Advertisement

Preparing Postgraduate Researchers for Life beyond the Degree

Reference work entry
Part of the University Development and Administration book series (UDAA)

Abstract

Until two decades ago in postgraduate education there was an almost exclusive emphasis within universities worldwide, unfettered by external intervention, on the quality of the research undertaken and its presentation in a thesis or dissertation and in published work. However, the 1990s witnessed an unprecedented rise in concern from associated organizations about the preparedness of postgraduate researchers for work in other institutions within or outside the Higher Education (HE) sector. In particular the transferability of learning and expertise between the academy and professional work has risen in importance as doctoral graduates increase in number, diversity, and career aspirations. Further, the “fitness for purpose” of doctoral education for subsequent work, even for an academic career, and as a contribution to national economies has been questioned, while governments and other funders have increased their influence on the structure and content of research training in the HE sector.

HE institutions globally have developed various forms of “generic” skills training (skills in addition to those required for the immediate project) and engaged with employers to bridge theory-practice gaps, nurturing collaborative projects of varying kinds. The desire that doctoral researchers produce research that has influence beyond a contribution to knowledge has been extended to a more formal requirement for them to demonstrate “employability skills.” Responding to such challenges to traditional postgraduate education and conventional academic practice, many UK universities are in the vanguard of initiatives such as the Skills Agenda and the Public Engagement/Impact Agendas thus providing examples which illustrate the impact on HE staff and students for institutions worldwide. Nevertheless, those working within particular units of institutions are varyingly aware of the strength and pervasiveness of these changes.

Keywords

Doctoral education Discourse and practice Employability skills Researcher developer Research impact Public engagement Collaboration Codes of practice Researcher development framework (RDF) 

