A New Partnership in Doctoral Education in Business Administration

2018 ◽  
pp. 1450-1468
Author(s):  
Florence Richman ◽  
Brian W. Sloboda

The existence of doctoral programs in business since the 1960s has advanced the knowledge of business both academically and practically that enabled a wide dissemination of research in management, finance, accounting, marketing, and leadership. However, pursuing a doctoral degree in business should support students pursuing a range of professional paths that includes positions in academia and outside of academia. That is, training in doctoral business training should encourage doctoral business students to develop new career paths that bridges business and the academy. Despite the selection of the traditional or the professional doctoral degree, the expectations of the graduates differ, and these expectations affect the administration of the doctoral program. The focus of this chapter is to examine the need for an evolution of doctoral education models in business administration to make the doctoral education more accessible while providing high quality teaching and research to business schools and making societal contributions.

Author(s):  
Florence Richman ◽  
Brian W. Sloboda

The existence of doctoral programs in business since the 1960s has advanced the knowledge of business both academically and practically that enabled a wide dissemination of research in management, finance, accounting, marketing, and leadership. However, pursuing a doctoral degree in business should support students pursuing a range of professional paths that includes positions in academia and outside of academia. That is, training in doctoral business training should encourage doctoral business students to develop new career paths that bridges business and the academy. Despite the selection of the traditional or the professional doctoral degree, the expectations of the graduates differ, and these expectations affect the administration of the doctoral program. The focus of this chapter is to examine the need for an evolution of doctoral education models in business administration to make the doctoral education more accessible while providing high quality teaching and research to business schools and making societal contributions.


10.28945/4665 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 685-704
Author(s):  
Patrícia Silva Santos ◽  
Maria Teresa Patrício

Aim/Purpose: This article examines the experience and practice of doctoral students by focusing on different dimensions of the PhD socialization process. It addresses the question of whether university collaborations with businesses influence the experience and practice of PhD students. Background: The study explores the academic culture in the PhD process through the analysis of the experiences and practices of doctoral students in two groups – those without business collaborations (academic trajectories) and those with business collaborations (hybrid trajectories). Academic trajectories are seen as traditional academic disciplinary based doctoral education, while hybrid trajectories cross boundaries collaborating with companies in the production of new knowledge. Methodology: The article uses a qualitative methodology based on extensive interviews and analysis of the curriculum vitae of fourteen Portuguese PhD students in three scientific domains (engineering and technology sciences, exact sciences, and social sciences). The doctoral program profiles were defined according to a survey applied to the directors of all doctoral programs in Portugal. Contribution: The study contributes to the reflection on the effects of collaboration with companies, in particular on the trajectories and experiences of doctoral students. It contributes to the understanding of the challenges associated with business collaborations. Findings: Some differences were found between academic and hybrid trajectories of doctoral students. Traditional products such as scientific articles are the main objective of the PhD student, but scientific productivity is influenced by trajectory and ultimately by career prospects. The business culture influences the trajectories of doctoral students with regard to outputs such as publishing that may act as a barrier to academic culture. PhD students with academic trajectories seem to value international experiences and mobility. Minor differences were found in the choice of topic and type of research activity, revealing that these dimensions are indicative of the scientific domain. Both hybrid and academic students indicate that perceptions of basic and applied research are changing with borders increasingly blurred. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is important for universities, department chairs, and PhD coordinators to be concerned with the organisation, structure, and success of doctoral programs. Therefore, it is useful to consider the experiences and trajectories of PhD students involved with the business sector and to monitor the relevance and results of such exchange. Key points of contact include identifying academic and business interests, cultures, and practices. A student-centred focus in university-business collaboration also can improve students’ well-being in this process. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should consider the processes of interaction and negotiation between academic and business sectors and actors. It is important to understand and analyse the trajectories and experiences of PhD students in doctoral programs and in university-company collaborations, since they are the central actors. Impact on Society: This analysis is relevant to societies where policy incentives encourage doctoral programs to collaborate with companies. The PhD is an important period of socialization and identity formation for researchers, and in this sense the experiences of students in the context of collaboration with companies should be analyzed, including its implications for the professional identity of researchers and, consequently, for the future of science inside and outside universities. Future Research: More empirical studies need to explore these processes and relationships, including different national contexts and different scientific fields. Other aspects of the academic and business trajectory should be studied, such as the decision to pursue a PhD or the focus on perceptions about the future career. Another point that deserves to be studied is whether a broader set of experiences increases the recognition and appreciation of the doctoral degree by employers inside and outside the academy.


