Let’s talk about doctoral education. A reflection regarding the changes on it
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.812.11302Keywords:
Supervision; doctorate; doctoral curriculum; team supervisionAbstract
Doctoral education is the link between research and higher education, being a hybrid area. In this context, the doctoral research project must correspond to the demands of both areas. The PhD. supervisor must be a team leader and, at some time, a doctorate guide, and a teacher. The PhD students must learn how to be a part of the research team, and simultaneously develop their research skills and knowledge. But PhD continues to be an individual and solitary journey, being the justification for it, the originality of knowledge created during the PhD.
In the last years, in Portugal, PhD students and PhD supervisors were auscultated. The supervisors’ rules were captured, doctorate experiences were collected, and supervision processes were analysed and deepened knowledge about doctoral education. But still, this vision is incomplete not only because few supervisors took part in the research (first because the sample population were limited to one Portuguese University (NOVA Lisbon University) and secondly, because most of the PhD supervisors didn´t respond to the surveys.
The data presented in this paper is part of a larger study that started at UNL before the pandemic. It examines the supervisor’s opinion regarding the PhD curriculum, constraints faced in day-to-day supervisor life, changes that may improve doctoral education (completion rates, decrease in attrition, curriculum, team supervision). But he also captures the doctorate perceptions regarding the doctoral research monitorization activities and instruments, constraints, and positive aspects during the PhD journey and, changes to be made in the PhD curriculum.
References
Alves, M., Neves, C., Azevedo, N., Gonçalves, T. (2012). Reconstructing Education? The Case of master’s and PhD Programmes in Education in a Portuguese Institution. European Educational Research Journal, 11, 520-534.
Armstrong, S. J. (2004). The impact of supervisors´ cognitive styles on the quality of research supervision in management education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 599-617.
Ayers, N., Kiley, M., Jones, N. McDermott, M-L. & Hawkins, M. (2016). Using learning plans to support doctoral candidates. Innovations in Education and teaching international. DOI: 10.1080/14703297.2016.1233074.
Baptista, A. (2015). Mature students’ voices on the ideal and reality of doctoral supervisors’’ role and practice. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1544-1551.
Bastalich, W. (2017). Content and context in knowledge production: a critical review of doctoral supervision literature, Studies in Higher Education, 42, 1145-1157.
Benmore, A. (2016). Boundary management in doctoral supervision: how supervisiors negotiate roles and role transitions throught the supervisory journey. Studies in Higher Education, 41, 1251-1264.
Bǿgelund, P. (2015). How supervisors perceive PhD supervision- And how they practice it. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 10, 39-55.
Boud, D.& Tennant M. (2006) Putting doctoral education to work: challenges to academic practice, Higher Education Research & Development, 25, 293-306.
Burnett, P. (1999). The supervision of doctoral dissertations using a collaborative cohort model. Counselor Education and Supervision, 39, 46–52.
Castelló, M., Pardo, M., Sala-Bubaré, A. & Suñe-Soler, N. (2017). Why do studentsconsider dropping out of doctoral degrees? Institutional and personal factores. High Educ., DOI 10.1007/s10734-016-0106-9.
Christensen, M. & Lund, O. (2014). Doctoral education in a successful ecological niche: a qualitative exploratory case study of the relationship between the microclimate and doctoral students’ learning to become research. International Journal of Higher Education, 3, 103-113.
Connell, R. & Manthunga, C. (2012). On doctoral education. How to supervise a PhD, 1985-2011. Australian Universities’ Review, 54, 5-9.
Coutinho, I. R. (2021). Let’s Talk About Doctoral Education. A Reflection Regarding the Changes on it. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal,
Cornér, S., Löfström, E. & Pyhältö, K. (2017). The relationships between doctoral students´perception of supervsision and Burnout. International Journal of doctoral Studies, 12, 91-106.
Deuchar, R. (2008). Facilitator, director, or critical friend? Contradiction and congruence in doctoral supervision styles. Teaching in Higher Education, 13, 489–500.
