is there ever a right time for a PhD?

Brief post - after all, it's Friday night. Really busy work wise at the moment which hasn't left much time for my PhD. Shame, as I'm SO excited about it...and frustrated that I have to steal time to work on it. I am learning to get bits of time to read chapters, update notes and so on. Ironically, the most productive PhD work session was in a coffee shop in Newcastle (upon Tyne) where I had no distractions. I have dreams of sitting in a quiet room with no other things shouting for my time. Does anyone have that? 

I went to my 'formal' PhD induction this week, ironic as I started reading and planning so long ago - I have realised I'm not a patient student, because I know the value of my time (busy, lots of kids, also doing a compulsory Post Graduate Certificate as a new teacher in HE - you get the score). I didn't learn ANYTHING I didn't know already! - but to be fair, as I'm a member of academic staff who runs inductions for my students, I guess it would have been useful for most people, but I'm on board already. I met a couple of lovely people; finally, people who 'got' the questions I'm wrestling with and I didn't feel like I was talking a different language to!

I've made some progress on the postmodern / constructivist thoughts I had a couple of posts back. I'm reading 'Organizing Identity' by Paul du Gay (2007) at the moment and was pleased to note his revisions / critique of the constructivist agenda. Not that I want to tear it down utterly, but find a less cynical, more objective perspective. Finding books that help move things on is truly a satisfying thing.

 Got some annual leave with the family, which is needed, as my batteries need a re charge. You know you need this when your brain is firing 100% with tasks all the time and the days flash past. Will....regain....my....focus (and get writing the re draft of my initial project application).

Need to choose (or is it as simple as that?)

A quick post here. I'm enjoying reading John Creswell's book
"qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five
approaches" and enjoying it's clear, straightforward approach. Having
scrabbled around at the base of PhD mountain for some time now, I've
realised that pulling my ideas together is more of a challenge than I
thought if might be! To be honest, I love aspects of both narrative,
ethnographic, phenomenological and grounded theory approaches. I know
I want to work with narratives (possibly spoken and visual narratives
of professional identity in multi professional children's services)
but the focus on a type of experience (like professional change) does
lend itself to phenomenology. I also love the idea of gaining an
insight into the dynamics of identity change so see the theory
building approach of grounded theory as potentially useful.

As you can see, I'm confused. Perhaps I can express the research
problem and questions in a way which borrows from a couple of
approaches. I'll berate my supervisor, but do you have any advice -
perhaps you've reached s similar crossroads?

PhD thinking: faith and postmodernism?

There's something that's been bugging me slightly. Like many people, in the early stages of pulling together a bigger research project like a PhD, I'm thinking about theoretical paradigms (social constructivist, participant, pragmatic and so on) but also what Creswell (2007) calls 'interpretive communities' such as postmodernism, feminism, critical theory and so on. This is where there is a niggle for me. In short, I'm feeling that the general tenants of social constructivism may be useful in that they allow for complexity, multiple meanings and perspectives - negotiated historically and socially. When I get to thinking about a specific way of thinking about my research - and in this case, postmodernism, I've mixed feelings. It's my first time trying to put some of these into writing, so that's a little dangerous but it may help me work up some questions to push things on.

My starting point is that my research paradigm, approach and methodology need to reflect my own views, beliefs and values for me to have any sense of 'authentic voice'. I've previously mentioned that I'm a Christian, so here's where it's interesting regarding those family of theories and approaches that can be called 'postmodern'. As you will no doubt know, postmodern thought is fairly fundamental to western (rich) intellectual life with its emphasis on multiple perspectives, the need to 'deconstruct' narrative (amongst other things) and to understand 'knowledge claims' in their situated contexts. Much of this I have no problem with and in fact I work with these ideas when helping students to think critically and analytically. However, certain aspects of postmodern discourse deserve more thought for me and I specifically want to think critically about them. Off the top of my head, I'm thinking things like:

• Identification and definition depends on contrast and separation from what it claims not to be. 
• There is no grand 'truth' or meta narrative outside of social and historical context.

So where does this leave the person of faith (in my case, in Jesus)? In one sense, it's missing the point to say this is about postmodern thinking vs. faith - I happen to believe faith opens up perspectives, challenges us and lives with complexity and contradiction in so many ways (unlike religion, which is dogmatic and run by legalistic rules, in my opinion). However, if I look at a subject such as identity (and I plan to do this, in the case of professional identity and narratives of change) I do bump up against beliefs that do seem fairly objective and claim to some 'truth'. I want to avoid an unthinking 'radicalism' that in its own way throws out the faith perspective - that seems uncritical in its own way! Is postmodernism fundamentally secular? Am I hypocritical to say I value the perspective but also feel the need to look at the implications of my faith when it comes to ideas of identity - not to (uncritically) go with every word I read?

Do I say that theology asks different questions, and that it is possible to hold both postmodern perspectives and faith together...to a point? I certainly plan to value plenty of postmodern perspectives in my work, but am wondering about how my own positioning as a researcher of faith (let's call it) means for how I interpret. This might get even more sticky if I go on with plans to adopt a narrative approach to the research - with the focus on understanding others' stories as they tell them. As far as I can gather, both narrative and phenomenological approaches require researchers to 'bracket out' their own perspectives and experiences...unless perhaps I position myself in there too?

Don't worry, I'm not losing serious amounts of sleep about this (yet!) but can you see that taking an 'authentic' position is quite a challenge - whoever you are? Perhaps you have some ideas and perspectives - whether you have a faith or not, I'd be interested to hear. I'm sure as I refine my questions about this, and read a little more I'll move the thinking along.

Now that's enough big thoughts, Next time I'll think about something much more down to earth - like how my new PhD student i.d. image that pops up when I log in makes me look like a serial killer..