International comparison of doctoral research training practices
Final Report Abstract
The main research question of the project was whether field-specific doctoral research and supervision practices differ fundamentally if their organisational environments change. The aim of the project was to critically assess the widespread assumption that doctoral education has been undergoing a paradigmatic transformation from individual to structured doctoral training worldwide. Within this structured model, institutions rather than academic advisors and candidates control the process of obtaining a doctorate. The project drew on interviews with PhD advisors and candidates as well as recordings of their meetings to analyse the practice of doctoral research and supervision. These practices were conducted in specific research fields of the social science and physics within the German chair, the Australian lecturer and US graduate school system. Continuity and change of these field-specific practices was analysed in three ways. First, to analyse the impact of new organisational frameworks, the project observed how advisors and candidates practically deal with and respond to newly established elements such as annual reviews, advisory teams, coursework or generic skills training. Second, practices of doctoral research and supervision in similar research fields were compared across the three types of doctoral education systems. Finally, the poject analysed how advisors and candidates experienced the sudden transition from inperson to online supervision in the wake oft he global coronavirus pandemic. The main finding of the project was that field-specific doctoral research and supervision practices are surprisingly robust. These practices tend to persist within new organisational frameworks, across different national systems and even when a unpredictable crisis hit. The transcontextual stability and persistence of these practices suggest that the particular socioepistemic conditions of research fields create the basic structures of these practices, while institutional organisational and technical conditions may add and shape some details. The results do not support the assumption of a radical change in doctoral education and suggest that future research and policies should consider the field-specific practice of doctoral research and supervision.
Publications
- (2019): Doctoral Education in Australia. Between National Traditions and Global Trends. Internationalisation in Higher Education 4/2019, 35-54
Torka, M.
- (2020): Change and continuity in Australian doctoral education: PhD completion rates and times (2005-2018). Australian Universities’ Review, 62(2), 69-82
Torka, M.
