DOCTORAL STUDENT

Executive Summary
Until recently, work experience at doctoral level has been limited to placements at the
premises of industrial sponsors of predominantly science­based PhDs. More recently, a
broader range of internships have been introduced, generating concerns amongst academic
staff that these initiatives may damage the quality of the doctoral experience and make
students less competitive in the global labour market.
This study examines the impacts of the doctoral internship experience from the perspectives
of both academic staff and the doctoral interns themselves. As much of the debate around
doctoral internships is based on anecdotal evidence, this report contributes some preliminary
evidence on the impacts of doctoral internships and the extent to which they may interrupt or
complement the development of the doctoral student.
The results show that academic staff who had first­hand experience of their students
undertaking internships felt very positive, whilst those with reservations were the ones that
had not experienced the process. This suggests that worries such as loss of motivation or
failure to submit the thesis on time are largely unfounded.
Academic supervisors whose students had undertaken internships felt that they returned
with greater maturity, improved research skills and worked more efficiently than previously.
The results show that returning doctoral interns had developed a range of professional skills
and that the majority of them felt motivated to complete their PhD and move on to the next
stage of their career.
Overall, this research suggests that doctoral internships are a broadly positive experience
and that some of the concerns expressed by academic staff may not in fact materialise.
However, variations in the length of the PhD, issues relating to funding of internships and their status as regards international students are issues that need to be resolved if doctoral
students and their supervisors are to make the most of this opportunity.

When Louis Pasteur remarked that chance favours the prepared mind, he was commenting on the important role played by serendipity in scientific discovery. That role is well known (most know of the story of Fleming’s accidental discovery of penicillin) but much of the literature focuses on the STEM disciplines, on ‘big’ science, and concentrates on the work of established scientists. There is virtually no discussion of the role of serendipity in the doctoral research arena, an arena which contributes significantly to contemporary scientific endeavour and the associated publications. This article reports the initial results from a survey of doctoral students and PhD graduates which explores how serendipity contributes to the PhD process and also the forms serendipity takes in this arena. Following the conceptual differentiation of serendipity from accident or chance, the article explores the intersection of serendipity with doctoral research. Most respondents reported serendipitous occurrences happening in the doctoral experience, with the most important involving them stumbling across unexpected and unsearched-for literature, meeting others who proved to be significant for both their research and also their future development and careers, and finding project-related artefacts which expanded their projects and thinking. There were also reports of second-hand serendipity a hitherto uncommented on phenomenon. Many of the serendipitous occurrences involved a social context and actors other than the doctoral student, placing a focus on the researcher as someone with the ability and opportunities to make connections rather than simply relying on luck.

This study explores doctoral students’ views about the support schemes and resources deployed to run PhD programs at one public university in Ethiopia. The research used questionnaire, interview and documentary evidence as principal data collection tools and involved 164 doctoral students at four purposely selected colleges of the university. The findings reveal that the human resource, facilities, support systems, financial assistance, climate (working environment), workshop and conference opportunities, provision of special trainings, and opportunities for publication of research papers are rated by doctoral candidates as highly deficient across all the four colleges. The findings of the study further indicate that the provisions of doctoral education at the sample university is far below the demands of PhD students for a diverse scheme of support which is regarded as critical to the quality of training they receive and the timely completion of their studies. It is argued that the provision of PhD programs will continue to be seriously hampered unless a significant improvement is made in terms of overhauling both the national direction set and the support mechanisms put in place.

Preface

This Guide offers what the authors think is the first significant consideration of the issue of part-time research students, a group now constituting the majority of research students in the UK. It is our contention that policy and institutional arrangements have yet to reflect this changed situation.

The Guide has the following purposes: • to establish a case for the part-time research student to be seen as bringing to the institution different qualities and characteristics to those brought by full-timers; • to establish that part-time research students have different needs to those of fulltimers; • to establish how institutional structures and practices can be, if only unintentionally, biased against part-time research students and can fail to give voice to their concerns; • to make recommendations to both institutions and national policy-makers as to how these biases can begin to be addressed; and • to provide a resource that institutional bodies and also supervisors and research students (full- and part-time) can use to stimulate and develop conversations about the place of the part-time research student in the university. In seeking to fulfil the latter purpose, the Guide contains a series of what we have termed ‘reflections’ which can be used, together with the text surrounding them, as prompts for discussion and (in some cases) guides to action.

