Multi-disciplinary Practice Based Doctorates: An Appreciative Inquiry in Design, Development, and Delivery in the European Union and US

Annette Fillery-Travis

Head of the Wales Institute for Work Based Learning

• The Project and its Purpose

Doctorate Supervision Presentation | 3

• Bologna Declaration of 1999 with the aim of creating European Higher Education Area

• Lisbon Strategy of 2000 formulated to create a European Research and Innovation Area

• September 2003 the Berlin Communique adding `third cycle’ i.e doctorates to the process---formulation of doctoral descriptors

• New terminology : postgraduate education / research training / doctoral education---`doctoral candidates’ rather than students

• Diverse doctoral forms across Europe ---the PhD / the professional doctorate /

• The motto is `One goal, different routes’

• The PhD and professional doctorates are considered under

`research-based’ category

Drivers for Growth

• ‘creative, critical and autonomous intellectual risk takers’ capable of contributing to all sectors where deep rigorous analysis is required.’ (ERA 2010).

• Doctorates are also becoming increasingly required for advanced levels of practice within the professions as well as work beyond frontier research and education: in applied research, in policy making, in management, and in many other leadership roles in society (LERU doctoral degrees beyond 2010).

‘The Modern Doctorate’

• Defined for us as doctorates for which the research and supervision occurs in part outside the academy at the point of knowledge application

• Has a variety of purposes, ranging from knowledge exchange between industry and academia, the development of higher levels of professional practice an individualised development programmes for practitioners of advanced standing.

PhD

EngD, industrial

PhD

DBA

DClinPsy

FTP

EdD, DTheol, ProfD

DProf(TD)

Taught professional elements

Research focus on practice within practice

Achievement of technical outputs & training as researcher Production of new knowledge owed by the University/published with the supervisor

Development of higher level learning and criticality of the candidate within their professional context (social, political etc). IP owned in part at least by candidate

Shift in Purpose

Shift in Advisor/Supervisor Role to facilitator of the research – at the service of the candidate’s agenda. The candidate approaches the research as the expert in the context and goal of the research Fillery-Travis (2012) Studies in Higher Education

The Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe' (2011, p12) as it fulfills the requirement for "researcher training in higher education... (to) be better aligned with the needs of the knowledge-intensive labour market and in particular with the requirements of SMEs. High quality, industry-relevant doctoral training is instrumental in meeting this demand for expert human capital."

‘Conventional’ Doctorate Supervision • ‘more private than any other scene of teaching and learning’ Lee (2010)

• ‘production of an autonomous independent scholar who is, in effect independent of their context and free from the outside world’

• An apprenticeship model where ‘mastery’ is identified as with the supervisor as the credentialed seasoned researcher

• Supervisory Stance – a mix of function, enculturation, critical thinking, emancipation, relationship development depending upon discipline and personal experience

• Barbara Grant’s (2008) archetype of ‘master and slave’ –’ the fruitful necessity of its difficult but often pleasurable power relations’

• Research is identified within the academy ‘looking into…’, often single or multidisciplinary, owned by the University (IP), certain boundaries as to what constitutes knowledge

The State of the Art

The supervision of such work based research requires complex capabilities from the supervisor(s) as they seek to

(1) address the diverse needs of a candidate operating at doctoral level within a work environment where their priorities are, in part at least, set by the needs of their organisation and work role and

(2) supervise the creation of knowledge at doctoral level.

And yet there has to date been little study of these needs and no commonly accepted framework of practice for supervisors to draw upon.

Doctorate Supervision Presentation | 10

ERASMUS +

Middlesex University IWBL DProf PhDs

Maastricht Business School, Netherlands DBAs PhDs

Francesca SpFondazione ADAPT University of Bergamo Italy Industrial PhDs and Labour Relation

Trinity College,University of Dublin DEds PhDs

EURODOC---federation of national institutions representing the interests of early stage researchers—doctoral candidates

University of Central California USA DEds PhDs

University of Wales Trinity Saint David

Evaluator: Ann Lee

175,000 Euros

The project sought to

• develop a framework for supervision that is applicable for the varying modes of modern doctorates throughout Europe

• enable universities, individuals and organisations to partner successfully in research training and the generation of research at the point of application

Objective 1 and 2 Collection of Data

• Literature review

• Survey 500 candidates (Lead Partner 1)

• Interview 50 supervisors

• Interview 25 Programme Leaders and sponsors

Objective 3 Construct Framework (Lead Partner 1)

• Collation of data and analysis

• 2 day design meeting

Objective 4 Preparation of Dissemination Materials (Lead Partner 3)

• Joint design and preparation

• Ebook of resources

Objective 5 Dissemination (Lead Partner 3)

• Publications, training workshops, online material.

• Consultancy Service

Months 1-14

Months 16-20

Months 24-36

Months 20-36

What do you consider the purpose of DBAs, or other Modern Doctorates such as EdD compared with the PhD? What does that mean for ‘curriculum’ ? What is needed for learning outcomes? What transferable skills can be/should be included in outcomes?

