Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Doctoral Program Types and Legitimacy of Models: Different Forms for Different Purposes

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Postgraduate Education in Higher Education

Part of the book series: University Development and Administration ((UDAA))

Abstract

Globally, there has been a shift in Higher Education. The rise in the number of nontraditional students and the educational inclusiveness obligations of universities has seen the development of differentiated doctoral pedagogies to meet the demand for flexible enrolments. The shift in university thinking that occurred due to student demand and political interference into higher education financially and socially has necessitated a change in traditional doctoral pedagogy to provide for the educational motivations of these students. This chapter will explore these factors relative to the doctoral degree models that have evolved in various countries in response to student, industrial, and political requirements.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adler, N., L. Friedman, and Z. Sinuany-Stern. 2002. Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context. European Journal of Operational Research 140: 249–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altbach, P.G., L. Reisberg, and L.E. Rumbley. 2009. Trends in global higher education: Tracking an academic revolution: A report prepared for the UNESCO 2009 world conference on higher education. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001832/183219e.pdf.

  • Barnes, T. 2013. Higher doctorates in the UK 2013. Staffordshire: UK Council for Graduate Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biloslavo, R., C. Bagnoli, and R.R. Figelj. 2013. Managing dualities for efficiency and effectiveness of organisations. Industrial Management & Data Systems 113 (3): 423–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blume, S. 1986. The development and current dilemmas of postgraduate education. European Journal of Education 21 (3): 217–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D., and A. Lee. 2009. Introduction. In Changing practices of doctoral education, ed. D. Bound and A. Lee, 1–9. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourner, T., R. Bowden, and S. Laing. 2001. Professional doctorates in England. Studies in Higher Education 26 (1): 65–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B. 2002. Public-value failure: When efficient markets may not do. Public Administration Review 62 (2): 145–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J.D., A.L. Brown, R.R. Cocking, M.S. Donovan, and J.W. Pellegrino, eds. 2000. How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridgland, A., and C. Goodacre. 2005. Benchmarking in higher education: A framework for benchmarking quality improvement purposes. In Proceedings, Educause Australasia, 5–8. Auckland: April.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, D.K. 2001. The social sources of educational credentialism: Status cultures, labor markets, and organizations. Sociology of Education, Extra Issue: Current of Thought: Sociology of Education at the Dawn of the 21st Century 74: 19–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, S., J. Lane, and D. Stevens. 2000. Job flows, worker flows, and churning. Journal of Labor Economics 18 (3): 473–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Candlin, F. 2000. Practice-based doctorates and questions of academic legitimacy. International Journal of Art and Design Education 19 (1): 96–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, S., J. Frazey, J.L. González Geraldo, and C. Trevitt. 2010. The doctorate of the bologna process third cycle: Mapping the dimensions and impact of the European higher education area. Journal of Research in International Education 9 (3): 245–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chase, S., and R. Pruitt. 2006. The practice doctorate: Innovation or disruption? Journal of Nursing Education 45 (5): 155–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, K.K. 2005. Bologna Seminar: Doctoral programmes for the European Knowledge Society, Salzbug, 3–5 February 2005. Retrieved from http://www.cnaa.md/i/news/2015/11272015/salzburg_report_final.1129817011146[1].pdf.

  • Christensen, C.M., and H.J. Eyring. 2011. The innovative university: Changing the DNA of higher education from the inside out. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B.R. 1983. The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • College of Information and Computer Sciences, UMass Amherst. 2018. PhD portfolio. Retrieved from https://www.cics.umass.edu/grads/phd-portfolio.

  • Collins, R. 2002. Credential inflation and the future of universities. In The future of the city of intellect, ed. S. Brint, 23–46. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costley, C., and S. Baker. 2012. Work-based doctorates: Professional extension at the highest levels. Studies in Higher Education 37 (3): 257–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Australian Deans and Directors of Graduate Studies. 2007. Guidelines on professional doctorates. Retrieved from http://www.uhr.no/documents/guidelines_on_professional_doctorates.pdf.

  • Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. 2007. Ministerial statement on quality assurance of degree education in Canada. Retrieved from http://www.cmec.ca/Publications/Lists/Publications/Attachments/95/QA-Statement-2007.en.pdf.