We have sought to develop our ideas from models and ideas drawn from our respective disciplines (political science in the case of McCulloch and management studies in the case of Stokes) believing that there is nothing more practical than a good theory.1 We believe that such an approach, basing the developing literature on doctoral study firmly in the extant disciplinary literatures, is one that should be encouraged and which would, if adopted widely, strengthen our relatively underdeveloped understanding of the area.

The authors would like to emphasise that this Guide has been written entirely collaboratively and that each author has contributed equally to the enterprise. We would also like to invite both comments on our arguments and also suggestions as to where the Guide could be improved when it is revised.

The publishers (SRHE) has kindly agreed to it publication on this site. Some hard copies are still available directly from the Society.

Se describe el "Método de 100 horas para escribir la tesis doctoral". Consiste en un método diseñado específicamente para los estudiantes que están en graves apuros y que apenas cuentan con unas semanas o días para redactar y entregar la tesis. Para su elaboración se examinaron más de 4500 tesis doctorales y de maestría.
WEBINAR SOBRE EL MÉTODO DE 100 HORAS EN https://fb.watch/2sLc8nPyis/

The paper shows my investigation of all private hospitals and several officals and doctors around Region VIII in Philippines. Actually, I started making this as a Microsoft Access to clarify the results in the form of table, query, form and report but since Academia doesn't support the file type so I transferred it in Microsoft Word.

The League of European Research Universities (LERU) organises a summer school each year at one of the member universities on a different theme, inviting PhD students from Europe's top research-intensive universities. This year's LERU summer school was organised around the theme of collaboration in research, with the aim of developing a guidebook for early career researchers including tips and advice for successful collaborations.

There is growing evidence to suggest that social media has great
potential for professional discourse, dissemination of research and
sharing of best practice; with their use being supported by the Nursing
and Midwifery Council (NMC) and the Royal College of Midwives (RCM)
who both have active social media profiles on Facebook and Twitter. In
the absence of official guidelines, the NMC advises its members to act
as professionally online as in person, in line with the principles of The
Code (NMC, 2008). The extension of the construct of professionalism
to the digital domain has blurred the boundary between personal and
professional personas and this lack of clarity seems to have created a
barrier to social media being used by midwives to its full potential in
a professional context. This series of short articles will provide step
by step guides written in plain English on how to join the social media
platforms Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn using appropriate privacy
settings and will provide suggestions on how to use the platforms
confidently, productively and safely in a professional context.

It is commonly believed that the doctorate prepares students for academic careers. While there is wide ranging literature about the development of doctoral students as researchers, preparation for the other aspects of academic careers, e.g. teaching, is mostly absent from the discussion. This qualitative longitudinal study investigated the shift from doctoral identities to academic identities using narrative inquiry. It examined the narratives of 15 doctoral students from two large Australian universities, who were approaching thesis submission and who aspired to academic employment. Two contrasting stories illuminated in-depth accounts of how academic identities were developed and experienced. Students defined their identities and assessed their academic development in relation to their perceived ‘market value’ in academia. To increase their employability, they engaged in university teaching and focused on strategic networking. Students regarded researcher development as the main focus of the doctorate as being insufficient for an academic career. This paper argues that doctoral education needs to facilitate student agency, encourage synergies between teaching and research, and support non-academic work experiences to strengthen researcher identity development.