References

  1. Archer, Will. 2016. International Postgraduate Research Students: The UK’s Competitive Advantage, UKHE International Unit. http://www.international.ac.uk/media/3722398/International-Postgraduate-Research-Students-The-UK-s-Competitive-Advantage.pdf.
  2. Billot, Jennie. 2010. The imagined and the real: Identifying the tensions for academic identity. Higher Education and Development 29 (6): 709–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clarke, Thomas. 2001. The knowledge economy. Education + Training 43 (4/5): 189–196.  https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910110399184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Deem, Rosemary, and Kevin J. Brehony. 2005. Management as Ideology: the case of ‘new managerialism’ in higher education. Oxford Review of Education 31: 217–235.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03054980500117827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de Freitas, Sara, Igor Mayer, Sylvester Arnab, and Ian Marshall. 2014. Industrial and academic collaboration: Hybrid models for research and innovation diffusion. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 36 (1): 2–14.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2013.825413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. De Grande, Hannalore, Katrien De Boyser, Karen Vandevelde, and Ronan Van Rossem. 2014. From academia to industry: Are doctorate holders ready? Journal of the Knowledge Economy 5 (3): 538–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Denicolo, Pam M. 2007. The metamorphosis of doctoral education in the UK and Europe: Perspectives from a teacher as learner. In Making a difference: Challenges for teachers, teaching and teacher education, ed. J. Butcher and L. McDonald, 235–250. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. Denicolo, Pam M. 2010. Bologna ten years on. In: Academic exchange no 9 the postgraduate student experience. York: The Higher Education Academy.Google Scholar
  9. Denicolo, Pam M. 2016. International developments in the purpose and process of the doctorate: Consequences for supervision, examining and the employment of graduates. In Postgraduate Supervision: Future foci for the knowledge society,eds. M. Fourie-Malherbe, R. Albertyn, C. Aitchison and E Bitzer 15-32, Stellenbosch:SUN MeDIA.Google Scholar
  10. Denicolo, P.M., and Dawn Duke. 2015. Employer-academic engagement: A response to the skills and impact agendas, 2015. December: Paper presented at the Society for Research into Higher Education Annual conference.Google Scholar
  11. Denicolo, Pam, Michael Fuller, and Dianne Berry. 2010. A review of graduate schools in the UK. Lichfield: UK Council for Graduate Education.Google Scholar
  12. Denicolo, Pam, and Chris Park. 2013. Doctorateness – An elusive concept. In Critical Issues in Higher Education, ed. M. Kompf and P. Denicolo, 191–198. Sense: Rotterdam.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Duke, Dawn C. 2015. Creating a Community of Postgraduate Researchers and Local SMEs. Paper presented at the UK Council for Graduate Education, July 2015.Google Scholar
  14. Duke, Dawn C., Veronica Benson, and Pam Denicolo. 2015. Fighting for physics: Proliferating pervasive partnerships. Paper presented at the UK Council for Graduate Education, July 2015.Google Scholar
  15. Duke, Dawn C. and Pam Denicolo. 2016. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts: Employer-doctoral researcher engagement facilitated by cross-institutional collaboration, paper presented at the EUA-CDE conference, Tarragona, June 2016.Google Scholar
  16. European University Association. 2016. Doctoral education-taking Salzburg forward: Implementation and new challenges. Brussels: EUA-CDE.Google Scholar
  17. Fuhrmann, Cynthia N., D.G. Halme, P.S. O’Sullivan, and B. Lindstaedt. 2011. Improving graduate education to support a branching career pipeline: Recommendations based on a survey of doctoral students in the basic biomedical sciences. CBE-Life Sciences Education 10: 239–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gibbons, Michael, Camille Limoges, Helga Nowotny, Simon Schwartzman, Peter Scott, and Martin Trow. 1994. The production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  19. Gilbert, Rob. 2004. A framework for evaluating the doctoral curriculum. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 29 (3): 299–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Golde, Chris M., and George E. Walker, eds. 2006. Envisioning the future of doctoral education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  21. Halse, Christine, and Janne Malfroy. 2010. Retheorizing doctoral supervision as professionalwork. Studies in Higher Education 35 (1): 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Harris, Martin. 1996. Review of postgraduate education. London: Higher Education Funding Council for England.Google Scholar
  23. Hodge, Alison. 2010. Review of progress in implementing the recommendations of sir GarethRoberts, regarding employability and career development of PhD students and research staff. London: RCUK (Research Councils UK).Google Scholar
  24. Jackson, Denise, and Grant Michelson. 2015. Factors influencing the employment of Australian PhD graduates. Studies in Higher Education 40 (9): 1660–1678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jorgensen, Thomas. 2014. Global trends in doctoral education and the European perspective. Journal of the European Higher Education Area 1: 17–34.Google Scholar
  26. Leitch, Sandy S. 2006. Prosperity for all in the global economy- world class skills. London: HM Treasury.Google Scholar
  27. Lucia, Oscar, Jose M. Burdio, Jesus Acero, Luis A. Barragán, and Jose R. Garcia. 2012. Educational opportunities based on the university-industry synergies in an open innovation framework. European Journal of Engineering Education 37 (1): 15–28.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2011.644762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. LERU (League of European Research Universities). 2010. Doctoral degrees beyond 2010: Training talented researchers for society. Leuven: LERU.Google Scholar
  29. LERU (League of European Research Universities). 2014. Good Practice Elements in Doctoral Training, Advice Paper No. 15. Leuven: LERU.Google Scholar
  30. Marcketti, Sara B., and Elena Karpova. 2014. Getting ready for the real world: Student perspectives on bringing industry collaboration into the classroom. Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences 106: 1.Google Scholar
  31. Manathunga, Catherine, Rachel Pitt, and Christa Critchley. 2009. Graduate attribute development and employment outcomes: Tracking PhD graduates. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 34 (1): 91–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nowotny, Helga, Peter B. Scott, and Michael Gibbons. 2003. “Mode 2” revisited: The New Production of Knowledge. In Minerva, vol. 41, 179–194. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  33. OECD. 2014. Education at a glance 2014: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved 12 Oct 2015,  https://doi.org/10.1787/eag-2014-en.
  34. Prada, Filomena, and John Peacock. 2015. The Quality of Doctoral Training and Employability of Doctorate Holders: The Views of Doctoral Candidates and Junior Researchers. In The European Higher Education Area, 593–612. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Park, Chris. 2007. Redefining the doctorate. London: The Higher Education Academy.Google Scholar
  36. Perkmann, Marcus, Valentina Tartari, Maureen McKelvey, Erkko Autiop, Anders Brostrom, Pablo D’Este, Riccardo Fini, Aldo Geuna, Rosa Grimaldi, Alan Hughes, Stefan Krabel, Michael Kitson, Patrick Llerena, Francesco Lissoni, Ammon Salter, and Maurizio Sobrero. 2013. Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research Policy 42: 423–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Roberts, Gareth. 2002. SET for success. The supply of people with science, technology, engineering and maths skills. London: HM Treasury.Google Scholar
  38. Rudd, Elizabeth., and Maresi Nerad. 2014. Career preparation in PHD programs: Results of a national survey of early career geographers. GeoJournal 80 (2): 181–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tinkler, Penny, and Carolyn Jackson. 2004. The doctoral examination process. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Tu, Yaqing, Huiyue Yang, Li Shu, Tu Wangshu, and Baoxin Chen. 2015. A mode of government-Enterprise-University-institute-employer cooperation for innovation postgraduate cultivation. Universal Journal of Educational Research 3 (2): 93–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. UUK. 2015. Patterns and trends in UK higher education. London: Universities UK. Retrieved 14 Apr 2016, http://issuu.com/universitiesuk/docs/patternsandtrends2015_23aa97d68a4d62?e=15132110/31968656.
  42. Walsh, Elaine, Caroline Hargreaves, Ulrike Hillemann-Delaney, and Jizhen Li. 2014. Doctoral researchers’ views on entrepreneurship: Ranging from ‘a responsibility to improve the future’ to ‘a dirty word’. Studies in Higher Education 40 (5): 775–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Winter, Richard. 2009. Academic manager or managed academic? Academic identity schisms in higher education. Higher Education Policy and Management 31 (2): 121–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School/Researcher DevelopmentUniversities of Reading and SurreyReadingUK

Personalised recommendations