Devos, C., Van der Linden, N., Boudrenghien, G., Azzi, A., Frenay, M, Galand, B. & Klein, O. (2015). Doctoral supervsision in the light of three types of support promoted in self-determination theory. International Journal of Dcotoral Studies, 10, 438-464.
Evans, T. (2002). Part-time research students: Are they producing knowledge where it counts? Higher Education and Research and Development, 21, 155–165.
Gardner, S. (2007). I heard it through the grapevine. Doctoral student socialization in chemistry and history. Higher education, 54, 723-740.
Gardner, S. (2008) “Student and faculty attributions of attrition in high and Low-completing doctoral programs in the United States”, High Educ, 5897-112.
Gardner, S. (2008). Fitting the model of graduated school: a quantitative study of socialization in doctorate education. Innovations in Higher Education, 33, 125-138.
Gardner, S. (2008a). “What’s too much and what’s too little?” The process of becoming an independent research in doctoral education. The Journal of Higher Education, 79, 326-350.
Gardner, S. (2009). Student and faculty attributions of attrition in high and low-completing doctoral programs in the United States. High Educ, 58, 97-112.
Gardner, S. (2010). Faculty perspectives on doctoral student socialization in five disciplines. International Journal of doctoral Studies, 5, 39-53.
Golde, C. (1998). Beginning graduate school: explaining first-year doctoral attrition. New directions for higher Education, 101, 55-64.
Golde, C. (2007). Signature Pedagogies in Doctoral Education: Are They Adaptable for the Preparation of Education Researchers? Educational Researcher, 36, 344–351. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X07308301
Halse, C. (2011). “Becoming a supervisor”: the impact of doctoral supervision on supervisores’ learning. Studies in Higher Education, 36, 557-570.
Huisman, J., de Weert, E., & Bartelse, J. (2002). Academic careers from a European perspective: The declining desirability of the faculty position. Journal of Higher Education, 73, 141–160.
Hunter, K. & Devine, K. (2016). Doctoral students´ emotional exhaustion and intentions to leave academia. International Journal of doctoral studies, 11, 35-61.
Jones, M. (2013). Issues in Doctoral Studies - Forty Years of Journal Discussion: Where have we been and where are we going? International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 8, 83-104.
Keeling, R. (2006). The Bologna Process and the Lisbon Research Agenda: The European Commission’s expanding role in higher education discourse. European Journal of Education, 41, 203-223.
Kehm, B.M. (2009). New forms of doctoral education and training in the European Higher Education Area. In B.M.
Kehm, J. Huisman, & B. Stensaker (Eds.), The European Higher Education Area: Perspectives on a Moving Target (pp. 223-241). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Kiley, M. (2015) I didn’t have a clue what they were talking about’: PhD candidates and theory. Innovations in Education and teaching International, 52, 52-63.
Kyvik, S. & Smeby, J-C. (1994). Teaching and research. The relationship between the supervision of graduated students and faculty research performance. Higher Education, 28, 227-239.
Lafont, P. (2014). Knowledge production of the doctoral thesis: between scientific utility and social usage. Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences, 116, 570-577.
Lee, N-J. (2009a). Achieving your Professional Doctorate. A handbook. Open University Press. McGraw-Hill Education. England.
Lee, N-J. (2009b). Professional doctorate supervision: exploring student and supervisor experiences. Nurse Education Today, 29, 641-648.
Lindsay, S. (2015). What works for doctoral students in completing their thesis? Teaching in Higher Education, 20, 183-196.
Mainhard, T., van der Rijst, R., van Tartwijk, J. & Wubbels. (2009). A model for the supervisor–doctoral student relationship. Higher Education, 58, 359-373.
Maxwell, T. & Smyth, R. (2010). Research supervision: The research management matrix. Higher Education, 59, 407-422.
Maxwell, T. & Smyth, R. (2011). Higher degree research supervision: From practice toward theory. Higher Education Research & Development, 30, 219-231.
McCallin, A., & Nayar, S. (2012). Postgraduate research supervision: A critical review of current practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 17, 63-74.