  • Crane, A., and S.M. Livesey. 2003. Are you talking to me? Stakeholder communication and the risks and rewards of dialogue. In Unfolding stakeholder thinking, ed. J. Andriof, S. Waddock, S. Rahman, and B. Husted, vol. 2, 39–52. Sheffield: Greenleaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosier, D., D. Purser, and H. Smidt. 2007. Trends V: Universities shaping the European higher education area. Brussels: European University Association. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hanne_Smidt/publication/248810872_Trends_V_Universities_shaping_the_European_HE_Area/links/56406dce08ae34e98c4e7fdb.pdf.

  • Davis, S., and J. Haltiwanger. 1999. Gross job flows. In The handbook of labor economics, ed. O. Ashenfelter and D. Card, vol. 3B, 2711–2805. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dellgran, P., and S. Höjer. 2012. The politics of social work research—PhD theses in Sweden. European Journal of Social Work 15 (4): 581–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2012.710875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N.K., and S.W. Beck. 1999. Research news and comment: Education should consider alternative formats for the dissertation. Educational Researcher 28 (3): 31–36. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X028003031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, S. 2009. A professional practice-based doctorate: Developing advanced nursing practice. Nurse Education Today 29: 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engels-Shwarzpaul, A.-C. 2013. Non-traditional ways to the doctorate: Introduction. In Of other thoughts: Non-traditional ways to the doctorate: A guidebook for candidates and supervisors, ed. A.-C. Engels-Schwarzpaul and M.A. Peters, 1–16. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K.A. 2008. Deliberate practice and acquisition of expert performance: A general overview. Academic Emergency Medicine 15: 988–994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Higher Education Area. 2005. Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education, Bergen, 19–20 May 2005. Retrieved from http://media.ehea.info/file/2005_Bergen/52/0/2005_Bergen_Communique_english_580520.pdf.

  • European University Association [EUA]. 2007. Doctoral programmes in Europe’s universities: Achievements and challenges – Report prepared for European universities and ministers of higher education. Brussels: European University Association. Retrieved from: https://www.dcu.ie/sites/default/files/graduate_research/pdfs/doctoral_programmes_in_europe_s_universities.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Ministry of Education and Research. n.d. The path to a professorship. Ministry website https://www.research-in-germany.org/en/jobs-and-careers/info-for-postdocs-and-junior-researchers/career-paths/path-to-professorship.html.

  • Federkeil, G., F.A. van Vught, and D.F. Westerheijden. 2012. Classifications and rankings. In Multidimensional ranking: The design and development of U-multirank, ed. F.A. van Vught and F. Ziegele, 25–38. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E. 1984. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freie Universität Berlin. n.d. PhD and postdoc. University website http://www.mi.fu-berlin.de/en/stud/prom-habil/index.html.

  • Gannon, F. 2006. What is a PhD? European Molecular Biology Organization 7 (11): 1061.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, T.G., and U. Hoppe. 2009. The business professional doctorate as an informing channel: A survey and analysis. International Journal of Doctoral Studies 4: 27–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glass, J.C., G. McCallion, D.G. McKillop, S. Rasaratnam, and K.S. Stringer. 2009. Best-practice benchmarking in UK higher education: New nonparametric approaches using financial ratios and profit efficiency methodologies. Applied Economics 41: 249–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, B. 2012. Addressing the curriculum problem in doctoral education. Australian Universities’ Review 54 (1): 10–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerin, C. 2015. Connecting the dots: Writing a doctoral thesis by publication. In Research literacies and writing pedagogies for masters and doctoral writers, 31–50. Leiden: Brill.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hamann, T.H. 2009. Neoliberalism, governmentality, and ethics. Foucault Studies 6: 37–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hesseling, P. 1986. Frontiers of learning: The PhD octopus. Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoddell, S., D. Street, and H. Wildblood. 2002. Doctorates – Converging or diverging patters of provision. Quality Assurance in Education 10 (2): 61–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holley, K. 2010. Doctoral student socialization in interdisciplinary fields. In On becoming a scholar: Socialization and development in doctoral education, ed. S.K. Gardner and P. Mendoza, 97–112. Sterling: Stylus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huisman, J., and R. Naidoo. 2006. The professional doctorate: From Anglo-Saxon to European challenges. Higher Education Management and Policy 18 (2): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, N. 2001. Benchmarking in UK HE: An overview. Quality Assurance in Education 9 (4): 218–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, W. 1903. The Ph.D. octopus. The Harvard Monthly. 36 (1), 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kot, F.C., and D.D. Hendel. 2012. Emergence and growth of professional doctorates in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada and Australia: A comparative analysis. Studies in Higher Education 37 (3): 345–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T.S. 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, A., and D. Boud. 2009. Framing doctoral education as practice. In Changing practices of doctoral education, ed. D. Bound and A. Lee, 10–26. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lester, S. 2004. Conceptualising the practitioner doctorate. Studies in Higher Education 29 (5): 757–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Looks Good on Paper. 2011. Times Higher Education Supplement. Retrieved from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/looks-good-on-paper/416988.article.

