On the peril of multi-essay dissertations (and the joy of knowing a topic well).
The past twenty years dissertations have changed in many disciplines.
Where at one time, PhD students wrote a single monograph that was designed to show mastery of a literature and an understanding of how to advance it.
Today, many PhD students write mutli-essay dissertations which have evolved into something quite different.
Each essay is intended to be a complete paper - the type of which can vary substantially - from a literature review to a mixed method study to a policy analysis with implications for practice.
When I first encountered this dissertation model, the students often described two to five essays on intertwined topics - which collectively demonstrated the competencies of a monograph.
Dissertation advisors touted them as a mechanism for moving ideas to market more quickly.
Students touted them as an opportunity to learn more than one method.
Hiring departments liked them bc they meant a new faculty member had a robust pipeline.
All sounds great? Right?
When the model works, it’s great.
However, lately, it doesn’t seem to be working so great.
Why?
Because what was meant to be three thematic essays seems to be, more and more, three disjointed essays on topics deemed publishable by the advisor or the student.
Why is this a problem?
It means that the deep understanding of a literature and of method relevant to a topic is missing.
Now when I talk to students on the market, they are as likely to identify with a method as they are with a research problem or a literature.
TBH, usually when a students leads with ‘I use ML to … or AI … Or DML … or fsQCA …or any method … I lose interest.
It’s a tell to me that they are more interested in applying knowledge than creating knowledge.
Because methods come & go, I worry these students are not well-positioned for sustained careers.
Maintaining a research pipeline usually requires deep knowledge of a topic or problem - that deep knowledge makes it possible to navigate the ever changing methodology landscape.
So how to avoid this peril? Of a mashup dissertation?
As advisors, we need to push students to be problem focused.
Methods are the side items.
Research problems are the buffet.
If we focus students on problems, it becomes easier for them to develop deep knowledge of how to address them.
As students, you need to focus on identifying relevant problems & think through a systematic research agenda.
Do not make the mistake of letting your essays become a random walk.
Take some time to identify a phenomenon, questions tied to it, & literature relevant to .
After drinking deeply from the literature, become systematic.
Lay out a set of essays that build deep knowledge of a topic that you care about & can yield a sustained pipeline of papers over time.
If you do, you will place yourself on a trajectory for sustained success & find more joy in the work itself.
Best of luck.
Comments