Hi all
Tracking this with interest - not sure my posting got through though?
Just a note- re supervisors - I was lucky enough to have a panel who saw
themselves not as my "super" visors - but as my "co-visioners". One of my
co-visioners, Jacques Boulets, has a great sense of the meaning of language
and its assumptions regarding hierarchy and power distribution - and he felt
very uncomfortable about the idea of being "super" to any Phd candidate. A
co-visioning relationship was one where they sat along side me, not
penetrating the text in a judgemental way, but attempting to see what I was
seeing, and offer critical and robust interjections in my implied
constructions, including those associated with my actual practice. At times
it felt quite brutal, or disconnected, or uncritically subjective from their
point of view - but mostly I worked with a great sense of space and freedom,
and their trusting confidence in what I could achieve. I remain very
grateful to the positions that they took up with me.
Cheers
Susie
On 16/2/07 8:36 AM, "Sarah Fletcher" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Great posting, Pip! I think it is important to
> understand a few things about the draft staff Mode PhD
> I offered as a catalylist for discussion:
>
> 1) There is no supervisor - this is not a supervised
> mode and the only feedback is from an Advisor (in my
> case Judi Marshall) pre examination
>
> This is why I'm (still!) trying to get a clear
> unequivocal stament of the standards of judgement with
> regard to LETs which are so favoured by practitioner
> researchers in different contexts thanks to Jack and
> Jean.
>
> 2) Are we suggesting that without a supervisor a PhD
> thesis is unlikely to succeed? Incidentally, just to
> clarify my thesis was examined under the wrong
> criteria and as such did not fail. I waited three
> years for re-examination as the Appeals Committee
> invited for examination as if for the first time - for
> whatever reason suitable examiners were not found.
>
> As I wrote a couple of days ago I will be analysing
> the responses to my posting with a view to to
> identifying the SoJ relating specifically to LETs -
> and I'd deeply appreciate any assistance before
> discussion moves on.
>
> Warm regards,
>
> Sarah
>
>
> --- Pip/Bruce Ferguson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I really endorse the need to take calm breaths and
> consider the feedback one's supervisors give one about
> what standards need to be evident in a piece of work
>
> Sarah Fletcher
> http://www.TeacherResearch.net
|