Search results

Many universities international activities have increased enormously in volume, scope, and complexity in recent years (Altbach & Knight, 2007; Altbach, 2015) with education providers seeking more innovative ways to provide education across boundaries. Joint doctoral degrees are one example of such an initiative, focusing on international collaboration between institutions. Joint doctorates can provide richer and more rewarding learning experiences for PhD students, supervisors and collaborating institutions. However, all the parties involved also need to be aware of the potential challenges and considerations that underpin effective outcomes, as well as the key differences between joint degree doctorates and doctorates with more traditional approaches. It has been pointed out that the literature on joint degree programmes is ‘thin’ providing limited information for institutional leaders (and other parties involved in their setting up and conduct) who may be contemplating joint degree initiatives (Michael & Balraj, 2003). This chapter draws on a unique case study of a joint doctoral programme that operates across continents and academic cultures to illustrate the challenges and considerations that should be borne in mind prior to entering into joint doctoral arrangements. Various ways in which the associated challenges may be overcome are also suggested in order to support effective outcomes for all the parties involved.

This paper outlines a doctoral internship programme introduced for students researching Mechanistic Biology in the Department of Biology, University of York, UK. The programme forms part of the White Rose Doctoral Training Programme (DTP), a collaboration between the three “White Rose” Universities of Leeds, Sheffield and York in the North of England. It provides an analysis of the UK context in which the new biotechnology doctoral internships initiative sits and describes the pilot phase of the Professional Internship for PhD Students (PIPS) programme and the introduction of the full doctoral PIPS internship programme. The purpose of this paper is to examine best practice in the planning and management of internships with particular interest in doctoral programmes, with a discussion on the challenges presented by cognate and non-cognate internships.

The paper uses as a case study, the introduction of PIPS for the DTP in Mechanistic Biology, hosted by the White Rose Consortium of Universities (York, Sheffield and Leeds) and funded by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC). It also considers good practice from around the world, and relates these to the work-based learning literature.

The paper outlines the processes and resources used to secure PIPS internships, and evaluates their success against BBSRC’s objective to help early career researchers to understand the context of their research and expose them to the range of opportunities available after graduation. The authors describe an initial pilot study, challenges and opportunities provided by the internships and feedback from students in the programme.

Though the number of students in the pilot study was very limited, all students had a greater awareness particularly of their leadership, project management, organisational and team working capabilities following the three-month internship and were more receptive to the consideration of careers outside of academia.

The authors offer recommendations from their own experiences of initiating these doctoral internships which may be useful to others implementing non-cognate internship programmes at their own institutions, whilst being mindful that programmes in other countries may face different challenges.

Recent years have seen an increasing emphasis placed upon the development of transferable skills within PhD degree programmes. This paper reports on steps taken to evaluate a programme of transferable skills development at a research intensive university in the UK, focussing on the views of late stage PhD students in the science, engineering and medical disciplines. It shows that most students report a positive impact from having taken part in transferable skills initiatives and that they have a positive attitude towards them. Participants report an enduring positive impact on their behaviour and consider that the training meets their perceived needs as they progress as researchers. However, amongst the population as a whole, there were differences in views. For example, it was found that females, overseas students and those mainly motivated to do the PhD by career‐related reasons attach the greatest importance to such opportunities to develop transferable skills.

According to national statistics, small numbers of black American women earn science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) degrees. Instead of focusing on this disturbing, well-documented trend, this chapter explores STEM career success among black female graduate students who enroll in and complete PhD programs. In other words, we are engaged in an effort to address how black women in STEM fields succeed in graduate school. This chapter presents a qualitative look at successful PhD pathways. It will provide data on the pipeline of black women at the high school, undergraduate, and graduate levels; describe programs that the state of Maryland has employed among its public research universities to recruit and retain black women in doctoral programs; present testimonials from black women who have participated in these programs; and offer an extensive case study of 15 black women alumni of these programs who now have PhDs and are establishing their STEM careers. Programs that will be documented as successful for recruiting, mentoring, and retaining black women in STEM include the National Science Foundation's (NSF) University System of Maryland Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation Bridge to the Doctorate program; the NSF's PROMISE: Maryland's Alliance for Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP) program for UMBC, the University of Maryland, Baltimore (UMB), and the University of Maryland, College Park (UMCP); the National Institutes of Health's (NIH) Meyerhoff Graduate Fellows Program in the Biomedical Sciences (Minority Biomedical Research Support – Initiative for Maximizing Student Development (MBRS-IMSD)) at UMBC and UMB; and subprograms such as the Dissertation House (DH), the Community Building Retreat, and the PROF-it: Professors-in-Training program. The case study will include the following questions: What were some of the obstacles that occurred during graduate school, and what helped you to overcome them? Were there any issues that occurred that made you want to quit? If you stopped for a while, or thought about stopping, what were your motivations for returning? Where did you receive mentoring during your graduate school process? What advice would you give to young women who are just starting? The chapter focuses on a variety of methods and practices that successfully shepherd black women from undergraduate ranks to PhD-level careers in STEM fields.