Modern Doctorates

Student Experiences

Processes & Procedures

Purposes & Outcomes

Relationships

Contexts & Settings

Supervisory Practices &

Models

Transformations & Identities

Transferable & Generic Skills

Postgraduate Programmes

Policy & Policy Making

Communities of Practice

Pedagogies

Structures

Transdisplinarity

Supervisory Experiences

Literature Review 572 pieces of literature

Doctoral programmes can be concerned with: • identifying the candidate as ‘fit to practice’ as in the

DPsych, • facilitating higher level development of professional

competencies as in EngD, • developing a researcher of practice, or • contributing to the knowledge exchange between

academia and industry as in industrial PhDs

Context • Increasing number of graduate (doubled over the last 16 years) • Movement to widen outcomes to be relevant to non-academic

post-doctoral wok – ‘doctorateness’ is not ONLY about being a good researcher

• Increased regulation, institutionalisation of doctorate supervision and research training in particular – frameworks

Specific Issues • Hint that candidates can move to transformational learning • Broader range of transferable skills (vitae framework) • Relationship is core to good outcomes – the crucible of the

work

20%

32% 27%

21%

Disciplinary or Professional?

Disciplinary

Professional

Multidisciplinary

Transdisciplinary

PhD

EngD, industrial

PhD

DBA

DClinPsy

FTP

EdD, DTheol, ProfD

DProf(TD)

Taught professional elements

Research focus on practice within practice

General Format of the Programmes as identified in the Survey (page 24) • Induction and entry – interview, leveling procedures, initial research

training etc- all designed to get the candidates starting to ‘talk the talk’ • ‘Contracting’ for learning relationship – 46% have a written agreement,

20% prescribed by programme regulation – • Prescription of training – 60%required such and 75% had access to

resources, monitoring of relationship by institution and mentoring arrangements

• Two modes of contact – physical sciences have greater than 20 hours (30%) whereas social sciences it was closer to 3-5 hours as mean.

Page 25 – for discussion point • Attributes and style identified by the supervisors as necessary is

interesting and surprising! • Working with Workplace Supervisors! Competing agendas!

Interviews

Questions and Probes

What you enjoy about supervising doctoral level work what you do

not enjoy, challenges, different kinds of candidates, progress, disciplines,

personalities, learning styles

Purpose of a doctorate changes, transferable skills, preparation for life,

attitude to life, usefulness, status

Influences on your supervisory role internal procedures, market changes,

educational policies, finance, conferences, literature, influences that help a

supervisory relationship work well or inhibit it from doing so

Any shifts in expectations, yours, the candidates, the universities,

the job markets technology, purpose of the university, fees, employability

Conditions for success in the supervisory role Trust, collaboration,

reliability, quality assurance, peer support, networking, being well informed in

supervision literature, CPD, personal philosophy, values

Main differences in supervision between PhD and professional

doctorates practice elements, conceptualising practice, differences in

perceptions of knowledge, truth and research, single disciplines and

inter/multidisciplinary nature of practice

What makes you a good supervisor why do students fail at the viva, how

do you keep them engaged, are there things a supervisor should not be

expected to be dealing with, what is your idea of a not so good supervisor

Research pedagogy, does it exists what would the key constituents

of it include supervision as learning/teaching, focus on challenges like

critical thinking, coherence, consistency, conceptualising practice, theorising

practice

What in your experience makes a candidate drop out or prolong their

study, or defer, or interrupt, managing that

What have I not asked you about which you would like to have been

asked

Consensus

•High level of consensus and consistency over many concepts

Challenges of Context

• University systems, inflexibility, administration, market forces, policy changes, funding changes, commodification, targets, standardisation, trust, autonomy, student profiles (age, circumstances, purposes etc) and university blanket approach as if all one profile

• Lack of time, support, continuing professional development, peer, community of practice

Good Supervision Skills

responsiveness translator skills

knowledge& information discursive

dialogic good feedback

contracting communicative

present helpful

understanding of difference understanding the real world

facilitating critical thinking

guide, mentor, coach, teacher, colleague

Good Supervision Attributes • quality of relationship caring

• patient enthusiastic

• open reliable

• trustworthy imaginative

• honest

Key concepts

• Quality of relationship!

• complexity thinking, beyond single discipline, bridging knowledges,

• Approaches to knowledge for the future, innovation in research approaches, the development part of research

• Commitment to quality of output

• Peer review of practice

• Dissemination and impact

• Advocacy

The Practicalities I cannot work without kisses (Hannah Arendt)

• Contract for relationship – agree explicitly, frequency of contact, who initiates it (page 24), review often (page 36)

• Include contracting with other members of the supervisory panel!

• Individual or cohort ??? • Research Environment

• Workplace Supervisors

Process of critical

engagement with knowledge object (research

focus)

Supervisory relationship of trust and care

Environment of research mindedness/stimulation

Dialogic/critical friend supervisory style

Supervisory learning contract encompassing operational

issues institutional monitoring

Supervisory training/mentoring/monitoring

Community of Practice/Cohort

Engagement with Workplace supervisior?

Framework of Practice

The supervisor must be an expert in the process of critical engagement with aspects of practice and have the meta-analytical skills in relation to research methods, activity and interpretation to creatively support their candidates’ diverse and contextualised

research projects.

‘there was a melding of the doctorate and practice but not in a simplistic way -in a way that elevates each.’

Carole Pemberton DProf Graduate Visiting Professor University of Belfast