Ugh. Dissertation revisions are difficult, aren't they? I'm looking at Chapter 4, and in 32 pages the only positive thing Fantastic Adviser has written is the tiny word "interesting" on page 22.
And then there's Chapter 2, AKA the revise-and-resubmit article. The reviewers of the article were really hung up (rightfully, I think) on my use of standpoint epistemology, which makes me want to just dump the standpoint theory altogether. But no! 'tis not possible since the reviewers specifically asked for the standpoint to become more central. So tonight is all about re-reading stuff I haven't read in almost five years and catching up on a little bit of newer theory.
And have I mentioned I really, really dislike reading this kind of theory, as it tends to be unanchored to any specific situations or people? I mean, really, what's the point of that?
Ugh, revisions do suck. But comments are good if they're at least constructive. I gave my thesis proposal to my advisor and he gave back the entire 30 page document with three pages marked. On each page was a GIANT X through most of the text. Oh and on the front he wrote: "this needs work". That was it....
Good luck with the work!
I really, really dislike reading this kind of theory, as it tends to be unanchored to any specific situations or people? I mean, really, what's the point of that?
[SIGH] Yeah, I know what you mean. In my little domain, let's see if I can say this without giving too much away, I'm often frustrated by people's choice of methodology. I'm interested in studying what people really, actually, honest and truly, in the real world, do. Not what they might be capable of doing under certain, highly constrained (though easy to interpret) conditions. Why, oh why do researchers so often choose the easiest way to conduct a study, rather than the best way (or at least one that attempts to study what they purport to be interested in)?
Post a Comment