Imagining an interdisciplinary doctoral pedagogy

There has been a great deal of discussion about the need for interdisciplinary, applied research to service the needs of the knowledge economy and to solve the broader complex theoretical problems of the twenty-first century. This is known as 'Mode 2' knowledge production. Yet, university research higher degree programs continue to be largely disciplinary-based. While there has been a rise in the number of research students working on industry-related, applied projects, very few research students gain exposure to interdisciplinary research processes. This paper explores several examples of interdisciplinary doctoral programs based in North America and Australia and seeks to draw upon examples of undergraduate interdisciplinary learning and epistemology. In reviewing this theoretical work and a number of strategies implemented at an Australian university, the paper begins to imagine an interdisciplinary doctoral pedagogy.

The risky business of doctoral management

Universities are under no less pressure to adopt risk management strategies than other public and private organisations. The risk management of doctoral education is a particularly important issue given that a doctorate is the highest academic qualification a university offers and stakes are high in terms of assuring its quality. However, intense risk management can interfere with the intellectual and pedagogical work which are essentially part of doctoral education. This paper seeks to understand how the culture of risk meets the culture of doctoral education and with what effect. The authors draw on sociological understandings of risk in the work of Anthony Giddens (2002) and Ulrich Beck (1992), the anthropological focus on liminality in the work of Mary Douglas (1990), and the psychological theorising of human error in the work of James Reason (1990). The paper concludes that risk consciousness brings its own risks—in particular, the potential transformation of a culture based on intellect into a culture based on compliance.

Life with sheepdogs:alternative metaphorical models of the doctoral research process revisited

The doctoral research process is the entry path for the academic profession. Traditionally it is explained by reference to another professional entry path, the industrial apprenticeship. Revisiting a paper and discussion originally held at the Marketing Education Group conference in 1991, we explore the implications and limitations of this metaphorical model, suggest alternatives and consider the interaction between student characteristics and supervisory approach. Through this process we offer marketing academics a vast range of unflattering metaphors to employ in describing themselves, their students, their supervisors and their colleagues.

Review of doctoral research in second-language teaching and learning in Australia (2003–2006)

This article reviews recent doctoral research in Australian universities in the area of language teaching and learning. Doctoral work in three main areas of research concentration is described: language teaching, language learning, and writing. The authors whose studies are reviewed are graduates of the Australian National University, Griffith University, Macquarie University, the University of Technology, Sydney, the University of Sydney, the University of New South Wales, the University of Melbourne, Monash University, La Trobe University, Deakin University and Murdoch University.

Doctoral work in translation studies as an interdisciplinary mutual learning process:how a translator, teacher educator and linguistic typologist worked together

The focus of this paper is on the doctoral research training experienced by one of the authors and the ways in which the diverse linguistic and disciplinary perspectives of her two supervisors (co-authors of this paper) mediated the completion of her study. The doctoral candidate is a professional translator/interpreter and translation teacher. The paper describes why and how she identified her research area and then focused on the major research questions in collaboration with her two supervisors, who brought their differing perspectives from the field of linguistics to this translation research, even though they are not translators by profession or disciplinary background and do not speak Korean. In addition, the discussion considers the focus, purpose and theoretical orientation of the research itself (which addressed questions of readability in translated English-Korean texts through detailed analysis of a corpus and implications for professional translator training) as well as the supervisory and conceptual processes and practices involved. The authors contend that doctoral research of this kind can be seen as a mutual learning process and that inter-disciplinary research can make a contribution not only to the development of rigorous research in the field of translation studies but also to the other disciplinary fields involved.

Master and apprentice or difference and complementarity? Local government practioners, doctoral studies and co-produced research

In their search for innovative policy solutions to complex social problematics, local governance practitioners will look to synergising specific policy guidance from government departments with conceptual scientific research outputs. UK academics are also now expected to emphasise the relevance of their research and to increase its utilisation by practitioners. Away from utilitarian pressures, academics from applied discipline, such as Public Administration and Local Government Studies are increasingly drawn to the benefits of co-produced research. Despite the pressure for more co-research there are few opportunities for practitioners and academics to nurture relationships that would support close collaboration. This paper looks at the opportunity for closer collaboration when practitioners undertake research degrees, in order to enhance their cognitive skills and develop greater scientific knowledge of particular policy domains. If this route to closer collaboration is to succeed, it will require academics to think differently about their relationship with practitioner-students.

