Drivers and Interpretations of Doctoral Education Today: National Comparisons

In the last decade, doctoral education has undergone a sea change with several global trends increasingly apparent. Drivers of change include massification and professionalization of doctoral education and the introduction of quality assurance systems. The impact of these drivers, and the forms that...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inFrontline learning research Vol. 3; no. 3; pp. 5 - 22
Main Authors Andres, Lesley, Bengtsen, Søren S. E, del Pilar Gallego Castaño, Liliana, Crossouard, Barbara, Keefer, Jeffrey M, Pyhältö, Kirsi
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction 12.10.2015
EARLI
Subjects
Canada
Colombia
Comparative Education
Cross Cultural Studies
Denmark
doctoral education
Doctoral Programs
Educational Policy
Educational Practices
Educational Trends
Finland
Foreign Countries
Global Education
Guidelines
higher education policy
massification
professionalization
quality assurance
United Kingdom
United States
Denmark
Canada
Colombia
United Kingdom
United States
Finland
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:In the last decade, doctoral education has undergone a sea change with several global trends increasingly apparent. Drivers of change include massification and professionalization of doctoral education and the introduction of quality assurance systems. The impact of these drivers, and the forms that they take, however, are dependent on doctoral education within a given national context. This paper is frontline in that it contributes to the literature on doctoral education by examining the ways in which these global trends and drivers are being taken up in policies and practices by various countries. We do so by comparing recent changes in each of the following countries: Canada, Colombia, Denmark, Finland, the UK, and the USA. Each country case is based on national education policies, policy reports on doctoral education (e.g., OECD and EU policy texts), and related materials. We use the same global drivers to examine educational policies of each country. However, depending each national context, these drivers are framed in considerably different ways. This raises questions about (1) their comparability at a global level and (2) the universality of the PhD. Also we find that this global-local nexus reveals unresolved tensions within the national doctoral educational frameworks.
ISSN:2295-3159
2295-3159
DOI:10.14786/flr.v3i3.177