Continuing professional and career development: the doctoral experience of education alumni at a UK university

This article reports on a study of alumni who completed their doctorates 2, 5 and 10 years ago at a Graduate School of Education in the University of London (n=162). It investigates the circumstances within which these research students started and completed their research and how they have subsequently used their studies, showing the particular place of the Ph.D. and the new Ed.D. in professional development in the field of education internationally. It questions current national proposals to ‘improve’ doctoral ‘training’ in the UK by enhancing students' employability and suggests that policy should be based on the actual employment and other life needs of postgraduate students in different disciplines. It argues that research students are paying for the privilege of satisfying their intellectual curiosity and making an original contribution to knowledge and are as concerned with personal growth as with vocational development.     

The critical policy discourse analysis frame: helping doctoral students engage with the educational policy analysis

This paper addresses an issue of increasing significance in the context of taught educational doctorates and argues that this may have wider applicability for doctoral students across a range of social science disciplines. It identifies the need to engage with policy analysis as a key element of such programmes and attempts to address students' concerns over a lack of practical approaches to do so by offering an analytical framework drawing on critical discourse analysis. This paper highlights the affordances of a taught doctorate context to consider the potential for more collaborative community approaches to doctoral pedagogies through reflecting upon the way the frame was introduced and used by one group of EdD students. In doing so, this paper offers both a practical analytical tool for doctoral students but also a pedagogical approach grounded in an invitation to dialogue and induction into the academic discourse community, through a notion of critical inclusion.     

Bringing pedagogy to doctoral publishing

This article explores the role of publication in taking forward the work of the doctorate. Low publication rates from doctoral degrees have been noted as a problem in the quality of doctoral education for preparing students to participate in research cultures. At the same time there is ambivalence and some resistance among doctoral supervisors and candidates about the place of publication in doctoral work. This article argues that issues of writing and publication need to be systematically addressed within doctoral pedagogy. In a climate of increasing pressure to publish during and after candidature, pedagogies need to take up a more explicitly outward-looking stance, developing a stronger orientation to induction and participation in the world of peer-reviewed publication. These arguments are developed through two case studies that illustrate ways of supporting doctoral researchers to effectively recontextualise their dissertation writing for wider audiences.     

An investigation of instruction in research publishing offered in doctoral programs: the Hong Kong case

As a result of globalization, universities in some Asian countries now require their faculty members, by way of carrot or stick, to research and publish internationally. In tenure, promotion, contract renewal and faculty recruitment exercises, rate of publication in reputed journals based in the US and the UK has become a major criterion of assessment. The stakes involved in publication in many of these contexts, have created ripple effects on their doctoral students, many of whom are now under pressure to publish internationally during their doctoral tenure in order to secure professoriate employment upon graduation. Yet, publishing during the doctoral years is rarely an easy task not least because it is a taxing endeavor even for practicing academics. Challenges of publishing multiply when it is done in a period when the new researcher is already intensively engaged in the daunting tasks of researching and thesis-writing. However, what make publishing most challenging for students in these contexts are perhaps its linguistic demands and the need to make their work relevant to the international academic community. Given the stakes and difficulties involved in publishing internationally during and beyond the doctoral years, instruction in research publication (IRP) need be given some priority in doctoral programs in the Asian contexts. However, to what extent is IRP in place and to what extent can the instruction prepare students to face the various challenges of publishing in the early phase of their academic career? The questions remain largely under-explored in the literature. The study reported in this paper is a response to this lacuna by examining the IRP provided in the universities in Hong Kong. The study assumes that to succeed in publishing internationally, one needs to develop competence of three major domains, namely, scholarly communication, strategic research conception, strategic management of publishing. And in the context of doctoral undertaking, an added domain is that of strategic management of thesis-publishing. The study investigated the extent to which the IRP provided in the context under study attends to the four domains of competence. Methods of investigation involved an analysis of documents of research degree programs and courses (n = 155) offered in seven doctoral degree granting universities and interviews with doctoral students (n = 30). Findings suggest that instructional attention tends to be skewed towards developing students’ scholarly communication while competence in the other three domains remains relatively under-addressed. Pedagogical implications will be discussed.     

