The Doctoral Experience

Delamont, Sara; Atkinson, Paul; Parry, Odette

doi:10.4324/9780203451403

Cited by 177 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Working within a qualitative paradigm, I wanted to be able to provide meaningful descriptions of the ways in which the consortium impacted on the participants. In consequence, the study was designed such that the data were collected utilising methodologies that would reflect an appreciation of the ways in which individuals create their realities 6 . Data were collected in two phases.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Expectation and experience: dissonances between novice and expert perceptions in medical education research

Pugsley

2008

Medical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CONTEXT There is both qualitative and quantitative variation in the research methods training provided for Masters and doctoral students on medical education programmes across the UK. Unlike other higherdegree programmes, there are no requirements for higher-degree medical education students to have studied the subject at degree level or for their supervisors to have training in social science research methods. This study explores the ways in which a panel of experts responded to novices' presentations of their research in progress.METHODS This qualitative, case-based study of a 1-day education research consortium generated data in two phases. The author collected detailed field notes as a non-participant observer and subsequently analysed the data they contained. A second set of data was generated from written reflexive accounts of the day e-mailed to the author by all participants 1 month after the event and was subsequently analysed. RESULTS Thematic coding revealed wide degrees of variance between the research experiences and abilities of the novices and the expectations of the experts. These levels of dissonance are ascribed to the limited amounts of research training undertaken by students and the variable guidance provided by research supervisors, some of whom were themselves novices in this area.CONCLUSIONS If medical education research is to thrive, it requires a properly developed infrastructure with training and support for research supervisors and students alike. Communities of practice need to be fostered to enable researchers to collaborate and disseminate good practice. This will ensure that medical education research practitioners can produce theoretically sound, rigorously designed and executed studies that can contribute to the evidence base for medical education.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It aimed to provide a supportive and developmental forum in which research students could engage with a panel of experts from several different institutions. It was hoped that this would in part help to ameliorate some of the isolation often experienced by researchers 6 and also enable e‐discussions around research practice.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expectation and experience: dissonances between novice and expert perceptions in medical education research

Pugsley

2008

Medical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Interdisciplinary research groups have been found to be culturally and intellectually fragmented (Delamont, Atkinson and Parry 2000). Similarly, bioinformaticians present bioinformatics as a field riven by divisions.…”

Section: The Space In-between: Biology and Computer Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Wet laboratory scientists are different to dry laboratory scientists – they work with different data, produce different kinds of outputs and see value in different ways of working. Biologists in the wet lab might be interested in how they can get their experiment to run successfully, whilst computer scientists in the dry lab might be concerned with programming or modelling (see Delamont et al 2000). These apparently practical differences are intimately connected with the value system of the discipline.…”

Section: Different Value Systems In Bioinformaticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hidden in the Middle: Culture, Value and Reward in Bioinformatics

Lewis

Bartlett

Atkinson

2016

Minerva

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioinformatics – the so-called shotgun marriage between biology and computer science – is an interdiscipline. Despite interdisciplinarity being seen as a virtue, for having the capacity to solve complex problems and foster innovation, it has the potential to place projects and people in anomalous categories. For example, valorised ‘outputs’ in academia are often defined and rewarded by discipline. Bioinformatics, as an interdisciplinary bricolage, incorporates experts from various disciplinary cultures with their own distinct ways of working. Perceived problems of interdisciplinarity include difficulties of making explicit knowledge that is practical, theoretical, or cognitive. But successful interdisciplinary research also depends on an understanding of disciplinary cultures and value systems, often only tacitly understood by members of the communities in question. In bioinformatics, the ‘parent’ disciplines have different value systems; for example, what is considered worthwhile research by computer scientists can be thought of as trivial by biologists, and vice versa. This paper concentrates on the problems of reward and recognition described by scientists working in academic bioinformatics in the United Kingdom. We highlight problems that are a consequence of its cross-cultural make-up, recognising that the mismatches in knowledge in this borderland take place not just at the level of the practical, theoretical, or epistemological, but also at the cultural level too. The trend in big, interdisciplinary science is towards multiple authors on a single paper; in bioinformatics this has created hybrid or fractional scientists who find they are being positioned not just in-between established disciplines but also in-between as middle authors or, worse still, left off papers altogether.

show abstract

“…While motivation and approaches to inquiry continue to be dominated by the clinical tradition, medical education research will be viewed as inferior to its scientific and clinical counterparts. Researchers need to be drawn from a wider range of disciplines 14 – usually the social sciences – and supported by research training and supervision that is readily available and appropriate 18,19 . For some institutions, this may require moving beyond technicist concepts into an exploration of methodological issues rooted in the philosophy of social science.…”

Section: The Doctoral Experiencementioning

confidence: 99%

Making a difference: researching master’s and doctoral research programmes in medical education

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study raises concerns about the aims and functions of courses offering qualifications in medical education. It identifies a number of obstacles to the development of educational researchers who are skilled in the philosophical underpinnings of research activity or equipped to undertake educational research that is of a quality sufficient to withstand the scrutiny of the authors' scientific and clinical counterparts. We argue that if research into medical education is to thrive, it requires the full commitment of all those who are engaged in teaching the topic and supporting researchers.

show abstract

The Doctoral Experience

Cited by 177 publications

References 0 publications

Expectation and experience: dissonances between novice and expert perceptions in medical education research

Expectation and experience: dissonances between novice and expert perceptions in medical education research

Hidden in the Middle: Culture, Value and Reward in Bioinformatics

Making a difference: researching master’s and doctoral research programmes in medical education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About