Dear Don, David, Chris and all,

The idea of competencies  offers a way of looking at PhDs and the role of the thesis and of contribution to knowledge that simplifies the education and  provides the basis for an integrated picture across disciplines, fields, institutions  and across  the different forms of PhD.

For some years, I've been exploring an approach on Design PhDs based on focusing on PhD competencies. This is a similar approach to that adopted around 6 years ago in the UK by the ESRC. This competencies-based approach to PhD focuses on the candidate's 'contribution to knowledge' in a slightly different light.

The competencies-based approach to managing PhDs offers the basis for:

• Understanding and calibrating PhDs in new areas of study
• Assessing and evaluating different forms of submission of PhD
• Moderation of PhDs across and within fields and institutions and across countries
• Moderation of PhD examiners
• Guidance to PhD candidates on standards
• Guidance to PhD examiners on standards
• Independent justification of PhD examination decisions
• A structured approach to future modes of PhD submission 

The premise is that we can easily define the competencies we expect of someone who is awarded a PhD, and that these competencies are remarkably similar across disciplines, fields, institutions and forms of PhD.

A typical list of the major competencies expected of a PhD candidate on completion would likely include:
• Competence to identify a suitable problem issue of the right scale and focus that offers potential for a significant contribution to knowledge
• Competence to assess the significance of addressing the focus of the PhD
• Competence to identify, read, understand, analyse and evaluate  existing body of literature
• Competence to identify data that needs collecting to address the PhD issue
• Competence to identify and utilise appropriate methods of gathering the necessary data
• Competence to analyse the data that is collected
• Competence to undertake reasoning whilst avoiding fallacies and sophism
• Competence to understand and address ethical issues likely to be common in PhD level research]
• Competence to work with stakeholders
• Competence to communicate professionally with colleagues
• Competence in the skills of the field as a practical practitioner appropriate to PhD
• Competence in the skills of a theoretical practitioner
• Competence to avoid plagiarism, copyright etc
• Competence in managing large amounts of information, analyses, background reasoning
• Competence in writing a large well structured and readable report 
• Competence in making public presentations
• Competence in being able to address a new research project and manage it through to conclusion

Each of these competencies can readily  be associated with performance indicators that professionals, employers and academics in an area would consider appropriate. In many cases, competencies and performance indicators reflect the reality that on conclusion of a PhD, the candidate is beginning their journey to mastership in research rather than being fully competent. These performance indicators, like the competencies themselves,  can be compared across fields, institutions and nations.

The measure of success in examination of a  PhD is whether the candidate has demonstrated that they have these competencies. It  opens up the possibility of revision or resubmission being only to demonstrate competencies not demonstrated by first submission. 

I suggest that this sort of thinking is already at the core of the way that many PhD examiners already mark PhD theses. The competencies approach is also  the tacit foundation of research into competence and  inter-rater reliability of PhD examiners. It is also, as I mentioned before, the foundation of the ESRC’s position on funding PhD research in the UK. 

In this competence-based approach to understanding and managing PhDs, the ‘contribution to knowledge’ has two different roles. The fact that the candidate undertakes a unique research project that will enable them to make a personal contribution to knowledge )(i.e. something that hasn’t been done before) is a security against plagiarism. The second role is that the contribution to knowledge helps pay society back for the approx half million dollars that each PhD costs.

My feeling is that this competencies-based approach to PhDs addresses all of the issues currently found in relation to PhDs in Design regardless of the design fields, and also addresses the interactions between Design, Art and Engineering.

I welcome other people’s thoughts on this competencies-based approach to PhDs.

Best regards,
Terry
____________________

Dr. Terence Love, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI

Director Design-focused Research Group, Design Out Crime Research Group
Researcher, Digital Ecosystems and Business Intelligence Institute
Associate,  Planning and Transport Research Centre
Curtin University, PO Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia 6845
Mob: 0434 975 848, Fax +61(0)8 9305 7629, [log in to unmask]
Visiting Professor, Member of Scientific Council
UNIDCOM/ IADE, Lisbon, Portugal
Honorary Fellow, Institute of Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Development
Management School, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
____________________