Book Reviews

We present here a reflexive and critical commentary and exemplification of the teaching and learning of research methodology. The paper focuses on the teaching/learning of qualitative data analysis. It is our belief that it is essential to do data analysis when learning about the process and that there are serious limitations to methodological ‘manuals’ which set out to model the process. In doctoral workshops, Frankham and Stronach have used a passage by Jules Henry to provoke students into generating data which is then analysed as a group. This paper, written with a group of doctoral students, describes the reflexive and iterative processes of data analysis which took place in one such group. We hope that describing our discussions will be of practical use to others in our attempt to iterate a process. Our other purposes include a desire to underline the inappropriacy of the notion of ‘skills’ in the context of research ‘training’ or of following formulaic procedures in interpretive inquiry. Instead the process we set out to illustrate here is embodied and serendipitous and centres on individuals' capacity to think.     

Beyond authorship and accountability? The ethics of doctoral research dissemination in a changing world

Discussion of ethics in doctoral training courses usually focuses on the initial stages of planning and conducting field research. Shifting attention onto the responsibility of the researcher to share their findings throughout the research process, we set out to consider how doctoral students can conceptualise and engage ethically with research dissemination in the broader context of the globalised knowledge economy. A comparative analysis of the ethical guidelines produced by BERA (British Educational Research Association) and ASA (Association of Social Anthropologists of the UK and Commonwealth) reveals that both are more concerned with the possible benefits or harm of dissemination to those directly involved in or affected by the research, and pay little attention to the ethical implications of multimodal and digital dissemination to unknown audiences. Drawing on the concept of research as a moral endeavour and the problematising of collaboration as an ethical issue within participatory and ethnographic research debates, we explore the implications for doctoral training courses. We argue that engaging students in discussion on dissemination can open a space to explore who benefits most from research undertaken.     

Troubling talk: assembling the PhD candidate

When PhD students complain it is assumed there are problems and that troubles talk is evidence of a ‘sick’ research candidature or culture. This paper argues that such a one-dimensional reading fails to attend closely to the academic identity work that is done when students talk together. Identity work has become a useful way of thinking about the nature of PhD study in the production of thesis texts, the development of PhD students as scholars and in the practices of everyday doctoral life. This paper extends this work by analysing various instances of PhD student ‘troubles talk’ in everyday interactions between peers and in online spaces where PhD students congregate. Attention to troubles talk allows us to explore how doctoral students might do academic identity work in the ‘hinterlands’ where academic subjectivity and other forms of subjectivity (wife, husband, parent, son, daughter etc.) start to blur into each other.     

Conceptualizing the innovation: factors influencing doctoral candidates’ interventions in the action research dissertation

In this action research study, we describe how doctoral candidates conceptualize innovations for their dissertations and outline how we are using the results to improve the doctoral dissertation experience for our new cohort. Over the course of one academic year (2010/11) we documented our students’ process of conceptualizing their innovations as they moved from general ideas to concrete plans, which they would carry out the following year during their dissertation research. We found four major factors influencing the conceptualization of the innovation: the leader–scholar community, prior cycles of action research, interactions with stakeholders, and the student’s work context. As the next cycle in this action research study, we shared the results with our local community and are currently implementing recommended changes based on the study for the next cohort of students.     

Critical Mass and Pedagogic Continuity: studies in academic habitus

The paper is based on ethnographic work with doctoral students, their supervisors and postdoctoral researchers in three contrasting disciplines: biochemistry, artificial intelligence and physical geography. It explores how stability and continuity in scientific disciplines are sustained through socialisation processes of doctoral research. It identifies the inter‐generational transmission of knowledge, skills and assumptions within the institutional setting of laboratory or the research group. Working on ‘standardised packages’ in such social contexts, doctoral students are enculturated into scientific work. Despite setbacks and uncertainties in getting their research to ‘work’ doctoral students express faith that their problems are ‘doable’. Drawing on these empirical findings we suggest that these forms of pedagogic continuity are of more significance in the enculturation of doctoral students and the reproduction of scientific knowledge than the presence or absence of a ‘critical mass’ of active researchers (as has been suggested by the recent Harris review of postgraduate education in the UK). We therefore suggest that recent UK policy formation that has emphasized the notion of critical mass deserves critical scrutiny, and that there is need for perspectives more sensitive to disciplinary cultures and departmental organization.     

