Reforming the Doctorate in the Social Sciences : a report on good practice

Background of INCASI Project H2020-MSCA-RISE-2015 GA 691004. WP1: CompilationThis report responds to the changing nature of doctoral education and the need to engage in a reflection andreform process, especially during times of economic downturn when public university funding comes under increasing threat. It is based on a project that was initiated by the European University Institute (EUI) in late 2015 to provide a neutral forum for discussion. A distinguished Task Force of eminent professors from across Europe carried out the mandate to identify 'good practice' in doctoral education. As general discussions on the doctorate tend to pay main attention to medicine and STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects, this project was to focus specifically on doctoral education in the social sciences (broadly understood). This focus also distinguishes the present project from much important work that has been done by the European University Association (EUA), the largest representative body of higher education at a European level which seeks to promote European policies, networking opportunities, and the visibility of European universities more generally. The compilation of good practice in the present report has no regulatory function, as it was assessed and collected by active academics and not policymakers; but it is expected to be of use as a first necessary mapping of good practice in doctoral education in social sciences

The Information Systems Academic Discipline in Australia

This book represents the second phase of a multi-method, multi-study of the ‘Information Systems Academic Discipline in Australia’. Drawing on Whitley’s Theory of Scientific Change, the study analysed the degree of ‘professionalisation’ of the Information Systems Discipline, the overarching research question being ‘To what extent is Information Systems a distinct and mature discipline in Australia?’ The book chapters are structured around three main sections: a) the context of the study; b) the state case studies; and c) Australia-wide evidence and analysis. The book is crafted to be accessible to IS and non-IS types both within and outside of Australia. It represents a ‘check point’; a snapshot at a point in time. As the first in a hoped for series of such snap-shots, it includes a brief history of IS in Australia, bringing us up to the time of this report. The editorial team comprises Guy Gable, architect and leader; Bob Smyth, project manager; Shirley Gregor, sponsor, host and co-theoretician; Roger Clarke, discipline memory; and Gail Ridley, theoretician. In phase two, the editors undertook to examine each component study, with a view to arriving at an Australia-wide perspective

The Information Systems Academic Discipline in Australia

This book represents the second phase of a multi-method, multi-study of the ‘Information Systems Academic Discipline in Australia’. Drawing on Whitley’s Theory of Scientific Change, the study analysed the degree of ‘professionalisation’ of the Information Systems Discipline, the overarching research question being ‘To what extent is Information Systems a distinct and mature discipline in Australia?’ The book chapters are structured around three main sections: a) the context of the study; b) the state case studies; and c) Australia-wide evidence and analysis. The book is crafted to be accessible to IS and non-IS types both within and outside of Australia. It represents a ‘check point’; a snapshot at a point in time. As the first in a hoped for series of such snap-shots, it includes a brief history of IS in Australia, bringing us up to the time of this report. The editorial team comprises Guy Gable, architect and leader; Bob Smyth, project manager; Shirley Gregor, sponsor, host and co-theoretician; Roger Clarke, discipline memory; and Gail Ridley, theoretician. In phase two, the editors undertook to examine each component study, with a view to arriving at an Australia-wide perspective

Arguing for PhD Coursework

The lone-scholar reputation of the traditional UK style PhD program is the result or a misunderstanding by some course designers. Getting a PhD is as much about making friends, forming a collegiate group, as it is about writing a book. The loneliness should be about being an independent thinker, not to being physically lonely. An increasing number of researchers are now reasserting Aristotle's calls for informed public argument to advance inquiry. Research is an argumentative process, requiring claims and a universal audience of independent thinkers to constructively question those claims. This paper argues for the establishment of semi-structured programs for PhD students, but importantly, one that undergrirds any program with an appreciation that research is an argumentative process, trying to develop knowledgeable audiences, and thus a social activity

Arguing for PhD Coursework

The lone-scholar reputation of the traditional UK style PhD program is the result or a misunderstanding by some course designers. Getting a PhD is as much about making friends, forming a collegiate group, as it is about writing a book. The loneliness should be about being an independent thinker, not to being physically lonely. An increasing number of researchers are now reasserting Aristotle's calls for informed public argument to advance inquiry. Research is an argumentative process, requiring claims and a universal audience of independent thinkers to constructively question those claims. This paper argues for the establishment of semi-structured programs for PhD students, but importantly, one that undergrirds any program with an appreciation that research is an argumentative process, trying to develop knowledgeable audiences, and thus a social activity

ARGUING FOR PhD COURSEWORK

The lone-scholar reputation of the traditional UK style PhD program is the result or a misunderstanding by some course designers. Getting a PhD is as much about making friends, forming a collegiate group, as it is about writing a book. The loneliness should be about being an independent thinker, not to being physically lonely. An increasing number of researchers are now reasserting Aristotle's calls for informed public argument to advance inquiry. Research is an argumentative process, requiring claims and a universal audience of independent thinkers to constructively question those claims. This paper argues for the establishment of semi-structured programs for PhD students, but importantly, one that undergrirds any program with an appreciation that research is an argumentative process, trying to develop knowledgeable audiences, and thus a social activity