Teena pointed to the need for PhD students and academics to publish in
journals - good quality journals.

This is a problem in Design Research. 

There simply isn't enough journals.

Normal expectation per academic is 2-10 refereed publications per year. 

My guess is there are around 10,000 academics worldwide in design research
in the 'Art and Design' disciplines, and these are around 5% of the total
design research fields.

That suggests around 200,000 publishing academic researchers across design
research worldwide.

At 2 papers each per year, that requires a publishing capacity in journals
of design research of 400,000 papers.

I suspect the current publishing  capacity of journals dedicated to design
research is less than 500 papers per year.

What happens now?

At the moment, many design researchers publish less than 2 papers per year.
Those that do publish, mainly publish in conferences and journals that are
not specific to design research. In terms of refereed publications for the
design research field, the role of conferences has been important to date.
Larger conferences can provide opportunities for 1000 or more refereed
publications each.

The difficulties of publishing in existing design research journals (~25%
acceptance rate)  appear to have led to a reluctance to submit to them and
instead to focus on conference papers.

There is now a  shift away from refereed conference papers. This is based
mainly on economics.  For a lecturer, a conference paper costs an
institution around $11,000 ($3000 preparation, $3000 time lost in attending
the conference and $5000 for the cost of the conference registration,
travel, accommodation etc). In contrast, a journal paper costs around $6000
and has more status and improved knowledge quality. Cost figures for
professorial staff are typically around double.

What is best for the future?

Open source journals such as the Journal of Design Research offer
opportunities, given a fast process and sufficient referees of good caliber.
There are opportunities for creating new journals, except there is not yet a
satisfactory  business model that funds the management of the journals
(though that cost gap between conferences and journals should free up some
cash - should!). More, there is increasing  pressure for publications to be
in 'A' grade journals and it takes a substantial amount of time for a
journal to get to that status.

Thoughts?

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





-----Original Message-----
From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related
research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of teena
clerke
Sent: Thursday, 3 April 2008 8:26 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Doctoral Disseminators

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