The Continuing Evolution of the Research Doctorate

In this chapter, we offer a synthesis of international perspectives on the nature of the PhD, its contribution to original research, and the competencies and outcomes now expected of those completing a PhD.1 As a resource for all doctoral programs, this synthesis can provide a basis for (1) improving the quality of outcomes for all PhD students, (2) explicitly differentiating doctoral programs to promote understanding and diversity within a broadly accepted framework, (3) facilitating discussion among universities and governmental agencies about quality assurance and funding, and (4) promoting mobility among PhD holders by clarifying commonalities in the degree across countries and educational systems.

[1]  David Post,et al.  World Bank okays public interest in higher education , 2004 .

[2]  S. Bourke,et al.  Relationships of PhD candidate, candidature and examination characteristics with thesis outcomes , 2007 .

[3]  P. Griffiths,et al.  Reshaping the graduate education of scientists and engineers. , 1995, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[4]  Eric K. Kaufman.  The Formation of Scholars: Rethinking Doctoral Education for the Twenty-First Century , 2008 .

[5]  Jeremiah P. Ostriker,et al.  A Data-Based Assessment of Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States , 2011 .

[6]  Catherine M. Millett,et al.  A Culture of Evidence: Postsecondary Assessment and Learning Outcomes. Recommendations to Policymakers and the Higher Education Community. , 2006 .

[7]  David S. Mills,et al.  The formation of scholars: rethinking doctoral education for the twenty‐first century , 2009 .

[8]  J. Metcalfe,et al.  Improving Standards in Postgraduate Research Degree Programmes: A Report to the Higher Education Funding Councils of England, Scotland and Wales. , 2002 .

[9]  Laura E. Rumbley,et al.  Trends in Global Higher Education: Tracking an Academic Revolution: A Report Prepared for the UNESCO 2009 World Conference on Higher Education , 2010 .

[10]  G. Roberts.  SET for Success: The supply of people with science , 2002 .

[11]  D. Cohen.  Chronicle of Higher Education , 1998 .

[12]  Peggy L. Maki,et al.  The Assessment of Doctoral Education: Emerging Criteria and New Models for Improving Outcomes. , 2006 .

[13]  M. Bullock,et al.  APA's Role in International Quality Assurance: APA as a Learning Partner , 2009 .

[14]  Bruce V. Lewenstein,et al.  An Instrument for Assessing Scientists’ Written Skills in Public Communication of Science , 2013 .

[15]  L. Shulman.  Signature pedagogies in the professions , 2005, Daedalus.

[16]  Philip G. Altbach,et al.  Higher Education Crosses Borders: Can the United States Remain the Top Destination for Foreign Students? , 2004 .

[17]  Mary R. Anderson-Rowland,et al.  Encouragers and discouragers for domestic andinternational women in doctoral programs in engineering and computer science , 2007 .

[18]  Robert K. Atkinson,et al.  Development of the science technology engineering and mathematics — Active listening skills assessment (STEM-ALSA) , 2012, 2012 Frontiers in Education Conference Proceedings.

[19]  John B. Biggs,et al.  Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does , 1999 .

[20]  Philip G. Altbach,et al.  Higher Education Crosses Borders , 2004 .

[21]  Dominique Simone Rychen,et al.  Defining and selecting key competencies. , 2001 .

[22]  Usman Ali Isani.  Higher Education in Pakistan. A Historical Futuristics Perspective. , 2002 .

[23]  K. Wilson,et al.  Quality assurance issues for a PhD by published work: a case study , 2002 .

[24]  Jaap Scheerens,et al.  Career Competencies for the Modern Career , 2006 .

[25]  D. Hosni,et al.  Higher education in developing countries: peril and promise: The Task Force on Higher Education and Society. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, 2000, 135 pp. Price: $20.00 (paper) , 2004 .

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

[27]  A Nancy,et al.  Council of Graduate Schools , 1993 .

[28]  Bianca L. Bernstein,et al.  MANAGING BARRIERS AND BUILDING SUPPORTS IN SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING DOCTORAL PROGRAMS: CONCEPTUAL UNDERPINNINGS FOR A NEW ONLINE TRAINING PROGRAM FOR WOMEN , 2011 .

[29]  P. Altbach.  Tradition and Transition: The International Imperative in Higher Education , 2007 .

[30]  M. Shaw,et al.  Benchmarking the PhD – a tentative beginning , 2002 .

[31]  J. Nyquist.  The PhD A Tapestry of Change for the 21st Century , 2002 .

[32]  Margaret Kiley,et al.  Examining the examiners: How inexperienced examiners approach the assessment of research theses , 2004 .

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

[34]  Daniel H. Pink.  A Whole New Mind: Moving from the Information Age to the Conceptual Age , 2005 .

[35]  K. E. Rowan.  Informing and Explaining Skills , 2003 .

[36]  D. Canning,et al.  Higher Education and Economic Development in Africa , 2006 .

[37]  Amrik Singh.  Fifty Years of Higher Education in India: The Role of the University Grants Commission , 2004 .

[38]  Chris M. Golde.  Preparing Stewards of the Discipline. Carnegie Perspectives. , 2006 .

[39]  Patrick T. Terenzini.  On the nature of institutional research and the knowledge and skills it requires , 1993 .

[40]  Eduardo Martínez,et al.  Higher Education in Developing Countries. Peril and Promise. , 2016 .

[41]  Anthony P. Bromley,et al.  Investigating the baseline skills of research students using a competency-based self-assessment method , 2007 .

[42]  Jennifer Caroline Greene,et al.  Handbook of communication and social interaction skills , 2003 .