Theoretical Framework
Now there is a hard question. Ok Im in third year and Id say by the end of second year I had a good idea of the theory I wanted to keep and the theory I wanted to discard. It really depends on the type of thesis you are doing. Those who are critiquing what came before them and building up a literature review in that respect should probably be advised that it will change and shift depending on the scope creep of your thesis. Those who are going out into uncharted waters with more multidisciplinary approaches have a harder time in my opinon because they have to deal with rival theory not only in one subject area but quite normally in 3 or 4. So I would say expect a little bit longer if you are multidisciplinary.
To make the whole thing cohesive is the hard part, you have to be pretty ruthless and almost write a disclaimer in your introductory chapter with the theory you will and will not be mentioning. I find a nod toward it is more than appropriate and a reason for its place (or lack of) in your thesis.
Its a real process though and in my opinion in the humanites you only really get a hold on your paper toward the end of second year. Certainly people talk about writing up and doing this and that in their first year, its not a bad idea to start writing early but be prepared to heavily edit and keep very little of it because your points and focus may have shifted away from that position.
I know I still battle theory. It is the stuff of many sleepless nights. Certain theories of my theoretical framework are underdeveloped and could be construed as difficult to defend so I have had to anchor the thesis with contexual framework also and some more theory heaped on top for good measure along with some phenomenology just to finish up.
There is no right and wrong time, I just think quite often PhD ideas in first year are still very sprawling which is a good thing because it gets you reading all that you need to, but they need tuned and tightened up which is done with time and mulling over with you and your supervisor. I know I sound bizarre but a thesis sometimes needs to mature for you to really see what its going to be about primarily.For me it was finding a particular philosophical area I liked and worked well with my analysis rather than the semiotic one that didn't suit me.
I think you need to try a few out for size and see which suits you, it may all change but hopefully you can still use some of it.
I am a humanities PhD student and found that by the end of my second year I had begun to "do" history in a very specific way - and could locate myself within a particular type of cultural history i.e my theoretical home. This was often an unconscious development at the time - but looking back I can definately see how reading certain texts and looking at certain primary sources shaped my theoretical perspective. In thr first year I would have been lost to say which theoretical perspective I am coming from - but now I can readily say that my work is like "these peoples work" and "not like these peoples work" etc. I realise now that now much of what I am doing is about a phenomenology of animals in a specific period of British cultural history. But this awareness only happened within the past 3 or 4 months.
So perhaps you should relax and let it happen! :)
heyyy eska you can you can you can give stars!!! Just press the star button beside the name of the person you want to give a star to (has to be the one who started the thread, like bug in this case!!)
Oh, this is like kindergarten when we'd all go up to the teacher to get lollypops!
Bug I think I have to have started the thread. I had a look round and clicked a few stars but no results - I think you could give me a star though!!! I know I haven't given you any advice but maybe feeling less alone make you feel a bit better? yes, it's just like kindergarten and I know exactly where all my time is going... and maybe why my framework could be coming quicker!
I think the way I arrived at my theoretical approach was quite similar to Chrisrolinksi's. From the outset I knew that I wanted to do my research in such a way that let people speak for themselves and did not try to impose 'rules' onto their behaviour but it wasn't until about a year in that I was reading a book on interpretive sociology and realised that was the label for what I was trying to do! I think I wrote a draft of my methods chapter in January of the second year so I guess that is when my 'theoretical framework' became fully formed. Having said that I still grapple with terminology now (third year) because my research is at the border of effectively four disciplines (politics, organizational studies, sociology of organizations and STS) and they all have different terms for very similar phenomenon! It's trick deciding whose terms to use because the labels you attach to yourself and your work (e.g. "I'm a political scientist" "This is a piece of science and technology studies") is very powerful in attracting or repelling other people from reading your work.
WOW i have a STAAAAAAAARRRRR (up)8-)(up)!!! thanks Bug!!
And thanks Heifer (I hope I spelt that right) for the illuminating info on cross-disciplinary approaches.
Alli - you could try getting a cheap 'dictionary of sociology' off amazon (or good 2nd hand bookshop if you're lucky enough to live near any). I've got the Collins one by Jary and Jary and it's great if you just need refreshing on the basics of a particular term. It's also good for finding out who are considered to be the main authors associated with a theory.