Doctoral experience and researcher development in different PhD workspaces


Lilia Mantai
Macquarie University
Robyn Dowling
Macquarie University

Abstract

In the rich vein of emerging research on doctoral learning and researcher development, an understanding of space is comparatively absent. Yet both learning and development occur in and through space: the materiality of spaces such as the lab as well as the imaginings and social aspects of spaces have affordances that facilitate the PhD. Our purpose in this paper is to explore the form and function of these spaces, based on a qualitative study of PhD experiences, specifically narratives of 30 PhD students at two Australian metropolitan universities, and focus groups with 34 students. Students are actively making use of diverse workspaces to improve their progress and study experience. In this context we identify four spaces important to doctoral learning and researcher development: university campus, laboratory/office, home, and virtual/online spaces. More importantly, we illustrate the doctoral practices and researcher identities that occur within, and are constituted through, each of these spaces. These include making connections with various others to prevent social isolation, researcher professionalisation, space of respite. This research suggests the need to reconceptualise PhD work within the dynamic and fluid landscape created by the various workspaces across which doctoral practices are distributed.

Keywords: doctoral practice; PhD students; workspace; researcher development; PhD experience

This article examines the lived experience of working women with 'children' (defined as under 18 years old (NSPCC, 2020) undertaking part-time PhD study. While there exists wide literature on the isolation of doctoral experience, 'mothers' and all this identity may entail, has been overlooked. Drawing on 35 in-depth interviews, the experiences of this marginalised group in the higher education sector are explored. The study's findings underline the tension between the public, private and professional domains, and the important role online Communities of Practice (CoP) can play in overcoming peripherality and helping to manage the context of gendered organizational cultures. The article highlights the role of online CoP in enhancing the experience of an otherwise marginalized group, providing a space for selfexpression, the development of a shared repertoire, and mutual engagement. It also has resonance in relation to the changing situation generated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

1. Know your audience.
2. Always explain your choices.
3. Learn to develop an argument and defend it.
4. Teaching matters more than people say.
5. References are not an afterthought.
6. There are three types of comments that require two types of responses.
7. Prepare but do not over-prepare for presentations.
8. Dare to be different.
9. Check the facts.
10. Apologies first, excuses second.
11. Be generous.
12. Promote your own work as well as that of others.
13. Be a good colleague, inside your department and outside of it.
14. Doing a PhD is not a regular job, but things need to get done and sometimes you are asked to do things that may not be your priority.
15. Update your planning regularly.
16. Sleep on it.
17. Reference letters.
18. Layout matters.
19. Don’t be lazy.
20. Makes notes—always and everywhere.
21. Stick up for yourself but don’t forget to stick up for others as well, especially if they are in a weaker position than you.

Am 7./8. April 2022 findet an der Universität Rostock der 5. Norddeutsche Doktorand:innenworkshop der Altertumswissenschaften statt.

!!! Das Format wird aufgrund der aktuellen Corona-Lage als digitale Veranstaltung via Zoom am genannten Datum umgesetzt !!!

Um Anmeldung zur Teilnahme als Zuhörer:in wird gebeten.

Kontakt: ndaw@uni-rostock.de
Organisatorinnen: Anne Gürlach, M.A. und Patricia Kaufmann, M.A.

This paper argues that, in order to take place, space and scale more seriously in the study of our discipline, we have to complement the pervasive understanding of geography as a tradition of thought or an extended conversation with an understanding of our discipline as a tradition of practice, in which the main focus is on the becoming of geographers. It is argued that the theme of 'what it takes to be a good geographer' is a fertile way to study this process of becoming. The four main advantages of this approach are illustrated empirically in the body of the argument by the author's reflections on his socializing within two very different geographical traditions.

