Search results

Although doctoral education has experienced substantial development in recent decades, it remains an elite, hence fragile, dimension of university policy and practice. This study aims to articulate perspectives to guide the next phase of strengthening and growth.

Working from theoretical and empirical research conducted in China, including scholarship on workforce ecosystems, education design and the student experience, this study contributes a framework with qualitative insights which clarify the goals and experiences of doctoral education in ways that will render it more relevant, effective and contributing.

The paper identifies areas for doctoral reform to ensure career readiness, including three distinctive outcomes and four indispensable experiences.

This study advances a doctoral design framework which can render transparent the substance of programs and prompt program coordinators to develop and ensure career relevance.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on doctoral education. Pandemics throughout history have generated new educational theories and practices, accelerated some trends and signalled the abrupt end of others. The unpredictable effects of the COVID-19 pandemic have particularly impacted upon First Nations and transcultural communities and People of Colour throughout the globe. A second significant recent global trend that occurred at the height of the pandemic was the reignited #BlackLivesMatter (#BLM) protest campaign. This campaign drew attention to the vast inequities faced by black, transcultural (migrant, refugee, culturally diverse and international) and Indigenous peoples and triggered rapid action in higher education institutions against racism and unconscious bias.

This conceptual paper draws upon postcolonial/decolonial theory to demonstrate how the COVID pandemic and #BLM movement prompts us to revitalise doctoral education.

These two issues have created renewed urgency around the need to decolonise higher education and a desire to transform the “business-as-usual” geopolitical power dynamics that continue to privilege Northern knowledge over culturally diverse knowledge systems from First Nations and transcultural contexts. A key site where special opportunities exist to effect this transformation lies in doctoral education. Doctoral education is a significant location of new knowledge creation and the development of the world’s future researchers.

Applying post/decolonial theory enables one to rethink how doctoral education should be changed to work towards greater decolonisation.

This study applies Santos’ ideas about “the sociologies of emergence” in the global South to think about how doctoral education should be reconstructed as a liberated zone of decolonisation and epistemic justice.

Global leadership is a vibrant and still emerging field of study. As scholarship grows in this area, the boundaries of the field become more defined. This has a direct impact on curriculum selection for courses and degree programs focused on global leadership. This article begins by exploring how emerging areas of study become recognized as disciplines and applies this knowledge to the global leadership discipline. We also look at doctoral-level degree programs in global leadership, comparing, and contrasting their offerings and approaches, and reflecting on global leadership doctoral education’s role in the ultimate crafting of the discipline. Finally, the curriculum strategies within the doctoral program in global leadership at Indiana Tech are discussed to illustrate the complex and multidisciplinary approach required to prepare global leadership scholars-practitioners.

The purpose of this study, nested within a broader study about higher education leadership, was to generate knowledge about the ways in which doctoral education prepared people for leadership roles in postsecondary institutions within the USA. At colleges and universities, there is an interest in ensuring diverse leadership teams and welcoming campus environments. Yet, the research demonstrates challenges for and underrepresentation among higher education leaders. One point of intervention is doctoral programs in higher education and related fields, given the professional socialization, identity formation and knowledge acquisition that occurs through the doctoral journey.

By conducting interviews with women who hold doctorates in the field of higher education and who took on new leadership roles at postsecondary institutions in the USA during the global health pandemic, the authors identified specific areas for which doctoral-level training and experiences may be helpful in supporting leader development.

The authors identified specific areas for which doctoral-level training and experiences may be helpful in supporting leader development. Based on those findings, the authors offer initial propositions about how doctoral programs might support the development of equity-minded leaders in higher education, which should be tested and refined through further research, theory development and application to practice.

This paper contributes by providing a focus on the ways in which doctoral programs can equitably train and develop equity-minded leaders for a range of career goals including but not limited to academic appointments in higher education.

This paper compares the learning experiences of full‐time PhD students in 28 Education Departments and 31 Chemistry Departments in British universities. A questionnaire composed of two major dimensions of the learning experiences, supervision and research environment for doctoral students, was distributed to about 2,200 students. It is found that Chemistry departments are seen as offering better doctoral education as perceived by students than Education departments on most counts, especially regarding academic culture of facilitation, intercultural facilitation of research for foreign students and research facilities in research environment for doctoral students. Supervision is perceived to be more satisfactory in Chemistry than in Education especially in aspects of supervisor’s knowledge, supervisor’s research workload, supervisor’s student‐load and supervisor’s helpfulness in finding funding. A theoretical framework of the Teamwork and Individualist research training structures to discuss the possible causes of these findings is offered. It is proposed that disciplinary diversity in effectiveness of doctoral education is engendered by the two distinct research training structures.

