Hi all,
I concur with Gavin's comments. I am halfway through a
transdisciplinary PhD in a faculty of education (UTS), with a
co-supervisor in design. The faculty is undergoing major course
restructuring in its doctoral programs, and publishing along the way
and co-authoring are being positioned as high priorities for
candidates, particularly in practice-oriented research, which makes
it highly relevant for designers engaging in higher degree research.
The other imperative in Australia is that it is becoming less
attractive for candidates to attend conferences and publish in
proceedings, because these publications will shortly not 'count' in
DEST points (the funding units on which the government funds
universities for research achievement). This sends a clear message,
and one that has been discussed in my own supervision, to publish in
journals. Up until our recent change of federal government, there was
also a funding-linked list of journals that made it more difficult to
publish in any other than the more mainstream journals in the field -
I recall Terry Love mentioning this some time ago.
Coupled with the push for timely completion, that is, 3 years full
time, and 4.5 years part-time, candidates now have to be more
strategic in their publications strategies. This means writing both
for the thesis and publishing out of it as you go. This of course has
implications for supervision, as well as the issues Chris mentioned
in terms of what exactly is to be published 'along the way'. So there
might be a case for papers that discuss innovative methodologies,
preliminary findings, or even 'lit reviews' that position the
candidate's developing argument in a way that flags what their
research might construct. Subsequently, there is an urgent need for
doctoral programs that emphasise and facilitate research writing and
other research literacies, from the beginning of the degree, not just
at the 'writing up' stage.
It occurs to me though, that the publishing issue is closely linked
to the candidate's motivation for doing a doctorate in the first
place. Recent research suggests that while new kinds of doctorates
have been established that have expanded the scope and direction of
doctoral education (Malfroy & Yates 2003; Park 2007; Boud & Lee in
press), and more people are doing doctorates (Evans et al 2005), not
all of them will work in academia, but are preparing for research
careers in industry. In fact, Australian universities are being
encouraged to refine existing policies and 'determine the most
effective means of delivering the body of research-enabling skills
(beyond reliance on informal processes) to ensure their broader
contribution to employability and personal development' (CADDGS
2005d). This represents a clear link between research capabilities
and employment and flags certain tensions currently facing candidates
as they make decisions about publishing along the way. What to
publish (topic), where to publish (professional/academic
publications) how to express the 'original and significant
contribution' their research will make (in practice/academic fields),
what is the 'impact' of this knowledge (on professional practice/the
field)?
My own strategy is two-fold: to publish both from my thesis work
(women design academics), and within the field in which I am enrolled
(adult education, specifically doctoral programs). This is partly so
that I may have choices about my research employment beyond the
doctorate itself, and partly because it informs my approaches to my
own doctoral progression. This however, contributes to tensions,
especially priorities. I am curious as to what other candidates'
strategies might be in relation to their 'after doctorate'
aspirations, how publishing might assist them to get there, and the
tensions that arise in the process.
cheers, teena
Boud, D. & Lee, A. (Eds/in press). Changing Practices of Doctoral
Education. London: Routledge.
Council of Australian Deans and Directors of Graduate Studies.
(2005d). Guidelines to Support the Framework for Best Practice in
Generic Capabilities for Research Students in Australian
Universities. November 25. Retrieved October 9, 2007, from DDOGS
website: http://www.ddogs.edu.au/.
Evans, T., McCauley, P., Pearson, M. & Tregenza, K. (2005) Why do a
'prof doc' when you can do a PhD? In T.W. Maxwell, C. Hickey & T.
Evans (Eds). Conference proceedings for the 5th International
Conference on Professional Doctorates, Working Doctorates: the impact
of Professional Doctorates in the workplace and professions,
November, 25-26, 2004. Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, p.
24-34. Retrieved October 9, 2007, from
http://www.deakin.edu.au/education/rads/conferences/publications/prodoc/doc/3EvansMacauley&Pearson.pdf
Malfroy, J., & Yates, L. (2003). Knowledge in action: Doctoral
programs forging new identities, Journal of Higher Education Policy
and Management, 25(2), p. 119-129.
Park, C. (2007). Redefining the Doctorate, UK Higher Education Academy.
>Dear Chris and listers
>
>In my recent international review of doctoral programs in design
>(n=154) I noted among other themes in the curriculum landscape the
>increasing interest/insistence on students publishing along the way
>- including through conference papers. My claim (one I am currently
>formulating for publication and insisting on with my own research
>students) is that such an active approach to knowledge production
>during (not after) the doctoral process benefits everybody. In
>addition, there is also a strong stream in program documentation
>recommending co-authoring with supervisors and other academics as a
>beneficial approach to the apprenticeship of novices to research
>communities of practice. Again, this is a strategy I want to make
>part of my own still early career supervision platform. Both these
>strategies I saw being well run during my three years in a medicine
>and health faculty and are ones I strongly recommend. Cheers.
>
>Dr Gavin Melles
>Research Fellow, Faculty of Design
>Swinburne University of Technology
>http://www.linkedin.com/in/gavinmelles
|