This article examines the lived experience of working women with 'children' (defined as under 18 years old (NSPCC, 2020) undertaking part-time PhD study. While there exists wide literature on the isolation of doctoral experience, 'mothers' and all this identity may entail, has been overlooked. Drawing on 35 in-depth interviews, the experiences of this marginalised group in the higher education sector are explored. The study's findings underline the tension between the public, private and professional domains, and the important role online Communities of Practice (CoP) can play in overcoming peripherality and helping to manage the context of gendered organizational cultures. The article highlights the role of online CoP in enhancing the experience of an otherwise marginalized group, providing a space for selfexpression, the development of a shared repertoire, and mutual engagement. It also has resonance in relation to the changing situation generated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Podejmowana w artykule problematyka znaczenia studiów doktoranckich wpisuje się w szerszy międzynarodowy kontekst gospodarczy, polityczny i społeczny. Szczególnie ważnym czynnikiem są tu oczekiwania rynku pracy wyznaczone przez współczesne procesy rozwojowe i konieczność dostosowania się do wyzwań globalnej konkurencji, wzrostu znaczenia nowych technologii, a także rosnących wymagań kwalifikacyjnych i kompetencyjnych. Celem artykuły jest rekonstrukcja roli studiów doktoranckich w Polsce zarówno z perspektywy kierowników studiów doktoranckich, jak i samych doktorantów. Autorki odpowiadają na pytanie na ile wartość studiów doktoranckich określana jest jako autoteliczna, a na ile jako instrumentalna. Rekonstruując rolę i znaczenie studiów doktoranckich autorki posługują się wynikami badań własnych, których przedmiotem była między innymi analiza motywów podjęcia studiów doktoranckich, jak i ocena ich przydatności. Na podstawie przeprowadzonych badań powstała typologia doktorantów, w której wyróżniono typy postaw wobec studiów doktoranckich. W pierwszej kolejności autorki przedstawiają wyniki indywidualnych wywiadów pogłębionych przeprowadzonych z kierownikami studiów doktoranckich na trzech wiodących warszawskich uczelniach, w drugiej – z doktorantami. Porównanie wypowiedzi osób reprezentujących uczelnie z poglądami doktorantów pozwoliło określić na ile podobne są wizje studiów doktoranckich w tych dwóch grupach reprezentujących stronę podaży (kierownicy) i popytu (doktoranci).

Doctoral study means "deep drilling", rigour, depth and discourse. A DBA investigates a narrowly stated research question from different perspectives based on a set of proven theories. If you think of embarking doctoral studies, here a few tips.

Most studies on economic discourse have focused on benchmarking and internationalization of business firms and their economic effects and have neglected their role in the education institutions. The general apathy and neglect of the concept of benchmarking to align PhD and Doctoral program requirements needs to be verified by focusing on clear differences of PhD and ED.D which can be accepted internationally. While using the bench-marking model, this paper discusses findings accumulated based on case study analyses of graduate schools adaptations of international specifications and major characteristics and differences between PhD and Doctoral programs especially for International Graduate Students (IGS).

This prestigious three year PhD studentship is available beginning 1st October 2015. The new Rehabilitation and Recovery Service for People with Severe and Enduring Mental Health Needs was introduced in January 2015. The service aims to better support service user recovery through more enhanced community support, and less reliance on inpatient care. It is a radically different prototype emphasising collaborative team working across statutory and third sector providers, and a philosophy focused on the community recovery element of the service in-reaching into the inpatient ward to provide more holistic and intensive support. It is anticipated that this model will help avoid institutionalisation and will promote better outcomes for service users (core of around n=50 p/yr) who may be characterised as ‘high need’ and ‘slow moving’. It is anticipated, that this model of community service will be more widely implemented across other Trust community services. A partnership evaluation is on-going and consists of a questionnaire at 1mnth, 6mnths, and 12mnths.
The project will provide a complementary, qualitative evaluation of the service using ‘photo elicitation’. Photo elicitation is a developing method of inquiry in which participants are invited to take photographs which help them to express something of their experience around the topic of investigation. The researcher provides a structure by having an introductory meeting to clarify the topic of investigation, to answer questions, and provide a digital camera, if one is needed - participants can use their own phone/tablet if they like. A time-frame is agreed for the photos to be taken and sent to the researcher (e.g., by e-mail attachment) and for the participant and researcher to meet to discuss the meaning of the photos in an audio-recorded research interview. The research entails undertaking photo elicitation with service users (n~16) about their experience of the new service and to include purposefully sampled staff as well (n~8 including inpatient service and community partners). The aims are to provide:
• an in-depth understanding of the experience of service users and staff to complement the quantitative service evaluation currently ongoing in the Trust;
• an understanding of the strengths of the service and areas requiring further development, from the perspective of both service users and staff;
• an evidence-base from which to develop the service, for example, through exploring the possibility of integrating the method in an on-going cycle of service evaluation and service use technology skill development;
• to provide a platform to apply for additional funding for a public engagement and knowledge transfer/dissemination to other services.

