26.03.2015 Views

the-changing-phd_final

the-changing-phd_final

the-changing-phd_final

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

These differences are not trivial because PhD graduates are often highly mobile and willing to move<br />

to different countries to take up relevant opportunities to work with <strong>the</strong> best people in <strong>the</strong>ir field,<br />

wherever <strong>the</strong>y might be. Moreover, recruitment processes increasingly seek talented people, no matter<br />

where <strong>the</strong>y might be in <strong>the</strong> world. There is intense competition to attract <strong>the</strong> best and qualifications<br />

provide a proxy measure for identifying <strong>the</strong> most creative and capable experts across countries.<br />

Uncertainty about <strong>the</strong> relative worth of similarly named qualifications, or about <strong>the</strong> set of personal<br />

competencies and attributes someone with <strong>the</strong> qualification should possess, can cause confusion<br />

and result in incorrect or inappropriate decisions. For this reason <strong>the</strong>re have been attempts to set<br />

international standards for what a PhD should mean.<br />

One example is <strong>the</strong> publication Standards for PhD Education in<br />

Biomedicine and Health Sciences in Europe, published in 2012. 28<br />

An international taskforce (appointed by <strong>the</strong> Organisation for PhD<br />

Education in Biomedicine and Health Sciences in <strong>the</strong> European<br />

System (ORPHEUS), The Association of Medical Schools in Europe<br />

and World Federation for Medical Education) prepared <strong>the</strong> document<br />

and <strong>the</strong> standards presented in <strong>the</strong> document are <strong>the</strong> result of<br />

extensive discussions taking place at ORPHEUS annual meetings since 2004, discussions at meetings of<br />

<strong>the</strong> Association of Medical Schools in Europe and many o<strong>the</strong>r societies, and at over 20 workshops and<br />

meetings held at universities and specialised organisations.<br />

The standards presented in <strong>the</strong> document cover <strong>the</strong> research environment, program outcomes,<br />

admission policy and criteria, <strong>the</strong> PhD training program, supervision, <strong>the</strong> PhD <strong>the</strong>sis, assessment<br />

and structure – matters relating to <strong>the</strong> organisation responsible for providing <strong>the</strong> PhD education.<br />

Basic standards described in <strong>the</strong> document are those which must be met from <strong>the</strong> outset; quality<br />

development standards are those which accord with <strong>the</strong> consensus about international best practice<br />

and which institutions should strive to meet. An example of <strong>the</strong> latter is that PhD programs should<br />

include time in ano<strong>the</strong>r laboratory, preferably in ano<strong>the</strong>r country, to promote internationalisation.<br />

O<strong>the</strong>r work looking at developing standards is more exploratory and offering guidance and<br />

suggestions. For example, <strong>the</strong> Accountable Research Environments for Doctoral Education (AREDE)<br />

Project funded through <strong>the</strong> EC Lifelong Learning Program has identified <strong>the</strong> set of questions that it may<br />

be useful to ask in relation to <strong>the</strong> quality of supervision. 29 These include matters such as whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong><br />

institution taking on doctoral students has policies relating to:<br />

• <strong>the</strong> maximum number of doctoral candidates per supervisor;<br />

• obligatory training for supervisors;<br />

• voluntary training for supervisors;<br />

• a requirement or recommendation for a minimum number of meetings with <strong>the</strong> supervisor(s);<br />

• a requirement or recommendation for supervisory teams;<br />

• written agreements between supervisors, supervisees and/or institution;<br />

• procedures for dealing with supervisor-supervisee conflicts?;<br />

• systematic feedback collected from doctoral candidates?; and<br />

• o<strong>the</strong>r, (specified) issues.<br />

Are PhDs from different<br />

institutions and different<br />

countries equivalent?<br />

It is difficult to underestimate <strong>the</strong> importance of supervision and <strong>the</strong> quality of supervision in creating<br />

28. http://www.orpheus-med.org/images/stories/documents/ORPHEUS-AMSE-WFME-standards-for-PhD-education.pdf<br />

29. http://www.eua.be/Libraries/Doctoral_week_2012/Thomas_Jorgensen_Plenary_II.sflb.ashx<br />

THE CHANGING PHD PAGE 13

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!