Search results

The Quality Assurance Agency’s (QAA) qualifications framework has resulted in hives of benchmarking activity in 42 subject areas focussed on defining acceptable standards of performance exclusively for first degree awards. There appears to be little similar activity nationally around postgraduate awards. It has been suggested by QAA that, for the time being, awards at postgraduate levels should be benchmarked directly by reference to the outcomes contained within the qualifications framework for awards at levels M and D. This leaves something of a significant black hole in efforts to assure equity of standards across the postgraduate sector. Begins to address this situation by identifying the sort of thinking that has emerged from undergraduate benchmarking groups and applying it in the context of attempting to benchmark the standards of the PhD. Identifies and discusses issues emerging from this process and from associated national workshop activity. Concludes by indicating the questions to which clear answers should be sought if the PhD, as well as other postgraduate awards, are to be rigorously benchmarked.

Changes in the freedoms of individual academics and universities have been gathering apace across the western world since World War II (e.g., Altbach, 2001; Karmel, 2003, p. 2). Such changes have compelled the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to alert the world community to the link between freedoms experienced in the university sector and those in wider democratic systems. In 1998, UNESCO held a World Conference on Higher Education with a specific focus on academic freedom and university autonomy. An international charter resulted, detailing mutual rights, obligations and monitoring mechanisms. The International Association of Universities (IAU), the group responsible for convening the UNESCO debate, emphasised that academic freedom and university autonomy were essential to be able to transmit and advance knowledge:For Universities to serve a world society requires that Academic Freedom and University Autonomy form the bedrock to a new Social Contract – a contract to uphold values common to Humanity and to meet the expectations of a world where frontiers are rapidly dissolving. (cited in Ginkel, 2002, p. 347)

To study the relationship between organization structure and socio‐economic impact in the Welsh music industry and the potential role of social enterprises.

The economic value of social enterprise and the role of creative industries in urban regeneration are discussed from the viewpoint of the inclusion of marginalized workers, especially the young, into the labour‐market. Discusses the increasing political interest in social enterprise and explores evidence for this policy interest, including whether the nature of the governance and management structure of social enterprises influences their social and economic impacts. Reports preliminary stages of the research project and presents evidence gathered through case studies of three unnamed music businesses based in South Wales comprising: a development agency based on co‐operative principles; a loosely organized collective of practitioners and trainers; and a limited liability company. Explains that all three companies began by focusing on hip‐hop music but have developed in different directions and have also developed distinct forms of governance, and this enable the relationship between governance, the music industry, and socio‐economic outcomes to be studied.

The critical analysis of the potential of social enterprises to achieve social and economic regeneration supports the authors’ own conception of mutual economic activity in terms of what they call “associative entrepreneurship”. Concludes that this concept is needed because the existing definition of social enterprise has become too wide to have analytical value. Notes that the authors hope to present the research findings to a conference of creative industries’ academics in the coming year.

Presents the authors’ preliminary attempts to apply their knowledge of the social economy to the music industry as the first stage of a research project funded by the Welsh Assembly.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the use of a framework and planner for researcher development introduced into the United Kingdom in 2010 by Vitae: an organisation whose purpose is to support the development of UK researchers.

Qualitative and quantitative data from two cohorts participating in an accredited researcher development course designed and delivered by the Centre for Academic Practice and Learning Enhancement at the University of Strathclyde were analysed.

Participants reported that the Vitae Researcher Development Framework (RDF) personal development planner (PDP) was useful in facilitating career development. Most found it relatively easy to use once initial perceptions of the tool as being overly detailed and complex were overcome. In addition, some technical problems with the software were identified. There was great variation in the manner in which the RDF was used (for instance in the number of descriptors selected). Although use was highly individualised, the full range of descriptors was used between the course participants.

The results suggest that the RDF PD planner has great potential in supporting researcher development, provided certain specified conditions are met – in particular the need to ensure individualisation, support, and researcher ownership of the outcomes. Further evaluation is necessary.

This is the first report on the RDF PDP being used in a researcher development course.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the significance of student‐led initiatives in PhD development.

A case study is presented utilizing Kolb's model of learning from experience to identify with student‐led research training within the PhD process.

The experiential role of the student in the development of their personal doctoral training and the resultant social interactions thereof, remain as important as the more structured supervisor‐student relationship and other forms of doctoral training within the PhD research process.

This paper contributes new insights into the process of how PhD students can become more empowered by the process of “doing” a PhD, rather than being confined to their own specific discipline, whilst offering future recommendations for students embarking upon PhD research.

The purpose of this paper is to present a theoretically-informed analysis of an exploratory study which included a focus on postdoctoral researchers' views of their training needs.

The wider mixed-methods study was focused on post-doctoral career trajectories at a time of ongoing policy interest in doctoral education. Bernstein's theoretical perspectives are used to illuminate the data, particularly his concepts of classification and regionalisation.

Respondents' reflections on their doctoral training showed a much stronger appreciation of training which was based in disciplinary practices, even if these were subject to regionalisation, as opposed to more generic professional skills training.

The small scale and exploratory nature of the study is recognised, as well as the need for more independent research in this area.

The study has implications for the nature of the training provided as part of doctoral education. First, it is argued that this should include more explicit discussion of policy shifts relating to doctoral education. Second, rather than being glossed over in the imposition of generic competency frameworks (conceptualised through Bernstein as a generic performance mode), researcher training should attend closely to the social and cultural base of the skills and practices of different regions of knowledge production, at the same time as recognising these to be fluid and dynamic.

Overall, while recognised as exploratory, the study aims to contribute insights on doctoral graduates' perspectives on researcher training as well as suggesting the usefulness of Bernstein's theoretical framework for understanding the reconstruction of doctoral education in the UK.

The literature demonstrates how the environment for and value of research is changing. The purpose of this paper is to explore the narratives of 30 UK researchers and academics to consider how they learned about the nature and value of research through the researcher development process and within this broader context of change.

A biographical‐narrative approach is adopted, emphasising subjective experience and meaning and how this is shaped by wider social structures.

Respondents' stories highlight the continued informality of much of the development process and how a lack of systematic support can leave much to chance, potentially undermining future views of professional development. Data from respondents across generations also enable examination of some of the changes that have taken place over time in the higher education (HE) environment and the impact this has had on individuals' understanding of research. In particular, changes such as the introduction of the Research Assessment Exercise/Research Excellence Framework appear to have had a significant – and not entirely positive – shaping influence on how individuals perceive, and experience, research and its aims, leading to an emphasis on outputs over knowledge building.

A biographical‐narrative approach necessarily involves a smaller sample, nevertheless, shared themes were generated by this size of sample and inferences can be drawn.

Despite increased emphasis on research and publishing in the UK, these stories across generations suggest that training and development for researchers often remain very informal, with much left to chance. A more overt approach to researcher development, such as through a “scaffolded” learning process, in which an experienced colleague guides development activities, could help to avoid negative early experiences and increase the likelihood that individuals will develop their own sense of a “culture of developmentalism”.

Focusing on what individuals learn about the nature and value of research as they go through the development process adds to our understanding of researcher development and how this is situated within the wider HE context. Data from respondents across generations equally enable examination of some of the changes that have taken place over time, and how these re‐shape researcher development.