Dr. Major emailed me Saturday morning of September 6th with her comments typed on my prospectus as an attachment. The feedback was encouraging and constructive.
The research topic is becoming solid, with Fink's taxonomy on significant learning as workable theoretical framework. (Note: PQR approach connects theory with practice).
Yet from the beginning (the abstract), I stated how I would do an autoethnographic analysis on the data collection and analysis in order to juxtapose my own perspectives with that of students. She inquired if I was sure to do this analytic approach; furthermore, she said that I may need to set up an in-person methods meeting and get committee approval if I decide to do this.
And, another major feedback centered on writing in "I" and "me" too much into the introduction and methodology chapters. If I am committed to the pragmatic viewpoint, I need to backpedal on inserting my researcher views in the writing.
I emailed Dr. Major back to let her know I had received and read her advice. I also attached a prospective researcher positionality chapter (IV) inspired by one of my committee members and Qual II professor, Dr. Gilchrist, who completed her interpretive biographical dissertation on a teenaged Hispanic Juan Estrella on his illiteracy.
I would need to do more reading in order to re-commit myself to pragmatic qualitative research approach and actually fulfill its research framework in entirety.