Abstract
Students’ doctoral experience can be seen as a journey of mystery, of working in the dark, of allowing the purpose of the research to lead the process. Contrary to this view, students’ experiences of supervision described in this chapter are ones of being expected to follow a pre-determined path, a path that negates student engagement and agency. Using a case-study methodology and critical discourse analysis, this chapter explores two students’ experiences, describing some unsuccessful efforts to engage their supervisors. It interprets these experiences in the context of their growing realisation of the constraints for students and supervisors working within the corporate university, and within the knowledge economy. This analysis conceptualises new possibilities for the supervisory relationship in this unique journey within the context of the knowledge economy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Altbach, P. (2013). Advancing the national and global knowledge economy: The role of research universities in developing countries. Studies in Higher Education,38, 316–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.773222.
Bastalich, W. (2010). Knowledge economy and research innovation. Studies in Higher Education,35, 845–857. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070903406533.
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report,13, 544–558.
Brancaleone, D., & O’Brien, S. (2011). Educational commodification and the (economic) sign value of learning outcomes. British Journal of Sociology of Education,32, 501–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2011.578435.
Denzin, N. L., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fairclough, N. (2012). Critical discourse analysis. In J. P. Gee & M. Handford (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 9–20). Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Gibbs, P. (2010). Heidegger: Time, work and the challenges for higher education. Time & Society,19, 387–403. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463x09354438.
Haigh, M. (2008). Internationalisation, planetary citizenship and Higher Education Inc. Compare,38, 427–440. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057920701582731.
Harder, H. (2010). Explanatory case study. In A. J. Mills, G. Durepos, & E. Wiebe (Eds.), Encyclopedia of case study research (pp. 371–372). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412957397.n138.
Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Häyrinen-Alestalo, M., & Peltola, U. (2006). The problem of a market-oriented university. Higher Education,52, 251–281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-2749-1.
Kauppinen, I. (2012). Towards transnational academic capitalism. Higher Education,64, 543–556.
Kearns, H., & Gardiner, M. (2012). The seven secrets of highly successful research students. Adelaide: Flinders Press.
Keeling, R. (2006). The Bologna Process and the Lisbon Research Agenda: The European Commission’s expanding role in higher education discourse. European Journal of Education,41, 203–223. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2006.00256.x.
Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self: Problem and process in human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lynch, K. (2006). Neo-liberalism and marketisation: The implications for higher education. European Educational Research Journal,5, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2006.5.1.1.
Lynch, K. (2014). New managerialism: The impact on education. Concept,5, 1–11.
Marginson, S. (2006). Dynamics of national and global competition in higher education. Higher Education,52, 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-7649-x.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Olssen, M., & Peters, M. (2005). Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy: From the free market to knowledge capitalism. Journal of Education Policy,20, 313–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930500108718.
Rizvi, F., & Walsh, L. (1998). Difference, globalisation and the internationalisation of curriculum. Australian Universities Review,41(2), 7–11.
Robertson, R. (2012). Globalisation or glocalisation? The Journal of International Communication,18, 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/13216597.2012.709925.
Tadaki, M., & Tremewan, C. (2013). Reimagining internationalization in higher education: International consortia as a transformative space? Studies in Higher Education,38(3), 367–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.773219.
Yemini, M. (2014). Internationalisation discourse what remains to be said? Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education,18(2), 66–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603108.2014.888019.
Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Murray, A., Jensen-Clayton, C. (2019). Tiptoeing Around the Institution? Doctoral Supervision in the Knowledge Economy. In: Machin, T.M., Clarà, M., Danaher, P.A. (eds) Traversing the Doctorate. Palgrave Studies in Education Research Methods. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23731-8_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23731-8_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-23730-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-23731-8
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)