Abstract for PRASH

Hi All

this is my draft abstract for the PRASH conference at Edge Hill University in June.

You’re allowed 150 words only, so here they are. I’ll be sending this Thu/Fri so any comments would be most welcome!

The title of the presentation is currently “The ‘Interdisciplinary Turn’ and Locating Research”. Hh-hm:

“I do not intend to talk about the minutiae of my research but to give a broad-brush discussion, pitched at the level of sweeping research movements or historical “turns”, about how I have come to locate it within a tradition. Locating the research in this way has provided an overall coherence to both the project and to my identity as a researcher.

Part of the challenge has been conducting interdisciplinary research. Both of the sub-disciplines I am employing (Ethnomethodology and the New Literacy Studies) can be seen as critiques of or responses to “essentialising” discourses, and have been thus used to find a palatable alternative in an area of research interest that has previously been limited to psychologistic, experimental methods and generalising assumptions (Contrastive Rhetoric). The realisation that both EM and NLS are part of the same “practice turn” has allowed a productive re-reading of my work to date.” = 149 words


  • Richard Fay

    Paul’s reflection on this event will follow shortly but for now here is the powerpoint for his contribution on the day.

  • Hi Paul!

    Your abstract seems very interesting. Is this for a presentation or a poster?

    I am going to rephrase what you wrote just to confirm my understanding: You are arguing that established research approaches are being replaced by a new paradigm which includes Ethnomethodology and NLS, which are (a) interdisciplinary and (b) more productive. You are also saying that by locating both these approaches under the same epistemological banner -as it were- you have managed to locate your own researcher identity and to bring coherence to your work. Is this interpretation correct?

    Like I said – the abstract seems quite clear and effective. Some minor changes I might suggest is that perhaps you might make things clearer by replacing ‘EM’ with ‘ethnomethodology’ and repeating the initials NLS closer where New Literacy Studies is introduced as a concept.

    If there’s any way I can help as you turn this into a presentation / poster, don’t hesitate to ask 🙂