What is a Doctorate? Changing Meanings and Practices in Communication Sciences in Switzerland

In this article, we analyse the organisation of the doctorate in communication sciences in the context of the overall discussion on the changing organisation of doctoral studies in Switzerland. We focus on three tensions which appear central for the field, namely the employment status of doctoral students, the importance of academic vs. professional training and, finally, the organisation of doctoral studies and the possibilities and difficulties in the introduction of a graduate school model. Our results show that in this field the doctorate has to be considered more as an orientation period, where professional and academic training coexist and where there is an extremely high diversity of objectives, activities and organisation forms, both between universities and individual students. This model is surprisingly well adapted to the situation of a field characterised by high internal diversity, rather low research intensity and strong orientation to application. Reforms like the introduction of graduate schools or the reinforcement of academic training have thus to be implemented with some care.     

Switching Hats

Abstract

One of the most problematic issues in the field of social work is the gap between practice and research. This paper describes the roles of the social work clinical practitioner and the social work researcher, and explores the role discontinuity that occurs as social work doctoral students' transition between these roles. A model illustrating the three possible routes that are taken during this role transition is introduced. Understanding the process of change that occurs as social work doctoral students shift roles has important implications for social work. Investigating these two roles can help doctoral programs support students during the difficult transition. Discovering how doctoral students bridge the gap between practice and research in their own experience may provide insight into how the field of social work as a whole can successfully address this gap.     

Disciplinary discourse in doctoral theses

This paper discusses stylistic conventions within broad disciplinary groupings in the language of doctoral theses. It argues that the language conventions in doctoral thesis texts reflect spohisticated learning of key disciplinary norms governing the conception, production and reporting of knowledge in particular fields. The paper shows that many conventions are subtle; they may not be readily identifiable to experienced scholars, yet doctoral students are expected to learn and master them, suggesting that discipline-specific writing norms and conventions are learned largely by tacit means during doctoral study. The paper reviews the nature of linguistic forms in doctoral theses and identifies the underlying epistemological and cultural influences which shape the writing. Doctoral theses from a range of disciplines are examined closely. Attention particularly is directed to the overall structure of argument and the techniques for coherence; the conventions for citing, acknowledging and making judgements about previous research; and the nature of the technical language of the field.     

从地质学博士培养谈SCI和EI收录论文的评价体系

博士是高等教育的最高层次。地质学作为理科学科,以博士生发表SCI或EI收录论文为评价指标,受到越来越多的培养单位的重视。要求博士生发表SCI或EI收录论文,可以大大提高博士生（尤其是脱产博士生）的科学研究水平、科学思维和创新能力,保证博士生的培养质量。将地质学的新理论、新方法用于生产和社会实践,取得好的经济效益和社会效益,也是地质学博士培养的重要评价指标。     

知识生产模式转型背景下博士生培养质量评价

当代博士生培养质量评价是对当代博士生培养活动及其效果优劣程度进行综合评判,它集中体现于博士学位获得者原创性知识贡献评价、学术研究素养评价和对就业市场的适应性评价三个方面。以知识生产模式转型为背景来观照当代博士生培养质量评价,就是强调用知识生产模式转型中的知识创新思想、学术训练要求和博士生对就业市场的适应性标准来评价博士生培养质量,优化博士生培养质量评价模式与机制,使当代博士生培养质量评价的视角、内容、制度等与知识生产模式转型的要求相适应。     

The value of place

This commentary seeks to expand the dialogue on place-based science education presented in Katie Lynn Brkich’s article, where the connections fifth grade students make between their formal earth science curriculum and their lived experiences are highlighted. The disconnect between the curriculum the students are offered and their immediate environment is clear, and we are presented with examples of how they strive to make connections between the content and what they are familiar with—namely their surroundings. “Place” is identified as a term with complex meanings and interpretations, even in the scope of place-based science education, and understanding how the term is used in any given scenario is essential to understanding the implications of place-based education. Is place used as a location, locale or a sense of place? To understand “place” is to acknowledge that for the individual, it is highly situational, cultural and personal. It is just such attributes that make place-based education appealing, and potentially powerful, pedagogically on one hand, yet complex for implementation on the other. The argument is posed that place is particularly important in the context of education about the environment, which in its simplest manifestation, connects formal science curriculum to resources that are local and tangible to students. The incorporation of place in such a framework seeks to bridge the gap between formal school science subjects and students’ lived experiences, yet acknowledges the tensions that can arise between accommodating place meanings and the desire to acculturate students into the language of the scientific community. The disconnect between guiding policy frameworks and the reality of the Next Generation Science Standards is addressed opening an avenue for further discussion of the importance of socio-cultural frameworks of science learning in an ever increasing era of accountability.     

