on Monday defended my thesis project. I thought (do not know why) going to be a formality. He had sent the draft to committee members a month ago, I had replied with a couple of comments, corrections are not very difficult to implement, my advisor told me "will be a lecture, taking advantage of the three of us thinking about your project to ask questions." I reread the draft, I thought why things did not work, wrote the questions, put on my pearl earrings mom gave me 15 years ago and I the classroom.
My thesis project is not perfect. It is too ambitious, it combines three different methods, and the independent variables are not all that could be neatly conceptualized. The three members of my committee I did know, I wrote down their comments. It seemed that was all. But no. A members, a political scientist quantitativist reasonably familiar, I was not cornered with the inductive qualities of the project (a series of interviews with people in different locations.)
- What the are you doing?
"Well, the survey would give me answers to what is happening, what are the subjects, while the interviews could learn about their interpretations, motivations and experiences.
- But why are you going to trust what people tell you?
"Well, for the same reason on which we rely on survey responses.
-A survey is a different process, one has a number of hypotheses to be tested, and asks questions to try.
"But you still need to rely on subjects' responses.
- What do you try out the interviews?
I do not want to "prove" anything, that's what surveys and macro data matching with the results of the elections. The interviews are to see why what happens happens, what people feel about it, how they interpret their actions.
- But do you expect to happen?
I do not know, that's why I do interviews.
"I really do not see what is the difference of what journalism plants. "We will conduct interviews to see what happens."
My advisor makes, among other things, ethnography. He was silent. The other member of the committee, a big guy, who does a super job quantitative, speaking "not all investigations are deductive as journalism."
"No, of course, is not what I meant.
I felt I had to defend my project, and explained that the combination of deductive logic and inductive logic could bring conflict, but he believed it was more complexity and subtlety of the results. That, anyway, I was prepared to relinquish any of the components, because I have yet to secure funding.
After half an hour of conversation, invited me to retire as they argued. Ten minutes too long. I thought what I would say, "Come back in two months. "
invited me to go. Had decided to approve the project. I have to refine a few things for December, pear and am ABD (All but dissertation "PhD Candidate). After I was talking with my advisor. "That was tough!" I said. He replied: "welcome to the real world."