Work placements in doctoral research training in the humanities:eight cases from translation studies

Research cooperation between academic and nonacademic institutions tends not to concern the humanities, where mutual financial rewards are mostly not in evidence. The study of eight nonacademic placements of doctoral researchers working on interlingual translation nevertheless indicates some degree of success. It is found that the placements lead to ongoing cooperation when the following conditions are met: 1) the nature of the placement is understood and relations of trust are established; 2) mutual benefits are envisaged; and 3) there are prior arrangements for receiving visiting researchers. A placement can be successful even when one of the last two factors is missing. Further, the measure of success for placements in the humanities should concern social and symbolic benefits, in addition to financial profits.

Women graduates' academic resilience and their personal strategies for doctoral success

This study explores women's perceptions of what made them successful doctoral students and what strategies they used to cope and succeed in the academic environment of an off-campus program in South Florida. The study's theoretical framework was built on Bandura's (1997) theory regarding ways self-efficacy influences choices made and effort expended; and Gilligan (1982), Belenky et al. (1986) and other feminists' theories concerning how women learn. ^ The study included data obtained from individual, semi-structured interviews with 10 participants, documents spanning the 10 years of the program and interviews with founding faculty members. For each, academic resilience was built on (a) viewing that working on the degree was personally fulfilling; (b) believing she possessed a strong sense of academic confidence; (c) priding herself on having self discipline; (d) seeing herself as a role model; and (e) being motivated by a personal or career goal. ^ Strategies the participants used to overcome roadblocks included (a) time management—finding time for personal, professional, and academic duties; (b) focus—making the dissertation a priority; (c) collaboration—utilizing both personal and programmatic assistance; (d) and advocacy—acting on their individual needs. ^ Results of the study indicated that the program at the satellite campus provided structural resources that satisfied basic needs and strengthened the students' self-efficacy. This helped them become successful doctoral graduates. The women had personal fortitude and strong self-efficacy to complete the doctoral journey. They understood that their success was primarily based on the support they received from people: families, peers, and their major professors. Participants suggested that successful women students ascertain whether they have time and resources to devote to an extended study, an understanding family, and the resilience to overcome roadblocks along the way. ^

“Like a Family”: Perspectives of Doctoral Students from Traditionally Under-represented Populations on Cohorts

This study examined the experiences of special education doctoral students from minority populations and investigated the perceptions of students in the cohort experience. Three themes emerged: The cohort was a (a) family for bonding and support, (b) motivator for academic success and retention, and an (c) inhibitor of educational growth.

Doctoral Students: Online, On Time, and On to Graduation

Increased numbers of students are enrolling in online doctoral programs. Although students enroll for a variety of reasons, many do not persist to the dissertation phase. The results of this quantitative study can guide the development of retention strategies for students who are at risk of academic failure in doctoral programs.

Doctoral Supervisor: Coach, Mentor or Master? Developing an Alternative Paradigm for Doctoral Supervision

This working paper is the second in a series of working papers presenting the on-going findings from a longitudinal research project grounded in exploring the experience of doctoral supervision and developing practice. In the first paper and phase one of this research study, Cook, Nichol and Loon (2014) explored the existing context for doctoral supervision and, drawing from literature on the problematic nature of doctoral supervision and coaching and mentoring, considered the value of drawing on coaching and mentoring models in formulating alternative paradigms for doctoral supervision. This paper reports the findings of phase one, a mixed methods study of experiences of doctoral supervision with supervisors and students in one UK university business school, from which the Collaborative Action Doctoral Supervision conceptual model emerged. The paper also introduces phase two, a collaborative action research study with doctoral supervisors and students who are applying, reflecting on and developing further this doctoral supervision model. We are aiming to answer the question of whether the use of coaching and mentoring in doctoral supervision enables the transfer and sustainability of learning from the doctoral supervision session to outside the experience and improves the quality. Is the doctoral supervisor coach, mentor or master? Key words Doctoral supervision, coaching, mentoring, collaborative action research.