  • Lowe, J. 2000. International examinations: The new credentialism and reproduction of advantage in a globalising world. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 7 (3): 363–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malfroy, J. 2005. Doctoral supervision, workplace research and changing pedagogic practices. Higher Education Research & Development 24 (2): 165–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manchester Metropolitan University Research and Knowledge Exchange 2013. Guidelines for PhD by publication and PhD by practice. Retrieved from https://www2.mmu.ac.uk/media/mmuacuk/content/documents/graduate-school/regulations-procedures/guidelines-phd-published-work.pdf.

  • Marginson, S., and M. van der Wende. 2007. To rank or be ranked: The impact of global rankings in higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education 11 (3/4): 306–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, T.W., and P.J. Shanahan. 1997. Towards a reconceptualisation of the doctorate: Issues arising from comparative data relating to the EdD degree in Australia. Studies in Higher Education 22: 133–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliam, E.L., P.G. Taylor, and P. Singh. 2002. Doctoral education, danger and risk management. Higher Education Research and Development 21 (2): 119–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliam, E.L., A. Lawson, T. Evans, and P.G. Taylor. 2005. Silly, soft and otherwise suspect’: Doctoral education as risky business. Australian Journal of Education 49 (2): 214–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mellros-Bourne, R., C. Robinson, and J. Metcalfe. 2016. Provision of professional doctorates in English HE institutions: Report for HEFCE by the careers Research & Advisory Centre (CRAC), supported by the University of Brighton. Cambridge: Careers Research & Advisory Centre. Retrieved from http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/HEFCE,2014/Content/Pubs/Independentresearch/2016/Provision,of,professional,doctorates/Professional_doctorates_CRAC.pdf.

  • Meritosis, J. 2016. Credentials reform: How technology and the changing needs of the workforce will create the higher education system of the future. Educause Review 51 (3): 26–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monash University. 2017. Thesis including published works: Guidelines for a thesis including published works. Retrieved from https://www.monash.edu/graduate-research/supervisors-and-examiners/examiners/publication.

  • Morgan, K.J. 2011. Where is von Humboldt’s university now? Research in Higher Education-Daigaku Ronshu 42: 325–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nerad, M. 2004. The PhD in the US: Criticisms, facts, and remedies. Higher Education Policy 17: 183–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, R. 2005. Doctoral differences: Professional doctorates and PhDs compared. Journal of Higher Education, Policy and Management 27 (2): 173–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nimkulrat, N. 2011. Problems of practice-based doctorates in art and design: A viewpoint from Finland. In Proceedings of ICPD-2, 2nd international conference on professional doctorates, Edinburgh, UK, 20th-21st April, 58–61. London: UK Council for Graduate Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norcross, J.C., and P.H. Castle. 2002. Appreciating the PsyD: The facts. Eye on Psi Chi 7 (1): 22–26. Retrieved from: http://cms.bsu.edu/-/media/www/departmentalcontent/psychology/docs/psyd.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Northcott, D., and S. Llewellyn. 2005. Benchmarking in UK health: A gap between policy and practice? Benchmarking: An International Journal 12 (5): 419–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyquist, J.D., and B.J. Woodford. 2000. Re-envisioning the Ph.D.: What concerns do we have? Pullman: Center for Instructional Development and Research, University of Washington. Retrieved from https://depts.washington.edu/envision/resources/ConcernsBrief.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD], European Union, and UNESCO Institution for Statistics. 2015. ISCED 2011 operational manual: Guidelines for classifying national education programmes and related qualifications. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002323/232343e.pdf.

  • Ostriker, J.P., C.V. Kuh, and J.A. Voytuk, eds. 2011. A data-based assessment of research-doctorate programs in the United States. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padró, F.F. 2004. Statistical handbook on the social safety net. Westport: Greenwood Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padró, F.F., and Jonathan H. Green. in press. TQM’s impact on the legal apparatus: Informing and directing compliance practices. In Education and the law: Considering the legal context of schools, ed. K. Trimmer, R. Dixon, and Y. Findlay. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, C. 2005. New variant PhD: The changing nature of the doctorate in the UK. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 27 (2): 189–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, C. 2007. Redefining the doctorate. The Higher Education Academy discussion paper. York: The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/redefining_the_doctorate.pdf.