This research was funded by, and implemented within, a UK national research organisation, while the author was the KE and Impact Evaluation Manager responsible for assessing impact on a £15m UK government-funded research programme.

This work was also submitted as the authors MBA dissertation which was accepted and awarded in 2009.

ABSTRACT: A methodology and methods ‘toolbox’ is proposed for conducting impact research and assessment from within research programmes. The emphasis is upon how to clarify and assess the wider impacts from the early stages onwards.

The approach explicitly acknowledges, and attempts to address, the known issues and challenges of impact assessment while drawing upon the resources and opportunities available to research managers and researchers within such programmes.

The study has two triangulating foundations. Firstly, it examines the academic literature to help identify and design the pilot methodology and methods. Secondly it trials these in a real programme to both test and improve them.

The study was conducted over one year within one leading UK research organisation, where two research programmes (and around 60 research projects of £15m total value) were being assessed for their impacts. The study draws upon actual impact management experience and reflection, prospective (ex ante) and retrospective (ex post) assessments, participatory contributions from leading researchers undergoing assessment, and consultation with external users. The findings of this study outline the pilot and its first iteration. Recommendations are made for improvement to the methodology and methods.

A subsequent follow-on bid to UK government incorporating the impacts identified from implementing this methodology, successfully led to a further £15m of government funding.

It is expected the pilot methodology and methods will be applicable to other organisations, conducting and funding such research programmes, required to research and assess the wider research impacts.

Although primary focus of implemetation trials was upon research in physical sciences, technology, high-tech engineering, computing/IT, and environment, the wider literature study, the methodology design and justification, the methods proposed and used, and the resulting general recommendations and lessons are expected to apply more broadly to many other research areas, where the impact is to be found more widely in the society, economy, government or public sector or within organizations, policies, professions or the public.

Interest in this work is expected from research programme managers, impact managers and assessors, management consultants advising in this area, and government funding managers, all seeking to embed a developing approach to understand, capture, and enhance wider impact.

AS A DOCTORAL CANDIDATE you may have a choice between submitting a traditional doctoral dissertation and submitting a set of papers for peer-reviewed journals plus an integrating chapter. The latter option, known as a “PhD by publication” or an “article dissertation”, has become the norm in some contexts and is resented in others. I can’t decide for you, but I can give you eight reasons why I think the PhD by publication is often a good model.

This paper describes the development and initial implementation of a national cohort-based model for doctoral training in a group of universities in the UK that are affiliated with the University Alliance Mission Group. The Alliance mission group currently represents 19, geographically-dispersed higher education institutions – 17 English and two Welsh. Alliance describes itself as a grouping of ‘Britain’s universities for cities and regions’. Universities within the group typically deliver research and teaching with a specific focus on impact and application. They are depicted in Figure 1 below.
The model – termed Doctoral Training Alliance (DTA) – is the first initiative of its size, scale and mission. It has the potential to be further developed to work with a variety of researcher communities, nationally and internationally.
The paper explores the policy and funding context that led to the development of this initiative and examines how the model was built, using a case study of the first DTA in applied biosciences for health. It specifically considers issues of size, structure, identity, governance and evaluation.
The following colleagues contributed to the development of the DTA model and the first DTA in Applied Biosciences for Health:  Prof Paul Harrison, Sheffield Hallam University;  Dr Faye Taylor, University Alliance;  Prof Yvonne Barnett, Nottingham Trent University;  Dr Jamie McFee, Manchester Metropolitan University; Jennie Eldridge, University Alliance; Members of the Management Committee, Training Group and Independent Advisory Group

Over the years we have often talked with one another, with our doctoral students, and with numerous colleagues and friends about how doctoral students and supervisors/advisors might be better supported on their doctoral journeys. Recognizing the richness of both students’ and supervisors’ lived experiences, and the importance of their insights and learning to others in helping to keep doctorates on track, we have chatted long into the night about how we might make their and others’ stories, what they now know, and the lessons they have learned more accessible.