This paper aims to investigate existing practices of transversal skills training in doctoral education and provide recommendations for improvement for universities, industry and doctoral students in Europe. The results offer a detailed picture that has implications for the design of doctoral education programs that aim to support transferable skills development and graduate employability.

A qualitative research method was used for this study; thus, data gained from existing literature were the most significant aspect of this study, serving as the key approach to answering the research questions. A literature review approach, which involved synthesizing and analyzing existing literature, was adopted in this study. Essential themes were identified and collected from literature through an inductive coding technique to find answers to questions in this study.

The research highlights the importance of coordinated efforts to improve transversal skills training in doctoral education programs. Universities must adapt their curriculum to meet industry skill requirements and provide enabling support for faculty innovative teaching. Private enterprises must continue to provide training for doctoral graduates employed in the industry because not all skills can be taught and developed in the university. Doctoral students themselves must be intentional about creating industry networks for acquiring transferable skills needed in nonacademic jobs.

In response to industry demands, a university should not be seen as a place where doctoral students formulate a theory about the net ideology of a discipline but as a place for socializing, interacting, arguing critically and developing transferable skills for various careers. The advocacy for transversal skill training in doctoral education positively impacts society, producing doctoral researchers with an innovative mindset. Universities must continue improving existing skill-based training and work-integrated learning practices while seeking new collaboration with various industry sectors.

This study provides relevant ideas for faculty, industry and doctoral students on enhancing the employability of doctoral graduates through the development of transversal skills.

Concerning trends in graduate education, such as high attrition and underdeveloped skills, drive toward a new doctoral education approach. This paper aims to describe and propose a transformative doctoral education model (TDEM), incorporating elements that potentially address these challenges and expand the current practice. The model envisions discipline-specific knowledge coupled with a broader interdisciplinary perspective and addresses the transferable skills necessary to successfully navigate an ever-changing workforce and global landscape. The overarching goal of TDEM is to transform the doctoral student into a multi-dimensional and adaptive scholar, so the students of today can effectively and meaningfully solve the problems of tomorrow.

The foundation of TDEM is transformative learning theory, supporting the notion learner transformation occurs throughout the doctoral educational experience.

Current global doctoral education models and literature were reviewed. These findings informed the new TDEM.

Designed as a customizable framework for learner-centered doctoral education, TDEM promotes a mentor network on and off-campus, interdisciplinarity and agile career scope preparedness.

Within the TDEM framework, doctoral students develop valuable knowledge and transferable skills. These developments increase doctoral student career adaptability and preparedness, as well as enables graduates to appropriately respond to global and societal complex problems.

This proposed doctoral education framework was formulated through a review of the literature and experiences with curricular design and pedagogical practices at a research-intensive university’s teaching and learning center. TDEM answers the call to develop frameworks that address issues in doctoral education and present a flexible and more personalized training. TDEM encourages doctoral student transformation into adaptive, forward-thinking scholars and thriving in an ever-changing workforce.

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the role of the doctorate as an investment in education, and to consider whose education is being invested in, how and why. We examine the role of postgraduate research within the doctorate and how this may contribute to a self-improving profession, self-improving educational institutions and self-improving education systems.

The methodology is the representation of different chapters from authors that explore the key themes that we introduce in this chapter.

We present the three main findings from a British Educational Leadership, Management and Administration Doctoral Research Interest Group seminar series funded by the British Educational Leadership, Management and Administration Society (BELMAS). First is the progression of a systemic basis for active educational research, engaged with the mobilization of learning-based and pedagogic knowledge leadership within doctoral scholarship, learning and pedagogy. Second is the continued examination of the internationalization of purpose, structure and function in doctoral study through evidence informed leadership. Third is the provision of opportunities to explore ways in which doctoral study may facilitate educational leaders to recognize ‘minoritised’ and marginalized communities, and disrupt dominant discourses that work within patterns of ecologies that ‘pathologise’ diversity and difference.

Here, a clearly stated focus emerged during the seminar series, emphasizing how leaders engaging with doctoral learning have the opportunity to articulate generative transformative theories of human learning for a civic curriculum, and to apply this new knowledge to work for change for students’ full economic, cultural and political participation in the society.