* Caveat: Institutions differ considerably in their regulations
Its good practice to ask for a mock viva To get attuned and used to answering
questionsTo get used to answering questions you didn’t
know were issuesGet an early insight into any potential gaps or
weaknesses in in the thesis in advance
What you might do before the oral defence Re-read the thesisConsider the contribution to knowledge
PhD in the field of X Where the gap lies What I’ve done is ? And addressed abc and found
xyz And this has implications for 1,2,3...
Prepare your John Humphrey test
Oral defenceStanding your groundDon’t defend the indefensible That got me thinking....I’ve never thought of it in that way......
There are different processes in operation
The role of the internal and external with and without a panel
ChairsVideo