The purpose of the PhD: theorising the skills acquired by students

Mowbray, Susan; Halse, Christine

doi:10.1080/07294360.2010.487199

Cited by 130 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies indicate that doctoral education is not solely an academic or professional concern (Boote and Beile 2005;Bansel 2011;Acker and Hague 2015). For instance, in some disciplines or areas of study, doctoral graduates are over-represented, while in others there is underproduction (Mowbray and Halse, 2010;Malfroy 2011;Neumann and Tan 2011). Overproduction or underproduction at the systemic or institutional level also ties in with the reality that doctoral quality varies across institutions, countries and disciplines (Schömburg and Teichler 2006;Wildly, Peden and Chan 2015).…”

Section: Contextual Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research into Doctoral Education: A Survey of Institutional Research Projects in Southern Africa

Bitzer¹

2016

Institutional Research in South African Higher Education - Intersecting Contexts and Practices

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Contextual Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research into Doctoral Education: A Survey of Institutional Research Projects in Southern Africa

Bitzer¹

2016

Institutional Research in South African Higher Education - Intersecting Contexts and Practices

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Despite the wide range of doctoral management programs, debates on teaching in doctoral education are still incipient (Banerje & Moreley, 2013;Khurana & Spender, 2012;Marx et al, 2015;Mowbray & Halse, 2010). Discussions about teaching at the graduate level are important given the need to improve students' knowledge and skills in research and teaching.…”

Section: Training Education and Implications For Qualitative Researmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is worrying because doctoral education has problems (Cassuto, 2015;Dent, 2002;Marx et al, 2015). One of them is the lack of identity regarding doctoral programs' goals and ends (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business-AACSB, 2013; Banerje & Moreley, 2013;Khurana & Spender, 2012;Marx et al, 2015;Mowbray & Halse, 2010). For Khurana and Spender (2012), "business schools doctoral programmes are unclear about their purpose and vision" (p. 635), while for Marx et al (2015) "business doctoral programs are something of an enigma" (p. 3).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Educating Qualitative Researchers in Management: Toward Performative Judgements

Bispo

2017

Rev. adm. empres.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this essay is to reflect critically on qualitative research education in doctoral management programs. The central idea is to offer a qualitative research education model supported by the concept of performative judgment. The notion of performative judgment draws upon Aristotle's virtues of thought via Strati's idea of sensible knowledge. The proposal focuses on a theoretical understanding of qualitative research education rather than prescribing pedagogical techniques or steps. The performative judgment education model is therefore open-ended and flexible and may fit in different doctoral program settings. It also helps to reveal the differences between the notions of training and education, showing how they can work together in the educational process. KEYWORDS | INTRODUCTIONOver the last two decades, management education-especially doctoral management education-has been given less attention than management and organizational research (Dent, 2002;French & Grey, 1996;Vaara & Fay, 2012). This situation reflects scholars' principal focus on research to the detriment of teaching and education, arising from the recognition that comes from publishing as opposed to classroom and other forms of education performance (Marx, Garcia, Butterfield, Kappen, e Baldwin , 2015).According to Vaara and Fay (2012), we are living in a period of reproduction of management education-which includes doctoral education-at large scale. This situation has been caused in part by the spread of university accreditations and rankings that lead to homogenization in management You management education regardless of the context in which it happens.One of these understandings is the idea of "publish or perish" that has increased the distance between research and teaching. This approach creates the sense that good universities should prioritize research over teaching. It has become common to find scholars working at universities who do not like teaching (Czarniawska, 2015;Marx et al., 2015).Even assuming that the most prestigious universities are those where good research is pursued, it is not possible to deny that universities are also places of education, teaching, and learning. Seeing universities primarily as research spaces violates their nature (Cassuto, 2015). Czarniawska (2015) discloses a situation to demonstrate carelessness with teaching. "Once when bemoaning a lack of interest from practitioners in front of a US audience, I met with the response that there was nothing to worry about: After all, there are so many doctoral students to teach!" (p. 111). This statement points toward a typical but worrying situation. It is worrying because doctoral education has problems (Cassuto, 2015;Dent, 2002;Marx et al., 2015). One of them is the lack of identity regarding doctoral programs' goals and ends These problems are partly due to poor qualitative research education in doctoral programs and a misunderstanding of the differences between education and training. Education presupposes learning and involves knowledge and underst...

show abstract

“…At both institutional and national level the agenda is generally on the output of the doctorate and time to completion (McCulloch et al in press). The actual experience of study is often ignored (Mowbray & Halse 2010). Nevertheless, this is the period of empirical activity and of intellectual growth as the student engages with the task of carrying out their planned study.…”

Section: Embarking On the Journeymentioning

confidence: 99%

The supervisor’s toolkit: A framework for doctoral supervision in health professions education: AMEE Guide No. 104

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

is an internationally recognised scholar and has conducted over 250 workshops in more than 60 cities, and presented over 200 keynote addresses focusing on curriculum development, assessment, programme evaluation, simulations, and international medical education. Abstract:Doctoral studies represent a complex undertaking for students and supervisors. Some research describes the experience of students and there are volumes of advice for students considering a doctorate. Yet the terrain for supervisors is less well-trodden and the concept of a pedagogy of supervision only really starting to emerge. Texts on the doctoral journey from the supervisor's perspective are uncommon and less yet has been written in the context of health professions education. The aim of this Guide, therefore, is to provide guidance for the supervisor's journey, drawing on our collective experience and such literature as there is. We explore the doctoral journey of students and their supervisors, highlighting what the implications are for supervisory practice. Recognising the doctorate as much more than merely conducting a research project, and seeing it as a shared educational endeavour is fundamental to understanding the doctoral journey -a journey that is complex and mutable, constantly shifting as the candidate moves from novice to expert, from dependence to growing autonomy. Our intention is to present this Guide as a toolkit for both the novice and the experienced supervisor as it, on the one hand, seeks to make the practice of supervision more transparent while on the other, challenges the reader to critically reflect on the supervisory space in which they currently reside. Our hope is that the Guide opens up opportunities for generative conversations about the practice of doctoral supervision in health professions education. 5 Practice Points: A doctorate is about much more than merely conducting a research project; it provides a unique opportunity for shared academic endeavour that ought to be enriching for both student and supervisor. Doctoral supervision should be positioned as a form of pedagogy that is informed by relevant theory and acknowledges the potential of doctoral studies to provide a transformative learning experience. Doctorateness speaks to a process of 'being and becoming' that accompanies the emergence of a doctoral identity with the supervisory process enabling the student's legitimate participation in the disciplinary community of practice. Doctoral supervision requires flexibility and adaptability, a guiding hand and a supportive stance to induct students into the disciplinary space within which educational research resides.6

show abstract

The purpose of the PhD: theorising the skills acquired by students

Cited by 130 publications

References 30 publications

Research into Doctoral Education: A Survey of Institutional Research Projects in Southern Africa

Research into Doctoral Education: A Survey of Institutional Research Projects in Southern Africa

Educating Qualitative Researchers in Management: Toward Performative Judgements

The supervisor’s toolkit: A framework for doctoral supervision in health professions education: AMEE Guide No. 104

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About