Methodological Literature in dissertation

The problem of finding a difficulty for understanding conceptual and theoretical
frameworks for both PhD faculty and student researchers– as it relates to designing of a
PhD dissertation study– has been studied by Lesham and Trafford (2007), where they
discovered doctoral candidates, PhD supervisors, and dissertation examiners, had limited
understanding and expression for the place of conceptual, theoretical, and paradigm
structures. They surveyed academic literature, dissertation literature reviews, and viva
examiners who look for the presence of an underlying framework leading to the
“doctorateness” of a candidate (2002, 2003, as cited in Lesham & Trafford, 2007). You can buy dissertation online on our service.

Their findings on doctoral candidates’ comprehension of conceptualizing their research showed
their misunderstandings in: a) omitting paradigm(s) which locate, and critique, research
issues; b) not visualizing linkages between concepts, and c) overlooking strategic and
guiding roles for conceptual frameworks (2007, p. 95). Of the faculty advisors consulted
(numbering 600+) during workshops, committee meetings, viva examinations, and
methodology discussions, it was noted that they too, had difficulties in their own
understandings and articulations of conceptual frameworks, as well as difficulties in
guiding candidates in the process and function of the same. It is possible to expand upon
this issue, from a solution-oriented framework, while taking into account possible
implications for future doctoral studies research.

The method for this study addressed this same problem from the qualitative
perspective of how PhD faculty mentors (or supervisors) guide and support their research
mentees through conceptualizing and mapping of their research plan. From gathering
interviews as data; through current literature, which has taken this longstanding problem
into account when looking at PhD dissertation literature reviews; as well as through those
who have offered practical solutions by improving rubrics, context and conceptualization
for improving research practices.