This book brings together contributions from authors across the world and from a variety of disciplinary backgrounds. It is about the realities doctoral researchers in the social sciences face on a day-to-day basis. Unlike the majority of books about doctoral research and research methods texts, it places centre stage, their lived experiences from the perspective of current and past candidates, as well as supervisors. Our aim in compiling this book is to offer insights to those thinking about (or presently undertaking) doctoral research and those supporting them. While everyone’s experiences (and doctorates) are unique, it is important to recognize that there are some commonalities too. The book is meant to be a companion for your doctoral journey, from the first thoughts of ‘how to begin’ through to submission and finding that first job. We aim for the book to be as close as possible to sitting and chatting with a friend or trusted advisor over a cup of coffee, tea, or even a gin and tonic. This is not a step-by-step procedural text; rather, it is about the realities that others have experienced during the doctoral process, and through these it gives a platform for their insights, advice and lessons regarding the realities of the doctoral process...

Cet article vise à identifier les facteurs qui contribuent aux expériences de solitude en doctorat de sciences humaines et sociales en France. La solitude est entendue ici comme une expérience subjective, distincte du seul isolement. Nous nous appuyons sur une enquête qualitative, par entretiens individuels et collectifs, auprès de doctorants exerçant dans diverses disciplines de sciences humaines et sociales. L’article montre que la solitude y constitue une épreuve socialement instituée, non seulement par la nature même de l’exercice, mais aussi par les formes institutionnelles d’encadrement et le statut du doctorat en France. Nous avons identifié trois univers rhétoriques de solitude, faisant respectivement jouer des dimensions existentielles, relationnelles et sociales. Un premier mode d’expérience de la solitude se loge dans le long face-à-soi du processus de recherche et de création : c’est alors la rhétorique du « temps » qui domine, face à l’enjeu de l’œuvre et de l’accomplissement. Une seconde expérience de solitude s’inscrit davantage dans le face aux autres et le difficile partage de son expérience ; elle se dévoile dans la prégnance d’une rhétorique des liens, sources de solitude avec les proches, les pairs ou le directeur de thèse. Une troisième expérience renvoie plutôt au rapport au « monde » et à la profonde ambiguïté, nourrie d’incertitude, du statut de doctorant : ce sont alors l’univers rhétorique de la « place » et du « sens » qui dominent, dans un enjeu de participation sociale. Dompter le temps, gérer les autres, trouver sa place : ces trois facettes de l’expérience doctorale se révèlent à la fois sources de tensions intimes et révélatrices d’inégalités sociales.

Richard Baskerville and Nancy Russo have shown how particular supervisor-student relationships can be seen as one of a number of metaphors, for example, a journey, a marriage, apprenticeship and servitude. In this paper we develop this idea further by
suggesting problems associated with situations where students and supervisors might be proceeding on the basis of different metaphors, which we refer to as ‘mixed metaphors’. We use ‘playlets’ to illustrate these situations. These and the discussions that follow are devised from individual interviews with supervisors and research students, a focus group consisting of research students, and our own experiences as research students and supervisors.
Suggestions are provided as to how the student and supervisor might avoid relationships where conflicting mixed metaphors are apparent that cause problems in the relationship and potentially hinder the progress of the student.

Thinking is pretty much invisible . . .  Mostly, thinking happens under the hood, within the marvelous engine of our mindbrain’  (Ritchart, Church and Morrison, 2011 ). So, how can candidates be assisted to make their thinking visible and explicit in their writing?

Quality in research is to be recognised and applauded for its conceptualisation and high level thinking. This thinking must be visible in the text of the thesis so that experienced researchers, supervisors and examiners can acknowledge the scholarship of the thesis.

This paper illustrates how to approach research in a scholarly manner moving from the descriptive to the conceptual by considering critical factors that represent the high quality that doctoral research should demonstrate (Trafford and Leshem, 2008). It shows how candidates can raise their level of thinking and exhibit in their thesis that they are ‘thinking like researchers’. It provides strategies for candidates to adopt in writing and defending their thesis by making thinking visible in the thesis and later in their defense.