Category: Lancaster PhD

Call for Papers: Networked Learning Conference 2012

Happy to see that the call for papers for the 8th International Networked Learning Conference 2012 was just announced. I attended this conference in 2010 in Denmark, and hope to be able to attend this again from 2-4 April 2012 in Maastricht, the Netherlands. If this will be anything like the last conference, it will be a tremendous experience.

While I do not usually promote conferences before I have anything accepted for them, I am doing so here because this is such a wonderful conference that I think may benefit more than that specific group that tends to already know about it. I think it needs a wider audience (i.e., from the US, Canada, and Australia), and hope this little post can help that along.

Did I mention that two scholars whose work has greatly influenced my own research will be speaking — Etienne Wenger and Tara Fenwick!

Thesis Proposal — Approved!

Happy to share the good news that my revised doctoral thesis proposal has just been approved.

My working title is, which will surely change as I dive further into the research and begin the interviews, is:

Navigating Liminality in Distance Education: The Experiences of Research and Professional Doctorate Learners

While I received initial, provisional approval a few weeks back, I found this revision a strangely challenging hurdle to overcome. I knew what was needed. I knew how to get the information (some of which I already had). I even knew within 1 hour how long it would take me. While armed with this, I still found it a daunting task. I wonder if this was due to all the anxiety that went into creating the initial proposal that it drained me of all my research energy? Hmm, something to think about. Wonder if others have encountered anything like this?

Anyway, on to my ethical paperwork.

Track the Literature Review Process in a Method of Inquiry Table

Have you ever worked on a literature review, going from database to database, repeating some searches while forgetting to try additional keywords in some of them when you think of them at a later point in your review? This is the reason I recently Tweeted about a Method of Inquiry Table. This tool, which can be adjusted as needed based on the research, is a simple table that allows you to track databases, keywords, and results. To help remain focused, it has a space for the research purpose and questions.

Seems like such a simple tool, though before I started using one, I always duplicated my efforts while forgetting things along the way.

I uploaded the tool I use here for anybody who may want to use or improve upon it.

Research Time Planner (as GANTT)

I am still developing the column headings for the planner that I presented yesterday, and while this is certainly beyond what The Clockwork Muse discusses, I think that having a project plan that includes all of the main elements that will take time in the doctoral thesis process (I am a project manager, after all), may help to add a bit of realization. For example, I have heard many people say, “write each day,” but that necessitates a constant reading and processing and organizing, none of which are readily accounted for in the time established for “writing each day.” The comments I received have been very helpful in moving this along . . .

I only have so much time, so need to organize it as well as I can. With this said, here are my revised column headings:

Section Length
(pages)		 Literature
(search, read, process)		 Research Steps
(organize, interview, transcribe, etc.)		 Writing
(pages per day)		 Time
(days)		 Deadline

I really welcome more feedback on this. While I so value a GANTT chart, I know the thesis has quiet components (writing, thinking, etc.) that may easily be neglected if they are not literally listed and considered; thus this focus on various specific chunks, that while they are not always as clearly identified as being distinct, need to be accounted for.

Research Time Commitment Planner

Thinking a little more deeply about scheduling and managing time for writing my doctoral thesis, as a continuation of my post yesterday about The Clockwork Muse, I am wondering how to also build in the time for reading and doing the research / transcription itself. While there is a great amount of time that is needed for the writing of the thesis, there is also a lot of time that needs to be allocated for the other elements of the research, and I am trying to organize my life for the next year overall.

Let me explain what I am thinking. As per Zerubavel’s suggested writing outline (pg. 76-77), these are the column headings for the time estimates for writing: 

Section Length
(pages)		 Pace
(pages per day)		 Time
(days)		 Deadline

I think this is very helpful; as writing is clearly a tremendous time commitment. However, I think that considering writing alone may be a bit decieving for the amount of work involved in the next year or so. Thus, this is how I am thinking about creating a master time commitment list, including both writing as well as the research itself that proceeds and happens throughout the writing: 

Section Literature
(search and read)		 Research
(specify)		 Transcription Length
(pages)		 Pace
(pages per day)		 Time
(days)		 Deadline

I welcome some thoughts about this . . .