Well, I understand what you are saying and agree that all articles have external input, but what I was getting at is how do you compare (not just in terms of job prospects, but also as a measure of intellectual accomplishment) someone who has gone that route to someone else who produced 100,000 words with a few sympathetic comments from a supervisor? Its just a completely different experience in terms of what you go through, in terms of conceptual effort, in my view. cheers Mathieu On 07/06/11, Dave Karpf <davekarpf@gmail.com> wrote:
This type of dissertation is very common in some social science programs, less-so in others. I have colleagues in econ and in the more econ-driven subfields of political science for whom this is the norm. It seems the main distinction is whether you are entering more of a book-driven or article-driven subfield.
I'd dismiss your first concern, that these are peer-reviewed articles, btw. Yes, solo peer-reviewed articles can be said to represent an individual's best solo effort. This is the case because *all* of our work in academia is eventually peer-reviewed. The process of managing those multiple inputs, engaging with their critiques, and crafting responses to them is fundamental to a "solo" effort. Or put more plainly, there is no such thing as a truly lone scholar. We are all participating in a discourse, and one's contribution is shaped passively through the books they read, semi-passively through the questions and methods they select, and actively through the peer reviews and conference discussants we encounter along the way.
(As for traditional dissertations going from A to Z and building a point over time... well, having just recently converted my traditional dissertation into a book manuscript, I'd humbly suggest that it's always a work-in-progress. What I thought was comprehensive in 2009 felt woefullly inadequate in 2010/11.)
Bottom-line: the article compilation route is a good choice for fields that emphasize articles over books. The traditional dissertation route is a good choice for fields that emphasize books over articles (or treat them equally). And in all cases, follow the prevailing norms of whatever departments you hope will one day hire you.
Regards, Dave
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Darren Purcell <dpurcell@ou.edu> wrote:
I know of several programs in Geography that were using this model in the 1990s, because my doctoral program interviewed at last two candidates who completed their dissertations this way.
Darren -------------------------------------------------------- Darren Purcell
Assistant Professor and Undergraduate Adviser Dept. of Geography and Environmental Sustainability University of Oklahoma
SWAAG Secretary : http://www2.geog.okstate.edu/swaag/
Email: dpurcell@ou.edu Skype: profpurcell (405) 325-9193 http://ags.ou.edu/~dpurcell/ http://ou.academia.edu/DarrenPurcell
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Knut Lundby <knut.lundby@media.uio.no
wrote:
At the Faculty of Humanities, University of Oslo, we have through several years been encouraged to apply this dissertation format alternative to a monograph. Our PhD-programme is described here: www.hf.uio.no/english/research/doctoral-degree-and-career/
Knut Lundby Dept. of Media and Communication University of Oslo, Norway
Den 5. juli 2011 kl. 19.20 skrev Mathieu ONeil:
Hi everyone
I am currently writing a report on a PhD dissertation from a European university. The dissertation -->consists of a general introduction (50 pages), four articles which have already been published in peer-reviewed journals, and an appendix consisting of an additional article. I have to admit that I am little surprised by what is for me a new kind of Dissertation. Whilst the benefits are clear in terms of publications – when candidates obtain their doctorate they already have at least four publications in peer-reviewed journals – it raised some questions in my mind regarding the nature of the work.
First, since it is the final, published version of the peer-reviewed articles which is presented these articles have (presumably) been peer reviewed. That is to say, candidates are not presenting strictly speaking their own work, with input from a supervisor, but rather work which may have been substantially benefited from a multi-person process of revision, negotiation, revision, etc. Can these articles be said to represent a candidate's best solo effort? I know people could ask friends and contacts for comments but here articles have been for want of a better word 'professionally' edited and proofread...
Second, despite the introduction which attempts to pull everything together the papers remain heterogenous articles and may suffer both from repetition (the same point can appear in one or several articles as well as in the introduction) and from the lack of a clear overall structure. When you write a traditional Dissertation (say 100,000 words) you really need to go from A to Z, learn to build a point over time and length... Maybe it is a useless skill.
This is not an isolated phenomenon, I received a published version of a really interesting PhD from someone a few months ago who did the same - from a different European country.
Anyway, I am curious as to how prevalent this practice is, and what people think about it – is a PhD like this the same as a traditional one? Does it matter?
cheers Mathieu _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
-- Dave Karpf, PhD
Assistant Professor Journalism and Media Studies Department School of Communication and Information Rutgers University, New Brunswick
www.davidkarpf.com davekarpf@gmail.com _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
-- **** Dr Mathieu O'Neil Adjunct Research Fellow Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute College of Arts and Social Science The Australian National University email: mathieu.oneil[at]anu.edu.au web: http://adsri.anu.edu.au/people/visitors/mathieu.php