Arf I have decided, entirely of my own volition, to do some more work :)
Bean went to sleep at about 7.15 so I had a house to myself and decided I should just work! I had a filter coffee at 6pmish and am completely giddy from it. I have managed to find an old essay on ethics that I wrote for my MRes back in the day that will do just fine for my ethics section so have copy and pasted that in which is grand. Will edit it when am back from hols. So that has taken my word count up to 10,000 and I haven't touched the sides of blathering on about my methods. This might turn out to be two chapters... Interestingly though this means that my word count for the PhD is now up to 70,000 words! I don't know how or when that happened. Crackers, am nearly there!
I am really not sure how to write about my methods without being insanely boring or formulaic or crap. Am not sure what is expected of me at all. Basically I think I ought to write the methods I used and why, how they tie in with my theoretical perspective, issues or drawbacks and well, that is it. I think the key might be in the subheadings, so I don't call them 'methods' and 'why I used these methods' but more nuanced and linked to my research/theory or something.
I think this might be one of those chapters where I just have to suck it and see, then send it to Sup and see if it turns his face inside out with horror or is sent back with a nice big tick. I just don't know! What I do know is that any text I write is useful, whether it is in the right place, or worded right, or whatever is something that can be tweaked later - for now it is all about getting the text down on paper.
Writing about what methods I used and why is really dull. I am also concerned about whether I ought to be using references to talk about all this or whether it is just so obvious that no-one in PhD land wants a brief synopsis of what discourse analysis is by wetherall et al. Hmmm.
x J
Bean went to sleep at about 7.15 so I had a house to myself and decided I should just work! I had a filter coffee at 6pmish and am completely giddy from it. I have managed to find an old essay on ethics that I wrote for my MRes back in the day that will do just fine for my ethics section so have copy and pasted that in which is grand. Will edit it when am back from hols. So that has taken my word count up to 10,000 and I haven't touched the sides of blathering on about my methods. This might turn out to be two chapters... Interestingly though this means that my word count for the PhD is now up to 70,000 words! I don't know how or when that happened. Crackers, am nearly there!
I am really not sure how to write about my methods without being insanely boring or formulaic or crap. Am not sure what is expected of me at all. Basically I think I ought to write the methods I used and why, how they tie in with my theoretical perspective, issues or drawbacks and well, that is it. I think the key might be in the subheadings, so I don't call them 'methods' and 'why I used these methods' but more nuanced and linked to my research/theory or something.
I think this might be one of those chapters where I just have to suck it and see, then send it to Sup and see if it turns his face inside out with horror or is sent back with a nice big tick. I just don't know! What I do know is that any text I write is useful, whether it is in the right place, or worded right, or whatever is something that can be tweaked later - for now it is all about getting the text down on paper.
Writing about what methods I used and why is really dull. I am also concerned about whether I ought to be using references to talk about all this or whether it is just so obvious that no-one in PhD land wants a brief synopsis of what discourse analysis is by wetherall et al. Hmmm.
x J
2 comments:
"Self-Plagiarism is defined as a type of plagiarism in
which the writer republishes a work in its entirety
or reuses portions of a previously written text while
authoring a new work."
Do you need to worry about this? They have some clever software for detecting this!
ps Glad to see that you're back on track.
hello! noooo, Uni guidelines state that as long as you state your refs as from your old thesis you are fine :) I tend to use old work as a template to work from rather than use it verbatim as most of it is a bit crap compared to how I like to write now anyway :)
Thanks though!
x J
Post a Comment