 |
 |
Dear Jacqui, Good question. I feel it's a key issue and for a PhD is larger than simply a list of words in an appendix. Its not been well addressed in the archives of phd-design. I'll make a start - others may see things differently? As I see it, it is your reasoning in your thesis and your use of concepts and terms that dictate whether you need a glossary and what is in it. It is likely that for a design research PhD you will need something more than a glossary. In essence, a glossary tells the reader how the candidate is using terms and concepts that are contested or ambiguous. This is in order that the reader can follow and test the validity of the candidate's reasoning, and whether the conclusions and findings of your PhD are fully justified. In some fields, a glossary stating the specific and exclusive meaning that the researcher attributes to terms and concepts is sufficient. In design research at doctoral level, usually something more is needed. It is normally necessary also to describe why you chose to use the specific definitions of terms and concepts in view of your research problem, the topic area, the theoretical perspectives and paths of reasoning that you use. This is essential on three grounds. First, almost all core concepts in design research are disputed or ambiguous (e.g. design, creativity, perception, useability etc) and choice of definition of these dictates which reasoning pathways are valid. Second, design research typically addresses multiple layers of the same issue that must be kept carefully separate. This can be problematic because the same terms and concepts may be used similarly or differently in epistemologically different aspects of a design research project. Hence, it is essential to define for the reader the specific meaning of terms the candidate is using in specific areas of analysis in their research. Lack of awareness of this issue is a major weakness of many PhD theses in design research. Third, the existence or not of a section defining terms and concepts and justifying them in terms of the research is a strong indication for the examiner whether the candidate has appreciated this is a problematic issue in design research. If a definition section is weak or missing, then almost certainly the conclusions of the research are not justified to the necessary doctoral level and hence the PhD should be failed and returned to the candidate for amendment. These are some of the reasons why design research PhD theses typically need a significant section defining the ways the candidate has used terms in the thesis and justifying their definition in terms of the theoretical perspective, topic area and modes of analysis of their research. This section must almost certainly be located in or close to the opening chapter of a PhD thesis because of its key role in underpinning ALL of the discussions and analyses of the thesis. There is a closely linked issue: describing the limitations and delimitations of the research, analyses and findings in the thesis. The definitions of terms and concepts that the candidate uses limit, bound and, largely, define the candidate's potential research findings. It would be expected at doctoral level that the candidate understands and explains the specific limitations and delimitations that can be directly inferred by their choice of theoretical perspectives and definitions. For example, if the candidate chooses a phenomenological theoretical perspective then this forces key concepts to be defined in specific ways, it also limits what dimensions of the research can be 'seen', it limits the range of areas of the research that can be analysed, it limits the choice of modes of analysis, it limits which research findings can be found and the ways they can be justified, and hence, limits and delimits the research in general. At doctoral level, the candidate would be expected to understand and explain this in their thesis - especially in design research where typically conceptual complexity is high. Thoughts and comments? Best wishes, Terry _____ Dr. Terence Love, PhD, FRDS, AMIMechE Curtin Research Fellow Design-focused Research Group, Design Out Crime Group Key Researcher at Centre for Extended Enterprise and Business Intelligence Research Associate at Planning and Transport Research Centre Curtin University, PO Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia 6845 Mob: 0434 975 848, Fax +61(0)8 9305 7629, [log in to unmask] Visiting Professor, Member of Scientific Council UNIDCOM/ IADE, Lisbon, Portugal Visiting Research Fellow, Institute of Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Development Management School, Lancaster University,Lancaster, UK, [log in to unmask] ___ -----Original Message----- From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of jacqui Sent: Sunday, 18 March 2007 4:12 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: re glossary for PhD Hi all Does anyone have any tips/advice on how to begin writing a glossary for my thesis? Do I have to cross reference or merely give a glossary of terms? Thanks in advance Jacqui -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.12/724 - Release Date: 16/03/2007 12:12