Mello, A., Fleisher, M. & Woehr, D. (2015). Varieties of research experience: Doctoral student perception of preparedness for future success. The International Journal of Management Education, 13, 128-140.
Mullins, G., & Kiley, M. (2002). It’s a Ph.D., not a Nobel Prize: How experienced examiners assess research theses. Studies in Higher Education, 27, 369-386. doi:10.1080/0307507022000011507
Neumann, R. (2005) Doctoral Differences: Professional doctorates and PhDs compared. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27, 173–188.
Park, C. (2005) New Variant PhD: The changing nature of the doctorate in the UK. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27, 189–207.
Ribau, I & Alves, M. (2017). Doctoral supervision at NOVA LISBON UNIVERSITY: an exploratory study. The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences. http://dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2017.10.51
Ribau., I. (2018). Why should I enrolled in a PhD? Students’ perceptions about the reasons to be in a doctorate. Livro de capítulos do 6th International Congress of Educational Sciences and Development (Setúbal, Portugal), 21-23 junho, 2018. https://www.congresoeducacion.es/edu_web6/LIBRO_RESUMENES.pdf
Ribau., I. (2019). Listening and feeling doctoral students’ perceptions of their doctoral supervision. The PhD students’ point of view. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 6 (12), 206-223. DoI:10.14738/assrj.612.7573. (ISSN 2055-0286) (indexado em: Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic Research, CrossRef, Index Copernicus, Open JGate, Econbib and other such databases.)
Ribau., I. (2020). Doctoral Supervisors and PhD Students’ Perceptions about the Supervision Process in a Young European University. Universal Journal of Educational Research. Vol 8 (1), 36-46. DOI: 10.13189/ujer.2020.080105
Ribau., I. (2020a). The drop effect at doctoral supervision sea surface. Observing the waves with supervisors’ lens. Universal Journal of Educational Research. Vol 8 (4) 1579 – 1595. http://www.hrpub.org/download/20200330/UJER52-19515445.pdf. ONLINE INFO: http://www.hrpub.org/journals/article_info.php?aid=9101. DOI: 10.13189/ujer.2020.080452
Ribau., I. (2020b). A (de)formed perception of the pathway to be taken during the PhD. The influence of time in the students’ eyes perception in becoming a researcher. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal. 7(11) 272-308. DOI:10.14738/assrj.711.9361. https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.711.9361
Ribau., I. (2021). When you look at the supervisor image in the mirror, what do you see? The supervisors´Mirror image regarding doctoral supervision. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, Vol 8 (2) 398 – 410. DOI: 10.14738/assrj.82.9714.
Spronken-Smith; R., Camron, C & Quigg, R. (2018). Factors contributing to high PhD completion rates: a case study in a research-intensive university in New Zealand. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43, 94-109.
Styles, I., & Radloff, A. (2001). The synergistic thesis: Student and supervisor perspectives. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 25(1), 97-106.https://doi.org/10.1080/03098770020030533.
Sverdlik, A., Hall, N. C., McAlpine, L. & Hubbard,K. (2018). The PhD experience: A review of the factors influencing doctoral students´completion, achievement, and well-being. International journal of doctoral studies, 13, 361-388.
Titus, S. & Ballou, J. (2014). Ensuring PhD development of responsible conduct od research behaviors: who´s responsible? Science Eng. Ethics, 20, 221-235.
Wao, H & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2011). A mixed research investigation of factors related to time to the doctorate in Education.International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 6, 115-134.
Watts, J. (2008) Challenges of supervisiong part-time PhD students: towards student-centred practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 13, 369-373.
Woolderink, M., Putnik, K., van der Boom, H., & Klabbers, G. (2015). The voice of PhD candidates and PhD supervisors. A qualitative exploratory study amongst PhD candidates and supervisors to evaluate the relational aspects of PhD supervision in the Netherlands. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 10, 217-235.
Wright, A., Murray, J. & Geale, P. (2007). A phenomenographic study of what it means to supervise doctoral students. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8, 458-474.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Isabel Ribau Coutinho
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
