 |
 |
Sarah,
Neither of my PhD examiners were from a living theory back ground. The point is that the research account was believable and met the criteria by which all PhDs are examined in the University (not bath for me). Thankfully I can't remember what the criteria were now! Sufficient to say I didn't satisfy on the first meeting and had to write more to explain why I had created a new epistemology of alongsideness. I didn't know the implications of that claim when I first made it but certainly came to by the end of the process. It has been useful for me to have done that extra thinking even though I am no longer working in an academic environment.
The point of all this Sarah is that living theory is just another methodology that people find useful for finding out what they need to know. Whatever methodology is used, it will need to produce research of a quality to meet the standards determined by the university in which it happens ...as I understand it. I don't see inhouse conspiracy or complacency it just sounds like it when the language that emerges from a particular style of thinking feels excluding to someone approaching things from a different perspective. My thoughts ...hope its helpful
Regards,
From: Sarah Fletcher <[log in to unmask]> |