学术活跃度与博士生学术产出的实证分析——以中国某研究型大学为案例

本文以我国某研究型大学自然科学领域的博士生为研究对象,分析博士生在读期间的学术产出状况;构造了以学术研究投入时间、国内国际会议报告、与导师交流频率为维度的学术活跃度概念,并利用负二项分布的回归模型,证实了学术活跃度与博士生学术产出之间的关系。本研究认为,应努力创造良好的博士生教育环境和氛围,通过提高博士生的学术活跃度,进而提高其学术产出,这对提高我国博士生教育培养质量具有十分重要的意义。     

Challenges of Entering Discourse Communities Through Publishing in English: Perspectives of Nonnative-Speaking Doctoral Students in the United States of America

There have been concerns that nonnative-speaking (NNS) researchers are at some disadvantage due to power differentials that result from the predominance of English in the academic world. This study investigates the assumptions and the findings of previous studies related to NNS researchers' publications in English in internationally refereed journals through in-depth interviews with four NNS doctoral students in the United States. The interviews sought to find out what challenges NNS doctoral students experience and how they cope with the challenges from research to publishing. Several salient issues emerged through the study, such as co-authoring, conducting certain types of research, getting native-speaker assistance, making the most use of local knowledge, and negotiating feedback from journals. The findings of this study imply that collaboration with native speaker (NS) mentors and colleagues can be beneficial in spite of potentially unequal power relations. In addition, the most use of NNSs' local knowledge can be positive in the sense that it brings valuable insight into Center-based academia. This study, however, suggests that it is critical to create a space for various voices in the Center publishing communities. Key words: nonnative-speaking doctoral students, writing for publication, co-authoring, local knowledge, situated knowledges, legitimate peripheral participation     

The Doctorate in Fine Art: The Importance of Exemplars to the Research Culture

The doctorate in Fine Art has had a troubled history in the UK. Although there are growing numbers of doctorates being undertaken and over forty institutions which offer doctoral study, there is still little understanding of this research culture. There is a developing literature, but it remains curiously focused on research methods and protocols rather than on establishing the character of the culture through what is being produced by doctoral students. Macleod and Holdridge have produced an AHRB‐funded study of selected exemplars of doctoral submissions. The study seeks to make both a practical and strategic intervention in the ongoing ‘making/writing’, ‘theory/practice’ debate. It also seeks to clearly demonstrate how artist researchers have dealt with the academic requirements of the PhD and how the production of a substantial written text (generally 30,000 words plus) showing a keen knowledge and criticality of the subject field has been achieved. The exemplars demonstrate both the distinctive and the normative character of the PhD in Fine Art. However, the underpinning empirical research for the study (1996 —) has also demonstrated the critical independence of such exemplars within the broader field of academic research. Through a brief analysis of three doctoral submissions selected from the study, the paper seeks to draw out some of the more important findings and their implications for the developing research culture.     

Writing in doctoral programs: examining supervisors’ perspectives

In the current context of doctoral education students are required to develop a range of complex academic literacy skills to accomplish optimal performance in their academic communities of practice. This has led to increase the interest in research on doctoral writing. However, research on how supervisors contribute to doctoral writing has not been extensive. The purpose of this study is to analyze the supervisors’ perspectives on doctoral writing by addressing three questions: a) What role do supervisors attribute to writing in doctoral training? b) What type of writing support do supervisors intend to provide to their students? and c) What are the relations between the role supervisors attribute to writing and the type of writing support supervisors offer to their students? Participants were 61 supervisors in the social sciences and humanities with diverse levels of expertise. Using a cross-sectional interpretative design, we collected qualitative data using an open-ended survey. Categories based on content analysis were established (Miles and Huberman 1994). The results demonstrated that supervisors attributed different roles to doctoral writing, ranging from process- to product-oriented and focusing on 1) producing appropriate academic texts, 2) generating epistemic activity, and 3) promoting communication and socialization. A significant number of supervisors did not attribute any role to writing but acknowledged writing as an important and neglected activity. Three categories of writing support were identified based on the type of activities supervisors reported and their involvement: 1) telling the students what to do, 2) reviewing and editing students’ texts, and 3) collaboratively discussing students’ texts. The results suggest that there are complex relations between the role that supervisors’ attribute to writing and the type of writing support supervisors are able to offer. The relations appear to be mediated by supervisors’ awareness and resources concerning doctoral writing.