The Dublin Descriptors are the general qualifications framework adopted in 2005 in all EU countries after the Bologna declaration of 1999.
" Qualifications that signify completion of the third cycle are awarded to students who:
• have demonstrated a systematic understanding of a field of study and mastery of the skills and methods of research associated with that field;
• have demonstrated the ability to conceive, design, implement and adapt a substantial process of research with scholarly integrity;
• have made a contribution through original research that extends the frontier of knowledge by developing a substantial body of work, some of which merits national or international refereed publication;
• are capable of critical analysis, evaluation and synthesis of new and complex ideas;
• can communicate with their peers, the larger scholarly community and with society in general about their areas of expertise;
• can be expected to be able to promote, within academic and professional contexts, technological, social or cultural advancement in a knowledge based society."
http://ecahe.eu/w/index.php/Framework_for_Qualifications_of_the_European_Higher_Education_Area#Third_cycle_-_PhD
Best regards,
Eduardo
Eduardo Corte-Real
PhD Arch.
Associate Professor
Professor Associado com Agregação
[log in to unmask]
Av. Dom Carlos I, nº4, 1200-649 Lisboa, Portugal
T: +351 213 939 600
> No dia 02/01/2018, às 22:59, Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]> escreveu:
>
> Dear David,
>
> Thanks for your reply. I will answer in a day or so.
>
> I do want to address one crucial issue and one key point lest they be misunderstood. You wrote:
>
> —snip—
>
> “You sent me a note off list giving your opinion on some 'serious' PhD programmes. Not one was in the UK. That is frankly ridiculous. I know the UK environment very well, have been a member of a couple of national research assessment panels etc., and see an increasing number of competent researchers/supervisors in these islands together with some great work by students.”
>
> —snip—
>
> While I mentioned some terrific programs of which I know, I asked *you* for your suggestions in the UK. I figured that you know the situation there better than I do. I can name two or three programs, but you’d said that there are more. So I asked you for *your list.*
>
> The key point is this. You wrote:
>
> —snip—
>
> On the question of teaching postdoctorally, there is little or nothing in any of the PhD programmes I have seen in detail that teaches anything about supervision. Personally, it's the hardest teaching I have ever done. There is an assumption that by doing a PhD one is equipped to supervise. That has not been my experience, by a big margin. Maybe that should be an elective in any new curriculum?
>
> —snip—
>
> You’ve made more of my statement than I made of it. Earning a PhD is one element for those who will later supervise PhD students — necessary but not sufficient. This is also an issue that appears in the Potsdam discussion of the Habilitation. The words “necessary but not sufficient” ought to pop up at many points in discussing these issues.
>
> https://www.uni-potsdam.de/en/wiso/research/post-doctoral-dissertation.html
>
> I will try to offer a cogent answer later this week or next. I still owe Mitch Sipus an answer, too. In the meantime, I try to write carefully. I polish my words so as not to overstate my case or to make claims I do not make. I hope that you will read my carefully delimited sentences in the way the I have limited them. I don’t mean that you must agree with me — I simply ask you to respect the limits I set for my own claims.
>
> I agree with you that doctoral education in design has made huge progress over the past two decades. I have seen many outstanding theses and some of the projects that have come to my attention are astonishing in designerly skill, conceptual elegance and theoretical beauty. I compiled a large collection of PhD theses in design and in art a couple years back — the collection was stored in a way that I am now required to rebuild it. I will eventually make it available again, as I did before for those who wish to see the documents for themselves.
>
> But I also add a caveat. In every field of the massively expanded university systems of the world, we see far more problem thesis than brilliant ones, and these problem theses tend to cluster in doctoral training programs that suffer flaws and gaps. That is why Mitch Sipus directed his question to me. And that is why I welcome your report.
>
> It is vital to respect, admire, emulate, and build on first-rate theses at excellent programs. They remain a minority.
>
> I will look through this post again with the hope of offering answers. I wanted to clear up these two simple points right away.
>
> 1) I know that there are terrific programs in the UK. I see you as one of the leading experts in the field, and I know you know those programs. Therefore, I asked you for your list while sending you my list of good programs elsewhere,
>
> 2) No one is prepared to supervise a PhD just after earning his or her own PhD. The PhD is the first step. It is the journeyman piece. It qualified one to learn how to supervise, and ideally it permits one to join a supervision team with a skilled senior supervisor. The journeyman piece is not the masterpiece. I was stating one document that grants the entry-level credentials. Except in rare cases, people without a PhD will not supervise well. So it is a necessary experience. Then one requires much more.
>
> I discuss some of the issues in the article “Now That We’re Different, What’s Still the Same?” You can get it here. It is not complete, but I address many of the necessary and partially sufficient issues of what a PhD program requires, and what one must learn, be, and do to become a skilled doctoral supervisor.
>
> https://we.tl/JI5A8EFAN7
>
> It is never possible to address an issue like this completely and carefully on a discussion list. That’s why we write 6,000-word journal articles with full references.
>
> I wanted to provide a responsible answer, though, so I bit off a tiny chunk of the puzzle.
>
> Yours,
>
> Ken
>
> Ken Friedman | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation/
>
> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| Email [log in to unmask] | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
