Perceived Assessment Requirements in the Contemporary Biomedical Doctorate: A Case-Study from a Research Intensive Australian University

Abstract

The present work draws on semi-structured interviews with Ph.D. students and supervisors working at an Australian Group of Eight University and uses elements of constructive alignment as a lens to discuss perceptions of assessment requirements for a doctorate in the biomedical sciences. Herein, we identify i) significant ambiguity among students regarding their understanding of learning objectives and the criteria on which they are assessed, ii) a large degree of agreement between supervisor perceptions of assessment criteria and the stated assessment criteria, and iii) a perception (common to both supervisors and students) that publication of research findings is a key element of doctoral assessment. We suggest that improving the alignment of stated and perceived assessment criteria may assist socialising students to the doctoral learning environment and improve learning outcomes in the contemporary biomedical doctorate.

An analysis of reported motivational orientation in students undertaking doctoral studies in the biomedical sciences

“…This study is based on of a series of semi-structured interviews to investigate students’ attitudes, beliefs and goals towards their doctoral studies in the biomedical sciences [ 9 , 10 ]. Semi-structured interviews are used extensively in education and social sciences contexts, [ 44 , 45 ]; the use of pre-set questions in a semi-structured fashion by an interviewer allows for the capture of precise data whilst retaining scope for participants to answer questions or diverge to topics felt to be of individual relevance or importance.…”

“…Despite these contemporary developments, relatively little specific focus has been applied to the scholarship of doctoral learning in the biomedical sciences [ 7 - 10 ]. As discussed by Golde and others, significant differences are found in the socio-cultural and operational construction of individual academic disciplines [ 2 ].…”

Connecting the Dots: Writing a Doctoral Thesis by Publication

“…The audit culture currently dominating universities in Australia, New Zealand and the UK (Parker, 2011) further encourages the production of "countable" research outputs, particularly in the form of journal articles and book chapters. So pervasive has the expectation of publication become in some disciplines that research suggests some students believe the inclusion of published papers to be a requirement of doctoral studies (Kemp et al, 2013). Although the drive towards thesis by publication appears to be lead by scientists, there is considerable interest in this format in humanities and social sciences too (UKCGE, 1996).…”

“…In those situations, a traditional format provides a much more effective form for mounting and defending the overall argument of the research project. Further, there is also a concern that the difficulties associated with publishing negative results (that is, results that refute the research hypothesis: Fanelli, 2012;Matosin & Engel, 2014) can skew the kinds of projects undertaken at doctoral level (Kemp et al, 2013).…”

“…A considerable range of research literacies is developed through this process, and many doctoral candidates appear to benefit from taking up the thesis-by-publication format. Yet it would seem that a certain amount of confusion reigns with regard to what examiners will accept as equivalent to a traditional thesis (Hagen, 2010;Kemp et al, 2013), what topics and students this is suitable for, and what the benefits and drawbacks might be (Watts, 2012). Student experiences are starting to be reported, but to date there is little theorising of what this might mean for doctoral pedagogies more generally.…”