the rationality we routinely adopt in reviewing formal texts belies the personal traits and circumstances and social glue that underpin academic discourse
Guides to writing a dissertation / thesis, particularly within the social sciences, often stress the act of ‘locating’ or ‘positioning’ oneself within the field of research being studied. In interpreting and conceptualising selected arguments we are expected to take sides; to critically evaluate different perspectives, look for synergies, contradictions and gaps in the constructed debate. Whilst this spatial metaphor is largely confined to the context of literature review, it is seen as a crucial component of doctoral study, indicating the student’s development as a critical and reflective researcher, and representing the process of finding her own voice as an independent scholar.
Depending on your research field, some of the authors you reference may be long departed. Many however, will be your contemporaries; living, breathing academics, fellow early researchers, postdocs, supervisors, professors, each with personal perspectives and motivations, influenced by ongoing professional experiences, incentives and constraints. The ‘I agree with x but disagree with y’ type of rationality we routinely adopt in reviewing formal texts belies the personal traits and circumstances and social glue that underpin academic discourse, and the nuances, cliques and politics of faculty and the wider academic field.
How much I wonder, does engagement in Web 2.0 environments indicate these often hidden influences? Does the informality and transparency evident in blogging, Twitter and personal learning networks etc. give us a richer, more authentic perspective? What these practices reveal may not be transferable to the formal structural requirements of the literature review, but they may help us signpost key arguments and their proponents, and give us an ‘edge’ in understanding the social complexities that influence contemporary academic debate.
Tags: academic practice, web 2.0
August 4th, 2010 at 9:49 am
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Martin Hughes, Andy Coverdale. Andy Coverdale said: New blog post http://phdblog.net/the-rationality-we-routinely-adopt/ […]
August 5th, 2010 at 1:59 am
[…] » I have to agree wholeheartedly with observations put forward by Andy Coverdale in his post about the current accepted rational approach adopted when reviewing formal texts. He identifies a […]
August 6th, 2010 at 1:31 pm
[…] PhDBlog – The rationality we routinely adopt […]
August 14th, 2010 at 6:41 am
Andy,
I think there is no doubt to your logic, however, I am finding it a bit hit and miss on Web 2.0 interaction. Either people don’t have time, are not interested, or perhaps worse are not even using technology see http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=412958 for some rough stats.
I’ve been seeking help on web 2.0 toolsets, and looking for a Sustainability Values Measurement tool on facebook, linkedin, academia.edu, and Mendeley… not luck or better said 0 responses. I’m hopeful – but losing confidence.
October 21st, 2012 at 7:29 pm
[…] we associate with the social web influence this act of conceptual distancing? I’ve discussed previously the potential role of social media in signposting the complex social and cultural interrelations […]