Search results

Highly developed and agile learners who can clearly convey and call on their skills are sought in all walks of life. Diverse demand for these capacities has called attention to how the skills and knowledge gained during doctoral study can be conveyed, translated and leveraged in non-academic settings; however, the complex learning reality underneath doctoral development is challenging to convey.

The data set for this particular analysis was obtained from 245 in-depth telephone interviews with PhD candidates collected prior to COVID-19. Candidates were asked about learning processes, challenges and changes, and both the questions and thematic analysis were guided by theories of doctoral development and transformational learning.

For many participants, learning and development were not familiar topics, while a small proportion deflected questions about learning altogether. One fifth of participants presented rich and lucid accounts of learning in which cognisance of complexity, metacognitive processes and transformational experiences were embedded and multiple avenues of development were in evidence. They were well-placed to convey the complexion of doctoral development. Candidates more deeply engaged in learning also commented more about changes they noticed in themselves. The most identified avenue of development was in understanding and approach to knowledge.

Candidate communication about learning and development is an under-explored dimension of doctoral experience and skill that is relevant to advancing knowledge about doctoral development and illuminating graduate potential both within and outside academe. This must constitute a key element of the re-vitalisation of the doctorate post-pandemic. The salience of framing transferable skills within a learning development perspective is discussed.

This article is intended to contribute towards furthering the understanding of researcher development as demonstrated by doctoral students' learning within scholarly communities. The article does this by reporting the findings of a study that explored the students' key learning experiences during their doctoral journey.

The 19 participants were natural science doctoral students from a top‐level research community in Finland. The data were collected through interviews that were qualitatively content analysed.

The participants emphasised the significance of participation, development as a scholar, developing specific research competences as well as learning to balance between doctoral research and other institutional tasks. They situated the key learning experiences in collaborative academic contexts such as research activities, taking courses, and academic meetings. The participants generally perceived their experiences as positive and enhancing.

Significant learning experiences identified by natural science doctoral students themselves are rarely studied. The results of the study reported in this article may be used by doctoral trainers, supervisors and students to create environments that foster students' learning and researcher development through their participation in scholarly communities.

This study aims to broaches several endemic challenges for academics who support doctoral writing: writers are emotionally protective of their own writing; writing a thesis in English as a second language is a challenging, complex task; and advising across cultures is delicate. Giving constructive feedback kindly, but with the rigour needed to raise writing quality can seem daunting. Addressing those issues, the authors offer a novel way of working with writing feedback across cultures.

The case study research team of two candidates and one supervisor stumbled onto an effective way of working across cultural and institutional difference. What began as advisory feedback on doctoral writing became an effective collaborative analysis of prose meaning-making. The authors reflected separately and collectively on how this happened, analysed reflections and this narrative inquiry approach led to theories of use to writing feedback practice.

The authors cross between theory and praxis, showing that advisors and supervisors can create Bhabha’s post-colonial third space (a promising social space that sits between cultures, beyond hierarchies, where new ways of thinking can be collaboratively generated) as a working environment for international doctoral writing feedback. Within this zone, Brechtian alienation, a theory from theatre practice, is applied to prompt emotional detachment that enables focus on writing clearly in academic English.

Arguably the writing feedback session the authors described remains bound by the generic expectations of a western education system. The study is exegetical, humanities reading of practice, rather than a social science gathering of empirical data. Yet the humanities approach suits the point that a change of language, attitude and theory can give positive leverage with doctoral writing feedback.

The authors provide a novel practical method of supporting international doctoral candidates’ writing with feedback across cultures. It entails attracting the writers’ interest in theory and persuading them, via theory, to look objectively and freshly at their own writing. Also backed by theory, a theoretical cross-cultural space allows for discussion about differences and similarities. Detachment from proprietorial emotions and cross-cultural openness enables productive work amongst the mechanics of clear academic English text.

Underpinned by sociocultural and metacognitive approaches to learning, reflection from student and supervisor perspectives (the data), and oriented by theory, the authors propose another strategy for supporting doctoral writing across cultures. The authors demonstrate a third space approach for writing feedback across cultures, showing how to operationalise theory.

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 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.

This chapter provides an overview of the challenges, opportunities, and successes facing contemporary doctoral programs. The authors outline the changing dynamics of doctoral studies, including the various degrees that are associated with doctoral programs and the changing demographics of doctoral students. Drawing from aspects of situated learning theory, the authors position the chapters in this volume in relation to learning communities and communities of practice in the ways that reimagine and re-invigorate traditional models of doctoral education.

Doctoral candidates possess specialized knowledge that could support sustainability transitions. Doctoral education, however, often focusses on discipline-specific topics and working methods, making it difficult to “see the bigger picture”. This summer school on wood construction gathered doctoral candidates from different fields to explore how solutions to complex sustainability issues could be found by working together across disciplines and by engaging multiple stakeholders. The purpose of this study is to report the pedagogical approaches taken and to understand whether these fostered the candidates’ ability to develop systemic solutions and professional competency.

Twenty doctoral candidates from various backgrounds participated in a two-week summer school organized by a consortium of four universities. Interdisciplinary groups worked on real-life challenges using a systemic approach to co-create tangible solutions. To support the creation of socio-technical innovations, stakeholders and experts from different fields were involved. The participants completed two questionnaires during the summer school to help elucidate their learning experiences.

The doctoral candidates showed strong willingness to cooperate across disciplines, though they found it important to connect this learning experience to their research. The candidates reported that the experience enhanced their ability to work in a multidisciplinary capacity. The experience identified a solid basis for interdisciplinary learning principles that could be replicated.

The summer school focussed on an innovative learning experience based on a systems thinking approach and the development of interdisciplinary capacity in the research-business ecosystem.

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 consider a doctoral dividend in regard to leading, learning and researching.

Our methodology is to analyse the chapters here presented and argue for key findings of the doctorate as an educational dividend. The doctorate yields a distinctive dividend in three important ways. First, it provides a strategic approach to purposes, processes and practices embedded in professional learning that is required for a profession committed to self-improving education systems to provide high quality learning opportunities for students in their local and globalized contexts culturally, economically and politically. Second, because it provides a valuable contribution to the knowledge economy and role models the discovery approach to knowledge generation. Third, it enables the profession to develop the knowledge, skills and experience required to engage with what counts for evidence when making decisions.

The profession can share these ways of thinking and doing with all stakeholders in communities of practice which move beyond students and staff within education systems.

The social implications are that the doctorate enables capacity building for professional, organizational and participant learning communities and networks, thus creating new and effective directions for knowledge creation, transformative learning and an understanding of quality in a local, national and international context.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the work-based learning (WBL) ethos of a professional studies doctoral program, a higher degree by research program implemented in Australia.

This is a preliminary case study of one higher degree by research program and two doctoral candidates participating in the program to explore the ethos and outcomes of the program.

The program has sought to develop a different type of higher education ethos, one characterized by an open-door communications policy, a critical friend philosophy, an emphasis on teamwork, pro tem supervision and a new model for doctoral supervision, self-designed work-based projects, self-directed research programs and the development of professional identity.

The characteristics and contributions of WBL programs at the doctoral level have been well documented in the academic literature, but the unique ethos, if there is one, of such programs has yet to be fully examined. This study goes some of the way to answering the question of whether such programs have a unique ethos and if so what are its features and how might it contribute to student development.