Category Archives: theory

can you say something about the “theory chapter”?

Posted on August 9, 2021 by pat thomson

I’ve been asked about writing a theory chapter. But should I say anything? I feel a bit iffy about the very idea. What to do? Take your own advice here. Write for ten minutes about a theory chapter. Write about … Continue reading →

theory makes us feel stupid

Posted on December 17, 2018 by pat thomson

This is the final post in my series on working with theory. It seemed appropriate to use something theoretical to round off: theory fright part one theory fright part two what’s a framework – conceptual or theoretical becoming friends with … Continue reading →

Posted in academic writing, Giorgio Agamben, stupidity, theory | Tagged Giorgio Agamben, in-between, Pat Thomson, stupidity, theory | 6 Comments

eight ways to write theory very badly

Posted on December 10, 2018 by pat thomson

If you want to be the person who makes their reader sigh and eventually give up when they get to your theoretical ‘bit’, here’s some non-fail writing strategies. Do these and I guarantee your reader will be enervated and/or exasperated: … Continue reading →

Posted in academic writing, nominalisation, primary source, reader, secondary source, syntax, theory | Tagged complex writing, nominalisation, Pat Thomson, syntax, writing theory | 1 Comment

becoming friends with theory

Posted on December 3, 2018 by pat thomson

I’m currently reading some theory that I’ve not read before. It’s in a field associated with mine, but the two areas are rarely brought together. I’m reading because I am wondering whether there is something in this new theoretical resource … Continue reading →

Posted in academic writing, reading, theory | Tagged connection, difficulty, Pat Thomson, reading, terminology, theory | 1 Comment

what’s a framework? – as in, conceptual or theoretical framework

Posted on November 26, 2018 by pat thomson

Whenever people talk about concepts or theory, they usually add on another word – framework. And ‘framework’ can be as confusing as the concept or theory word that goes before it. (Check this recent post for the difference between concept … Continue reading →

Posted in academic writing, coherence, conceptual, flow, framework, theory | Tagged coherence, conceptual framework, flow, framework, Pat Thomson, theoretical framework | 7 Comments

theory fright – part two

Posted on November 19, 2018 by pat thomson

Theory is explanation. Last post I suggested that this understanding might help to reduce fear of theory. This week, another piece in the fright reduction puzzle. Something else that might help reduce fear of theory is the understanding that not every … Continue reading →

Posted in academic writing, aims, explanation, research decisions, research question, theory | Tagged Jon Nixon, Pat Thomson, research aims, research purposes, researcher choice, theory, theory fright | 3 Comments

theory fright – part one

Posted on November 12, 2018 by pat thomson

Lots of doctoral researchers worry about the Th word, Theory. When said aloud, you can often hear the capital T. It must be important. Theory. And perhaps because of the capital T, the question “What’s your theoretical framework?” can reduce … Continue reading →

Posted in academic writing, concept, explanation, theory, theory chapter | Tagged concept, explanation, Pat Thomson, theory, theory fright | 6 Comments

writing the thesis – the theoretical framework

Posted on March 12, 2018 by pat thomson

Please note that I write my blog on weekends. It is not part of my workload or job description. I support the #USSstrike and “teach out” online. Not every thesis has a section or chapter devoted to a theoretical framework. … Continue reading →

Posted in academic writing, chapter, examiner, theory, theory chapter, thesis | Tagged examiner, Pat Thomson, theory chapter, thesis | 11 Comments

explain your terms – writing a journal article

Posted on December 11, 2017 by pat thomson

That picky reviewer. They’ve questioned your words. Asked you to clarify. Suggested that you have things wrong. What’s that about? Reviewers often take issue with the ways in which writers use particular terminology. They may politely suggest that some clarification … Continue reading →