My opinion of Rich Douglas’s Dissertation

I simply and strongly [verb .... ]

Dennis:

Split infinitives are neither grammatically nor syntactically wrong, but in formal writing such as dissertation authoring, protocol calls for split infinitives to be reduced to the barest minimum. However in informal writing and spoken English, split infinitives are used for accentuation. Dennis, if you aspire to engage me a grammatical swordfight, that’s up to you.

 

Re: Rich's Dissertation...

Thanks, Carl. I don't think the dissertation is excellent. I do, however, think it is adequate. The findings are interesting, too.

As for its distribution, I've given it to everyone who has asked except one: Neil Hayes. Any controversy or discussion regarding its availability comes from him and his ilk.

It should be available from UMC by this summer.

 

I simply and strongly [verb .... ]

Dennis:

Split infinitives are neither grammatically nor syntactically wrong, but in formal writing such as dissertation authoring, protocol calls for split infinitives to be reduced to the barest minimum. However in informal writing and spoken English, split infinitives are used for accentuation. Dennis, if you want to engage me in a grammatical swordfight, that’s up to you.

 

Having a grammatical discussion with me would be like discussing sexual technique with the pope.

I don't know nuthin about grammer.

 

Re: Re: Rich's Dissertation...

On amusing aspect of this squabble is that the very individuals that often criticize your work have never in their life completed a dissertation (or a doctoral thesis). If I were you, I will ignore them.

 

Hi Dr Ike: That was my point, sort of. It struck me as funny that Dennis should take umbrage at you (and others) praising Rich Douglas' dissertation when he had no objections to my praising Neil Hayes' "dissertation".

Also, Dennis has chosen a doctoral program which does not include a dissertation. So he has no experience writing one. I do not know if he has ever read one, for that matter. Might he still have valid observations about Douglas' dissertation? Sure, but likely not pertaining to formal matters, specific diss requirements, etc., unless he has gained his awareness of such things by another route.

On the other hand, while I was at pains to make my own non-doc status clear in an earlier post, I will defend my own right to criticize a diss in matters of either form or content, since I did:
complete about half the final written product;
receive a university award for work-in-progress on my ultimately uncompleted diss;
work side by side for years with grad students doing their dissertations successfully and listening to their travails at length;
read probably 50 dissertations in the course of my own research;
have a capacity for critical thinking unimpaired by ressentiment;
*and* know the limits of my command of a given field.

I can also separate my own frustrations and defensiveness from a critical reading--and a critical reading may be both positive and negative--of somebody else's academic work. Should I ever read Douglas' dissertation (I'd like to, eventually), I am quite certain that my opinions of it will have precisely nothing to do with anybody else's opinion of my own academic choices.

 

Hi Uncle:

Yes, of course I agree with your points. All and sundry has every right to criticize a dissertation regardless of their academic attainment. If it is a candid and constructive criticism, it will in fact contribute to the body of knowledge. A case in point is what one of my colleagues intends to do with my dissertation. His is about to write a review of my dissertation for an academic journal and I don’t know whether the review will be favorable or unfavorable but I sincerely welcome his intention. On the other hand, I consider as abhorrent unfounded criticisms that will lead to nothing or nowhere.

 

Just curious, is he going to give you a "pre" read before publication?

 

He didn't say so but I think that he will do that.

 

I agree. It's equally as abhorrent as no criticism at all.

 

So read it and make your criticism. Just keep in mind though that the real critical analysis has already taken place and was done as part of the academic process. This is another reason why unaccredited doctorates from Knightsbridge University, for example, are nothing more than expensive vanity credentials that have no real meaning. What criticism took place on Neil's "dissertation"? Neil didn't even know who had reviewed it until it was all over! You never mentioned that being abhorrent even though there was apparently zero criticism even during the sham of an academic process.

 

I am still waiting for Peter French's critique.

 

Dennis,

You seem to be under the impression that the only kind of meaningful "critique" or "criticism" is that which finds fault with a work. Your obsession with trying to get us to find something wrong with Rich Douglas' dissertation is, to say the least, puzzling.

Is Rich's dissertation flawless? No, but neither are any of the other 100+ theses or dissertations that I have ever advised or used for research. I have had a copy of Rich's dissertation since January and have read it several times. I am most interested in those findings that I can use in my own research.

Why in the world would I obsess about meaningless flaws that are present in every other work? If I found some glaring typo, deviation from APA style, a preference for a higher sample size or some other thing, would Union recall this dissertation?

I do not understand your utter contempt for Rich Douglas, but you really ought to grow up and stop playing these silly games.

Tony Pina
Faculty, Cal State U. San Bernardino

 

Peter French, Ph.D.(American Coastline University) Ummm...that should be a very insightful critque!!!

 

What contempt? All I wondered was why nobody has provided anything closer to a critique than blatant flattery.

Wish I had the monopoly on silliness, but I see that it has been liberally distributed.

 

That would be pre-Hoyer American Coastline.

It's just that Peter is so eloquent. The man has a way with words.

 

But I should give Peter his due. The last time he posted to Degreeinfo, he only mentioned his M.Acc degree on his signature - which is an accredited course work degree.

We all make our mistakes. The measure of a 'man' is their ability to admit them and seek to set them right.

 

And all I wondered, Dennis, is why it was OK for me to praise Neil Hayes' "dissertation" but it's not OK for Ike Okonkwo to praise Rich Douglas' dissertation?

 

I agree! Ain't it a shame, however, that one has to be thoroughly pissed (British) before they (Frenchie's words) begin to make any sense at all.

Woof-Woof