  • Plaza-Úbeda, J.A., J. de Burgos-Jiménez, and E. Carmona-Moreno. 2010. Measuring stakeholder integration: Knowledge, interaction and adaptational behavior dimensions. Journal of Business Ethics 93 (3): 419–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, S., and E. Long. 2005. Professional doctorate awards in the UK. Staffordshire: UK Council on Graduate Education. Retrieved from: https://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/doctoralcollege/about/external/publications/professional-doctorates.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • QS World University Rankings. 2017. Who rules? The top 500 universities in the World 2018. Retrieved from https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2018.

  • Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education [QAA]. 2015. Characteristic statement: Doctoral degree – UK quality code for higher education. In Part A: Setting and maintaining academic standards. Glouster: Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/qualifications-frameworks.pdf.

  • Scott, D., A. Brown, I. Lunt, and L. Thorne. 2004. Professional doctorates: Integrating professional and academic knowledge. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Servage, L. 2009. Alternative and professional doctoral programs: What is driving the demand? Studies in Higher Education 34 (7): 765–779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharmini, S., R. Spronken-Smith, C. Golding, and T. Harland. 2015. Assessing the doctoral thesis when it includes published work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 40 (1): 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.888535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. 2018. Credentialism. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/credentialism.

  • Stephenson, J., M. Malloch, and L. Cairns. 2006. Managing their own programme: a case study of the first graduates of a new kind of doctorate in professional practice. Studies in Continuing Education28 (1): 17–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, T.A., C. Mackie, W.F. Massy, and E. Sinha, eds. 2012. Improving the measurement of productivity in higher education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S., and N. Beasley. 2005. A handbook for doctoral supervisors. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Teichler, U. 2008. Indicators concerning rationales and modes of doctoral study and research in economically-advanced countries. In UNESCO Forum on Higher Education, Research and Knowledge Trends and Issues in Postgraduate Education: Challenges for Research International Experts’ Workshop, 5–7 March, 2008, Dublin City University (DCU) Dublin, Ireland – Final Report, ed. UNESCO, 24–27. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0016/001607/160744e.pdf.

  • Thomson, P. 2013. PhD by publication or PhD and publication - part two. Retrieved from https://patthomson.net/2013/04/22/phd-by-publication-or-phd-and-publication-part-two/

  • United Kingdom Council for Graduate Education [UKCGE]. 1997. Practice-based doctorates in the creative and performing arts and design. Staffordshire: United Kingdom Council for Graduate Education. Retrieved from www.ukcge.ac.uk/media/download.aspx?MediaId=1289.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. 2010. World Conference on Higher Education 2009: Final Report. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Retrieved from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001892/189242e.pdf.

  • Weineck, S.B., D. Koelblinger, and T. Klesslich. 2015. Medizinische Habilitation im deutschsprachigen Raum: Quantitative Untersuchung zu Inhalt und Ausgestaltung der Habilitationsrichtlinien. Der Chirurg 86 (4): 355–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wildy, H., S. Peden, and K. Chan. 2015. The rise of professional doctorates: Case studies of the doctorate in education in China, Iceland and Australia. Studies in Higher Education 40 (5): 761–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter, R., M. Griffiths, and K. Green. 2000. The “academic” qualities of practice: What are the criteria for a practice-based PhD? Studies in Higher Education 25 (1): 25–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/030750700115993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business, Education, Law and Arts, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia

    Robert Templeton

  2. Open Access College, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia

    Fernando F. Padró & Jonathan H. Green

Authors
  1. Fernando F. Padró
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jonathan H. Green
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert Templeton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fernando F. Padró .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management and Enterprise, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia

    Ronel Erwee

  2. Open Access College, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia

    Meredith A. Harmes

  3. Open Access College, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia

    Marcus K. Harmes

  4. School of Linguistics, Adult and Specialist Education, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia

    Patrick Alan Danaher

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Padró, F.F., Green, J.H., Templeton, R. (2018). Doctoral Program Types and Legitimacy of Models: Different Forms for Different Purposes. In: Erwee, R., Harmes, M., Harmes, M., Danaher, P. (eds) Postgraduate Education in Higher Education. University Development and Administration. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5249-1_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation