Being a good course‐taker is not enough: a theoretical perspective on the transition to independent research

Students are typically admitted into doctoral programmes because they have been good course‐takers. Yet, the PhD is awarded for doing independent research and making an ‘original contribution’ to knowledge. Graduate faculty acknowledge that the transition to independent research is hard for many students, and that they cannot predict who will successfully make the transition and complete the doctorate based only on students’ undergraduate records or even their performance in their first year of graduate school. Similarly, many graduate students feel unprepared to make the transition. Drawing on recent work on creativity, this paper provides a theoretical perspective on the factors that facilitate and impede doctoral students’ transition to independent research.

[1]  R. Sternberg.  The Triarchic Mind: A New Theory of Human Intelligence , 1988 .

[2]  Booi Hon Kam,et al.  Style and quality in research supervision: the supervisor dependency factor , 1997 .

[3]  Gregory J. Feist.  Handbook of Creativity: The Influence of Personality on Artistic and Scientific Creativity , 1998 .

[4]  Margot Pearson,et al.  Professionalising Ph.D. education to enhance the quality of the student experience , 1996 .

[5]  M. Nerad,et al.  From facts to action: Expanding the graduate division's educational role , 1993 .

[6]  Robert A. Ibarra,et al.  Beyond Affirmative Action: Reframing the Context of Higher Education , 2000 .

[7]  Howard Gardner,et al.  Handbook of Creativity: From Case Studies to Robust Generalizations: An Approach to the Study of Creativity , 1998 .

[8]  Henry Etzkowitz,et al.  Athena Unbound: Acknowledgements , 2000 .

[9]  Bernard Berelson,et al.  From Graduate Education in the United States , 1961 .

[10]  Salome G. Waelsch,et al.  The development of creativity , 1994 .

[11]  M. Enright,et al.  TOWARD A DESCRIPTION OF SUCCESSFUL GRADUATE STUDENTS , 1989 .

[12]  Ann M. Heiss.  Berkeley Doctoral Students Appraise Their Academic Programs. , 1967 .

[13]  Jitka Lindén,et al.  The contribution of narrative to the process of supervising PhD students , 1999 .

[14]  P. Tinkler,et al.  Examining the Doctorate: Institutional policy and the PhD examination process in Britain , 2000 .

[15]  R. Sternberg,et al.  Does the Graduate Record Examination predict meaningful success in the graduate training of psychologists? A case study. , 1997, The American psychologist.

[16]  Harriet Zuckerman,et al.  Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States: , 1979 .

[17]  Chris M. Golde,et al.  At Cross Purposes: What the Experiences of Today's Doctoral Students Reveal about Doctoral Education. , 2001 .

[18]  Jens-Christian Smeby,et al.  Disciplinary Differences in Norwegian Graduate Education , 2000 .

[19]  R. H. Keniston,et al.  AN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN UNIVERSITIES. , 1900, Science.

[20]  M. Csíkszentmihályi.  Implications of a Systems Perspective for the Study of Creativity , 1998 .

[21]  Paul Atkinson,et al.  Critical mass and doctoral research: Reflections on the Harris report , 1997 .

[22]  R. Weisberg.  Creativity and knowledge: A challenge to theories. , 1998 .

[23]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science and Technology , 2000 .

[24]  James K. Duncan,et al.  Cultivating Creative Endeavor in Doctoral Research. , 1982 .

[25]  R. Zwick.  An Analysis of Graduate School Careers in Three Universities: Differences in Attainment Patterns across Academic Programs and Demographic Groups. GRE Board Professional Report No. 86-21P. , 1991 .

[26]  Ann M. Heiss.  Challenges to graduate schools , 1970 .

[27]  William G. Bowen,et al.  In Pursuit of the PhD , 1992 .

[28]  Teresa M. Amabile,et al.  A Model of Creativity and Innovation in Organizations , 1988 .

[29]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions , 1963 .

[30]  M. Csíkszentmihályi.  Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention , 1996 .

[31]  Todd Lubart,et al.  Defying the Crowd: Cultivating Creativity in a Culture of Conformity , 1995 .

[32]  Paul Atkinson,et al.  The Doctoral Experience; Success and Failure in Graduate School , 1999 .

[33]  Margaret Kiley,et al.  'It's a PhD, not a Nobel Prize': How experienced examiners assess research theses , 2002 .

[34]  Tom Bourner,et al.  Professional Doctorates in England , 2001 .

[35]  Henry Etzkowitz,et al.  Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science and Technology , 2000 .

[36]  Joseph Katz,et al.  Scholars in the Making. The Development of Graduate and Professional Students. , 1976 .

[37]  H. Gardner,et al.  Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences , 1983 .

[38]  Rosemary Deem,et al.  Doctoral Students' Access to Research Cultures-are some more unequal than others? , 2000 .

[39]  K. Thompson.  Cognitive and Analytical Psychology Howard Gardner .Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York, Basic Books, 1983. , 1985 .

[40]  Gina Wisker,et al.  Recognising and Overcoming Dissonance in Postgraduate Student Research , 2003 .

[41]  Barbara E. Lovitts,et al.  Leaving the Ivory Tower: The Causes and Consequences of Departure from Doctoral Study , 2001 .

[42]  The Social Science Phd the Esrc Inquiry on Submission Rates : A Report Commissioned by the Economic and Social Research Council , 1987 .

[43]  R. Winter,et al.  The 'Academic' Qualities of Practice: What are the criteria for a practice-based PhD? , 2000 .

[44]  H. Gardner,et al.  How Domains Constrain Creativity , 1993 .

[45]  Josef Frischer,et al.  Laissez-faire in research education — an inquiry into a Swedish doctoral program , 2000 .

[46]  M. Enright,et al.  Toward a Description of Successful Graduate Students. GRE Board Research Report No. 85-17R. , 1989 .

[47]  R. Sternberg.  Beyond IQ: A Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence , 1984 .

[48]  S. Johnston.  Examining the Examiners: An Analysis of Examiners' Reports on Doctoral Theses. , 1997 .

[49]  J. M. Genn,et al.  AMEE Medical Education Guide No. 23 (Part 2): Curriculum, environment, climate, quality and change in medical education – a unifying perspective , 2001, Medical teacher.

[50]  R. Sternberg.  A three-facet model of creativity. , 1988 .

[51]  W. S. Simpkins.  THE WAY EXAMINERS ASSESS CRITICAL THINKING IN EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION THESES , 1987 .