During a meeting with my thesis supervisor a week ago, she told me to start writing for my PhD proposal immediately. I was required to write the Problem Statement, Research Questions and the Methodology. I was a bit shocked. She knew that I will be using CGT and I thought she knew how CGT works as she has attended the CGT Workshop on March 2009. Clearly I was wrong.
I made a mistake of reminding her that CGT doesn't work the way she thinks. She was disheartened. My remark must have been an insult to her. She replied hastily "I know CGT!".
Then she said something that I always hate to hear. "Just get the degree first. Later you can do whatever you want to do". Sigh.
This notion of getting the degree first is not new to me. I have heard lecturers and students asserting the same quote "Get the degree first!". Period.
"Just get the degree first" is a quote that connote the quick and easy way of getting a degree and then be known as "doctor". To me, it's just another way of saying that the PhD research thesis should be of low quality.' It's only a ticket that eventually allow you to a higher level of research.
The problem is I am 53 years old and I will retire in only a few years time. I don't want to obtain a degree from a poor quality thesis. I want to do something that will contribute or at least push further the boundary of knowledge in the communication discipline.
"Why get yourself into trouble to obtain the PhD the hard way?" they said.
The hard way to obtain a PhD degree is by using qualitative (CGT included) method! That's according to a lecturer during our conversation at the cafeteria. But she did her PhD research using the quantitative method and it took her seven years to complete. Was that easy?
But somehow, many of the lecturers I met who have obtained their PhD were either proud or a little embarrassed to talk about their PhD thesis. The new young "doctors" were always too eager to tell me about it. But the older "doctors" were somewhat hesitant. Wonder why? Is it the age / maturity factor.
Whatever will be, I will do something that I really like to do. I will do what no one else do and I will do something what everyone else chooses not to do. Period.
I made a mistake of reminding her that CGT doesn't work the way she thinks. She was disheartened. My remark must have been an insult to her. She replied hastily "I know CGT!".
Then she said something that I always hate to hear. "Just get the degree first. Later you can do whatever you want to do". Sigh.
This notion of getting the degree first is not new to me. I have heard lecturers and students asserting the same quote "Get the degree first!". Period.
"Just get the degree first" is a quote that connote the quick and easy way of getting a degree and then be known as "doctor". To me, it's just another way of saying that the PhD research thesis should be of low quality.' It's only a ticket that eventually allow you to a higher level of research.
The problem is I am 53 years old and I will retire in only a few years time. I don't want to obtain a degree from a poor quality thesis. I want to do something that will contribute or at least push further the boundary of knowledge in the communication discipline.
"Why get yourself into trouble to obtain the PhD the hard way?" they said.
The hard way to obtain a PhD degree is by using qualitative (CGT included) method! That's according to a lecturer during our conversation at the cafeteria. But she did her PhD research using the quantitative method and it took her seven years to complete. Was that easy?
But somehow, many of the lecturers I met who have obtained their PhD were either proud or a little embarrassed to talk about their PhD thesis. The new young "doctors" were always too eager to tell me about it. But the older "doctors" were somewhat hesitant. Wonder why? Is it the age / maturity factor.
Whatever will be, I will do something that I really like to do. I will do what no one else do and I will do something what everyone else chooses not to do. Period.
3 comments:
Hi.
I am the opposite and fight every step of the way :) I argue every point. I was the first student in my department to use qualitatitve methods and at the begining none of us understood how Grounded Theory worked. One of my supervisors was a little nervous of it. But I read and I went to one of Barney's seminars and I was convinced GT was for me. But my supervisor was still a little nervous and after a really difficult session with all three supervisors where they really grilled me on what I wanted to do and why, I felt utterly drained. But to my surprise they said (paraphrased) 'yes, fine, go ahead, we can see that you know what you are doing and we are convinced'. I realised afterwards that they needed to reassure themselves for all our sakes that I was competent to start the research. They needed to feel that my research project was in safe hands.
It was a while though before I lost the feeling of inadequacy that I felt when I came across the questions that are asked of researchers using the more traditional research designs - and was unable to answer them. Initially I felt defensive - as though somehow my not being able to answer these questions in the required manner meant that I was not doing a proper job, as though I was skiving or avoiding the difficult questions. It took me a while to realise that I was attempting a different research design that required a different set of questions. And that is the case here isn't it - the form that you are being asked to complete was not designed for an exploratory research design.
Two sources that might be of interest to you are:
http://www.groundedtheoryonline.com/getting-started/ethical-review-irb
and:
XIE, S.L. (2009). Striking a Balance between Program Requirements and GT Principles: Writing a compromised GT proposal The Grounded Theory Review: An international journal, 8(2), 35 - 47.
I wish you joy of your PhD.
Best wishes
Helen
*standing applause*
Dear Helen,
Thank you so much for the input especially the paper by XIE, S.L. (2009).
I've checked past theses in our library that might have used CGT as the methodology so that may be I could meet the authors to get some help but there were none. Most theses were about theory verification. I have a feeling that CGT is a method very new or unknown to the students as well as the lecturers here in Malaysia.
One way to satisfy my supervisors is to write a psuedo-proposal that may be a study in the same substantive area but of different focus. But still I'm concerned about the literature that may in away influence my conceptualization.
Wish me luck with the proposal, Helen.Again, thank you so much.
Post a Comment