Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Assessing the PhD: a constructive view of criteria

Assessing the PhD: a constructive view of criteria Research and informed debate reveals that institutional practices in relation to research degree examining vary considerably across the sector. Within a context of accountability and quality assurance/total quality management, the range and specificity of criteria that are used to judge doctoral work is of particular relevance. First, a review of the literature indicates that, although interest in and concern about the process is burgeoning, there is little empirical research published from which practitioners can draw guidance. The second part of the paper reviews that available research, drawing conclusions about issues that seem to pertain at a general level across disciplines and institutions. Lest the variation is an artefact of discipline difference, the third part of the paper focuses on a within discipline study. Criteria expected/predicted by supervisors are compared and contrasted with those anticipated and experienced by candidates and with those implemented and considered important by examiners. The results are disturbing. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Quality Assurance in Education Emerald Publishing

Assessing the PhD: a constructive view of criteria

Quality Assurance in Education , Volume 11 (2): 8 – Jun 1, 2003

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/assessing-the-phd-a-constructive-view-of-criteria-XBHTc8gsd4

References (16)

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 MCB UP Ltd. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0968-4883
DOI
10.1108/09684880310471506
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Research and informed debate reveals that institutional practices in relation to research degree examining vary considerably across the sector. Within a context of accountability and quality assurance/total quality management, the range and specificity of criteria that are used to judge doctoral work is of particular relevance. First, a review of the literature indicates that, although interest in and concern about the process is burgeoning, there is little empirical research published from which practitioners can draw guidance. The second part of the paper reviews that available research, drawing conclusions about issues that seem to pertain at a general level across disciplines and institutions. Lest the variation is an artefact of discipline difference, the third part of the paper focuses on a within discipline study. Criteria expected/predicted by supervisors are compared and contrasted with those anticipated and experienced by candidates and with those implemented and considered important by examiners. The results are disturbing.

Journal

Quality Assurance in EducationEmerald Publishing

Published: Jun 1, 2003

Keywords: Assessment; Qualifications; Research; Quality culture; Academic staff; Tests

There are no references for this article.