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.

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.

In Denmark, there has been, over decades, an intensified political focus on how humanities research and doctoral education contribute to society. In this vein, the notion of impact has become a central part of the academic language, often associated with terms like use, effects and outputs, stemming from neoliberal ideologies. The purpose of this paper is to explore how humanities academics are living with the impact agenda, as both experienced researchers and as doctoral supervisors educating the next generation of researchers in this post-pandemic era. Specifically, the authors are interested in the supervisor-researcher relationship, that is, the relationship between how the supervisors navigate the impact agenda as researchers and then the way they tell their doctoral students to do likewise.

The authors have studied how the impact agenda is accommodated by humanities academics through a series of qualitative interviews with humanities researchers and humanities PhD supervisors, encompassing questions of how they are living with the expectation of impact and how it is embedded in their university and departmental context.

The study shows that there is no link between how the supervisors navigate the impact agenda in relation to their own research work and then the way they tell their doctoral students to approach it. Within the space of their own research, the supervisors engage in resistance practices towards the impact agenda in terms of minimal compliance, rejection or resignation, whereas in the space of supervision, the impact agenda is re-inscribed to embody other understandings. The supervisors want to protect their students from this agenda, especially in the knowledge that many of them are not going to stay in academia due to limited researcher career possibilities. Furthermore, the paper reveals a new understanding of the impact agenda as having a relational quality, and in two ways. One is through a positional struggle, the reshaping of power relations, between universities (or academics) and society (or the state and the market); the other is as a phenomenon very much lived among academics themselves, including between supervisors and their doctoral students within the institutional context.

This study opens up the impact agenda, showing what it means to be a humanities academic living with the effects of the impact agenda and trying to navigate this. The study is mapping and tracking out the many different meanings and variations of impact in all its volatility for academics concerned about it. In current, post-pandemic times, when manifold expectations are directed towards research and doctoral education, it is important to know more about how these expectations affect and are dealt with by those who are expected to commit to them.

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.

Doctoral students are promising entrepreneurial actors in university-based ventures, which positively impact the external environment and create value for their universities. In this article, the authors extend current research on academic entrepreneurship by shedding light on the role of university support in the early stage of Ph.D. entrepreneurship. Based on social information processing theory, the authors posit that academic entrepreneurship results from the interplay between doctoral students' human capital and university-level support. A multilevel model is proposed and empirically tested to shed light on the cradle of doctoral students' entrepreneurship by explaining the variance of their entrepreneurial alertness and intentions.

A model is proposed that explains the combined effect of specific human capital and different forms of university support on doctoral students' cognitive transition from entrepreneurial alertness to intentions. The model was then tested through structural equation modeling (SEM) and multigroup analysis (MGA) on a sample of 187 doctoral students enrolled in Italian universities.

The SEM results reveal that doctoral students' entrepreneurial alertness is influenced by perceived educational support and human capital. The MGA demonstrates that those who perceive a higher level of support for concept and business development from universities are more likely to convert their alertness into intentions than those who perceive lower support.

The present paper brings to the stage doctoral students as an extremely promising entrepreneurial target. In doing so, it extends academic entrepreneurship studies by detailing how and when the different forms of university support influence their entrepreneurial decisions, along with individual dimensions.

The purpose of this paper is to understand US federal government policy during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and the connections to graduate education. Using the multiple streams framework, the paper outlines these actions through various streams (problems, policy and political) and perspectives (defining problems, articulating options and mobilizing responses).

The primary sources of data collected for this study were US federal government policies from March 2020 through May 2021. Policies were examined through introduction, implementation and alteration (when possible) within the specific time period of the study. The policies outlined in this paper were connected to the US Department of Education, and to a lesser extent, the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation and other federal agencies. Data analysis was a two-fold process. First, the individual policy was considered as a single case and second, a cross-case comparison occurred across the multiple cases.

Analysing the study’s data in the problem stream provides a strong indicator of how the pandemic was perceived as a challenge for US graduate education. The pandemic served as a focusing event and illuminated the connections of graduate education to key institutional functions, including research and teaching. Broadly, US federal policy actions in this area focused on giving institutions resources and flexibility to support graduate students and allow them to continue their academic work while also seeding funding and incentives to continue the movement of knowledge, activities and people in the research pipeline. Actions in the policy stream aligned with the decentralized nature of the US higher education system and allowed for choice by academic institutions within the parameters of options.

This paper extends extant literature related to policy-making and graduate education to consider policy-making during a time of crisis. The paper offers methodological and conceptual ideas for consideration in future research.

Social marketing and government policy are intertwined. Despite this, policy analysis by social marketers is rare. This paper aims to address the dearth of policy analysis in social marketing and introduce and model a methodology grounded in Indigenous knowledge and from an Indigenous standpoint. In Australia, a minuscule number of First Nations people complete doctoral degrees. The most recent, major policy review, the Australian Council of Learned Academies (ACOLA) Report, made a series of recommendations, with some drawn from countries that have successfully uplifted Indigenous doctoral candidates’ success. This paper “speaks back” to the ACOLA Report.

This paper subjects the ACOLA Report, implementation plans and evaluations to a detailed Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis using Nakata’s Indigenous standpoint theory and Bacchi’s Foucauldian discourse analysis to trace why policy borrowing from other countries is challenging if other elements of the political, social and cultural landscape are fundamentally unsupportive of reforms.

This paper makes arguments about the effects produced by the way the “problem” of First Nations doctoral education has been represented in this suite of Australian policy documents and the ways in which changes could be made that would actually address the pressing need for First Nations doctoral success in Australia.

Conducting policy analysis benefits social marketers in many ways, helping to navigate policy complexities and advocate for meaningful policy reforms for a social cause. This paper aims to spark more social marketing policy analysis and introduces a methodology uncommon to social marketing.

Physical activity (PA) has been widely studied for its individual and societal benefits, but research on how organisations can effectively promote workplace physical activity (WPA) programmes is lacking. This article aims to examine the organisational-level benefits and value drivers of corporate PA programmes whilst also exploring the factors that motivate employees to participate in these programmes.

The authors used the self-determination theory (SDT) and the Hungarian Sport Motivation Scale (H-SMS) – which was modified and validated from the original English SMS scale, which is one of the six most highly cited motivation questionnaires in sports – to assess employees' motivation towards sports. In conjunction, in-depth interviews with company representatives were conducted to create a mind map outlining the impacts and advantages of WPA programmes. The study involved interviews with 13 managers in Hungary and a survey completed by 728 employees.

The findings of the authors' study indicate that WPA programmes had positive effects on employee engagement, turnover reduction and absenteeism. However, the authors' results also revealed that employee motivation to participate in these programmes was primarily driven by external factors, such as identified and introjected regulators, indicating a low level of intrinsic motivation for sports in the workplace. It is important to classify employees based on their motivation and behaviour to design and promote effective PA programmes in the workplace and to increase participation rates.

The authors' findings indicate the importance of aligning WPA programme promotion with employee motivation. This can encourage organisations to initiate their programmes, address participation challenges and strive for higher engagement rates. Further research on employee motivation can support the development of more effective communication strategies for companies in this context.