Hi C. Beaumont, and others,
 
As I see it, a PhD does not provide expertise in designing (practice), but it provides expertise in research (research training), which might be useful to learn how to add to the current knowledge in design or OTHER fields, which means that any research-based degree awarded is only saying that you know how to do research.
 
In theory, the highest degree in a discipline should be awarded to someone who is an expert in a specific field; Not only in research, but in practice too. And this can be reflected in the professional doctorate and the PhD. These have somehow been created to differentiate the highest degree one can achieve in practice and research respectively.
 
So a PhD degree is just training in research who (if done properly) would have taught you the skills to carry out research independently and supervise future research students. This, by any means confer expertise in the field of design to a PhD. In fact, very often students from other fields (different from design) can carry out a PhD in the design field, if not equally perhaps better than students from design disciplines. So how can a social science student (with an education in social science and professional expertise in social science) can be an expert in the design field? 
 
The answer is because in order to do research in design you do not need to be an expert in design, you need to know how to do research, and that can be learnt and carried out even more skilfully with students from other disciplines (sometimes totally unrelated to the design discipline). I would even say that students from other disciplines (in some occasions) are more prepared to carry out research (depending on the topic) than design students, who are generalists, and do not have so much knowledge into the specific disciplines which shape the design process. That is why a PhD student in design does not need to be an expert in design, which might look like strange, given that the PhD is the highest qualification awarded in the discipline. Is this the case in other disciplines? 
 
David mentioned rightly that the only practice that counts in research is the practice of research. This practice can involve the creation of physical artefacts, or field work in order to add to the body of knowledge of design. However, we should be aware that PhDs that involve the creation of physical artefacts, lab test, field work, etc. may differ in the effort and economic resources needed and this is not usually reflected in the time and economic means provided in scholarships.  
 
Eduardo also mentioned that PhDs might be leading to experts in other fields but design. Although, it might not exactly leading to experts in other fields, if it true that, as mentioned earlier, the skills required do not match the skills achieved by students in design. And that due to the nature of research, other students from other disciplines might be more prepared for research in design. Again, are we approaching the PhD in design in the right manner?
 
We all agree that PhD degrees have one purpose, that is, to train researchers, but in what discipline? Do researchers in design need any reference of design before carrying out their research? Do other disciplines need these references?
 
I agree with David that creating a common terminology is very important, as well as teaching this and other basics to research students who begin to do research. I am not sure but I think this is common practice in US through formal courses. On my experience the courses and other formal training for research students in UK was not very related to Design and the particulars of this discipline. 
 
Martin mentioned about the need of a PhD in academy in order to progress as an academic, but is the current PhD structure providing always more knowledge to people who teach/research design? If other people from other fields can carry out research in design, sometimes even better, is there something about the discipline of design that is intrinsic, likewise other disciplines?
 
Ken mentioned that interdisciplinary is common in design, and that depending on the framing of the research, a PhD in design could become another’s discipline PhD. After reviewing some theses in design I believe that usually the framing of the research tends to put the maximum weight of the thesis in other disciplines methods, techniques and body of knowledge, and what is more worrying, I think this is the only way to carry out research in design; taking into account its multidisciplinary nature.
 
I hope this helps,
 
Jose      
 
 

 
> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 12:16:46 +0100
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Structure for practice based PhD
> To: [log in to unmask]
> 
> I am currently finishing a practice/project-based PhD in Design and understand the dilemma to stem from how people view what a PhD means:
> 
> 1. Does a PhD mean one is the best in his/her field...
> Or
> 2. Does a PhD mean one has obtained a level of academic achievement in his/her discipline?
> 
> Honourary PhD's for instance award a doctorate degree to someone who is the best in their field, but not necessarily in an academic sense. This is a token gesture really, but I think it can sometimes show the misrepresentation of the PhD--that a PhD means you are clever rather than someone who understands how to conduct and report research. 
> 
> To have a project be the sole source of conducting AND reporting the research is hard to justify. A written portion should accompany the creative work, enough to contribute new knowledge to the field, and be tangible enough to allow others to build on it. And for now, we do this through the written word. A creative non-written work would certainly be a platform to conduct the research--just as a physicist has a laboratory for testing and observing ideas--but to conduct an experiment and say it speaks for itself is not an academic outcome. 
> 
> It's like the kite and the key experiment of Benjamin Franklin. It's great that lightning struck, but unless he can explain to others how it happened and what they can do with it what benefit is it to anyone but Benjamin? Equally true is the fact that one can't ignore the importance of the experiment that led to the discovery, and practice/project based/led PhD's are a step towards recognising the non-written portion of research, which dominates fields like design, art, etc. This practice research route is needed, and it's not any less valuable than its traditional counterpart. It's about recognising they are dependent on the other, not about valuing one over the other.
> 
> For an achievement that's not academic, there are other ways of getting recognition: industry awards, knighthood, etc. We have to be careful not to confuse that with academia. In the end it's about contributing to research in your field, not just contributing to your field.
> 
> Or I could be wrong. If so, I'll gladly stop my dissertation and hand in my projects! :)
> 
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System.

_________________________________________________________________
Toda la información meteorológica. Consulta en MSN el tiempo que va a hacer en cualquier lugar de España o del Mundo. 
http://eltiempo.es.msn.com/