It is possible in many universities to complete a doctorate by publications. This usually entails writing a number of academic papers plus tying them together with maybe 80 pages of dicussion and explanation. It seems the preferred method in countries such as Finland for example. In fact I have examined a couple from there and thought they were well constructed.
The problem in many universities is that there are few precise guidelines for the standard and number of publications expected. When left without strong, clear guidelines it can often come down to the wishes of individuals.
To me, there seems to be two models commonly put forward based upon different rationales. One is the validation model where the publications are expected to be very high quality and serve as a form of validation for the quality of the research conducted over time. Because the expectation is of a very high standard, such as A and A+ papers, it is usually reserved for academics who have not completed a doctorate but have conducted research and written papers. For the examiner of such theses it seems a relatively simple task since the work has been heavily peer reviewed.
The second model is more student centered. It takes the view that the person taking a doctorate is going to get into the research and publishing game when they have completed and therefore publishing during their doctorate and making use of these papers for the examination is the way to go. So the emphasis is on skills development and writing papers as a way of developing the key skills. In this model, good papers are needed but it is unrealistic to expect A and A+ from every student, rather a conference paper (peer reviewed) in the first year, and say 3 journal papers of perhaps C, B and perhaps A would be fine. The examiner has to read the papers as well as the thesis text and come to some conclusion about their quality as a whole.
If academics are confused about the model they are adopting then they will be torn in terms of the expectations of a doctorate or phd by publishing and confuse the student too.
www.CompletePhD.com
The problem in many universities is that there are few precise guidelines for the standard and number of publications expected. When left without strong, clear guidelines it can often come down to the wishes of individuals.
To me, there seems to be two models commonly put forward based upon different rationales. One is the validation model where the publications are expected to be very high quality and serve as a form of validation for the quality of the research conducted over time. Because the expectation is of a very high standard, such as A and A+ papers, it is usually reserved for academics who have not completed a doctorate but have conducted research and written papers. For the examiner of such theses it seems a relatively simple task since the work has been heavily peer reviewed.
The second model is more student centered. It takes the view that the person taking a doctorate is going to get into the research and publishing game when they have completed and therefore publishing during their doctorate and making use of these papers for the examination is the way to go. So the emphasis is on skills development and writing papers as a way of developing the key skills. In this model, good papers are needed but it is unrealistic to expect A and A+ from every student, rather a conference paper (peer reviewed) in the first year, and say 3 journal papers of perhaps C, B and perhaps A would be fine. The examiner has to read the papers as well as the thesis text and come to some conclusion about their quality as a whole.
If academics are confused about the model they are adopting then they will be torn in terms of the expectations of a doctorate or phd by publishing and confuse the student too.
www.CompletePhD.com
Posts