Doctoral programs play a crucial role in promoting innovation and technology transfer in universities. To design these programs effectively and with a co-design perspective, it is essential to consider all stakeholders involved in the process, including teachers, students and employers. The main objective of this study is to enhance postgraduate programs to improve students' employability.

This empirical study was conducted over a three-year period and employed semi-structured interviews as its primary research methodology. In the first phase, 21 in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with managers from various sectors. The second phase involved 20 interviews, and the final phase of the study included 18 interviews with the same managers from previous phases.

The study's main results revealed that the international networks, language proficiency and analytical skills of doctoral students were highly valued by employers. The main findings come from companies with doctoral students. Therefore, the skills were identified during the learning experience of the PhD graduates in the companies.

The study's results can guide improvements in postgraduate program curricula and design to enhance students' employability.

This research presents a novel approach to its findings. On the one hand, the study's conclusions may provide valuable insights for business agents, encouraging them to hire PhD students. On the other hand, it aims to drive necessary changes that promote more PhD students' focus on non-academic careers, creating significant value for research and innovation in the private sector.

This chapter examines the challenges of getting two different systems of doctoral education to interact. The development of the joint PhD agreement between Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and King’s College London is used as an example to illustrate some of the challenges of developing a transnational PhD programme. After an outline of the recent trajectories of doctoral research culture in Germany and the United Kingdom, we will use the two partner institutions as examples to discuss key differences between the two systems in admission, status of the enroled ‘student’, supervision and training and – most challenging – the examination and degree awarding process. In a third step, we will consider the process of developing a shared set of working rules for the Joint PhD programme, preserving as much of the partners’ autonomy whilst at the same time creating a common and transparent framework for doctoral training. It will be argued that this process of balancing respect for local rules and practices with a desire for more integrated systems contains – in a nutshell – important lessons for a future ‘Europeanization’ of the PhD system.

Professional Doctorates (PDs) have been added to the curriculum of many universities worldwide, as an alternative to the traditional Doctor of Philosophy (PhD). PDs are more focused on practice-based knowledge that advances professional practice and contributes to society, industry and the economy. The dominance of the PhD as the typical higher degree by research has led universities to develop frameworks for their PDs which are very similar to the PhD framework. This includes the assessment of the PD, which in many cases follows the same process and is based on the same criteria as for the PhD. This similarity in the assessment of the two types of doctorates creates challenges for external examiners (EEs), who are invited to evaluate the contribution of the PD within frameworks which are tailored around the PhD. Here, the authors focus the investigation on the Doctorate in Business Administration and conduct a review and analysis of institutional documents from universities in England in an attempt to understand the similarities and differences between the examination process of the PD and the PhD and the extent to which the examination process of the PD supports the evaluation of the practice-based contribution that is at its heart. Through this review and analysis, the authors identify the challenges that exist for EEs who are called to assess PDs, and make recommendations which will support EEs to evaluate the contribution of the PD.

This paper aims to define a hierarchical and multi-criteria framework based on pillars of the Modernization of Higher Education to evaluate European Accounting Doctoral Programmes (EADE-Model).

The authors applied a quali-quantitative methodology based on the analytic hierarchy process and the survey approach. The authors conducted an extensive literature and regulation review to identify the dimensions affecting the quality of Doctoral Programmes, choosing accounting as the relevant and pivotal field. The authors also used the survey to select the most critical quality dimensions and derive their weight to build EADE Model. The validity of the proposed model has been tested through the application to the Italian scenario.

The findings provide a critical extension of accounting ranking studies constructing a multi-criteria, hierarchical and updated evaluation model recognizing the role of doctoral training in the knowledge-based society. The results shed new light on weak areas apt to be improved and propose potential amendments to enhance the quality standard of ADE.

Theoretical and practical implications of this paper are directed to academics, policymakers and PhD programmes administrators.

The research is original in drafting a hierarchical multi-criteria framework for evaluating ADE in the Higher Education System. This model may be extended to other fields.

This article is about the Doctor of Business Administration (DBA) degrees that were developed in the UK during the 1990s. It looks at the range of programme structures, content and learning support used. The article is based on a content analysis of the 16 DBA programmes in the UK at the end of 1999. The main conclusion is that there is a tension in the form and function of DBAs through their relationship with the traditional PhD. The tension is captured in the question: To what extent do programme developers follow the design of the ’‘gold standard” PhD and to what extent do they design a programme aimed at meeting the learning outcomes of the DBA that distinguish it from a PhD?