2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandy R Maynard ◽  
Elizabeth M Labuzienski ◽  
Kristina S Lind ◽  
Andrew H Berglund ◽  
David L Albright

Summary Longstanding tensions exist around the purpose of social work doctoral programs, particularly around the extent to which doctoral program should prepare their students to teach. Indeed, social work programs in the United States have been criticized for failing to prepare graduates for teaching; however, it has been a number of years since doctoral curricula have been reviewed. The purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which US social work doctoral programs are training their students to teach by assessing the extent to which pedagogical training is explicitly integrated into doctoral curricula and examining the scope and content of required doctoral courses on teaching. Content analysis of social work doctoral program curricula ( n = 72) and teaching and learning related course syllabi ( n = 24) was conducted by two coders. Syllabi were coded and analyzed to produce a profile of course objectives, readings, teaching strategies, assessment methods, and course content. Findings Of the 72 PhD programs, 90% included a goal related to the preparation of their students for teaching; however, only 37 (51%) required a course on teaching. Course content, teaching, and assessment methods were found to vary across courses. Applications Training the next generation of social work practitioners to engage in effective social work practice is critical to the profession; however, the preparation of doctoral students to provide quality education to future social work practitioners seems to be largely neglected. Implications for doctoral education are discussed.


Author(s):  
Catherine Hiltz-Hymes ◽  
Susan Spicer ◽  
Elizabeth Hardy ◽  
Manuela Waddell ◽  
Sherry Hatcher

The focus of this study was to examine motivations and reactions in context of a midlife decision to seek a doctoral degree. Participants were 116 non-traditional age, men and women graduate students and recent alumni from one of three geographically distributed and blended delivery model doctoral programs. Demographic information was collected, including career history and goals, age, gender, and ethnicity. The mean and median ages were between 41 and 50. The research questionnaire featured narrative questions regarding “midcourse corrections,” any experienced trauma, and life satisfactions. Autobiographical material was also analyzed thematically, providing further illustrative examples of the midlife experiences in the course of negotiating a doctoral education. Both the narrative responses and autobiographies were analyzed using content analysis (Ryan & Bernard, 2000). Forty-four percent of the sample reported seeking the doctoral degree as part of a career change plan, while 56% sought to achieve an advanced degree in their current fields. Despite a high rate of reported regret, surprise, and even trauma, considerable life satisfaction (91%) was reported as the result of seeking doctoral education in midlife, by definition a “midcourse correction.”


Author(s):  
Elizabeth Lightfoot ◽  
Raiza Beltran

The Group for the Advancement of Doctoral Education in Social Work (GADE) is the social work organization committed to promoting rigor in North American social work and social welfare doctoral program. GADE plays a vital role in supporting social work doctoral programs in training future social work researchers, scholars, and educators. GADE develops and updates the aspirational guidelines for quality in PhD programs, provides support to doctoral programs and doctoral program directors in program administration, collaborates with other national and international social work organizations, and serves as the leading voice for doctoral education in the field. This article traces the history of GADE from the early beginnings of social work doctoral education in the early 20th century, through the establishment of GADE in the 1977 to promote the research doctorate, and ending with GADE’s activities today.


2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (8-9) ◽  
pp. 44-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. I. Bednyi ◽  
A. A. Mironos ◽  
N. V. Rybakov

The diversification of professional trajectories of academic degree holders is now becoming a global trend, and it prompts us to take a fresh look at the problem of evaluating the effectiveness of existing institutions for the training of academic and research personnel – the systems of doctoral education in Russia and abroad – in terms of the training of academic researchers and higher education teaching staff. Our two articles which share the scope of problems and have a single general concept, consecutively address the following issues: the collection and analysis of empirical data on training in doctoral programs; the dynamics of dissertation defense by graduates after the completion of doctoral programs; the actual timeframe of doctoral students’ advancement to their degree; the proportion of graduates who continue their scientific career after graduating from the doctoral program. The first article analyzes the organizational and methodological aspects of information and analytical support of institutions responsible for doctoral education in the countries of the European Union, the United States and Russia. It provides information about the organization of the systems for monitoring doctoral education and doctoral program graduates’ professional careers in foreign countries. The authors note the insufficient information support for the programs aiming to develop doctoral education in Russia, as well as the lack of empirical data necessary to assess the effectiveness of Russian doctoral education in the reproduction of human resources for the research and education sector. The results of the authors’ scientometric research concerning doctoral program graduates’ retention in the field of research and higher education are announced. The second article will present the details of the method and the results of these studies.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Austin Rominger

Doctoral education evolves amidst changing international social and educational pressures. New programs emerge, while current programs re-evaluate educational processes. This literary meta-analysis reviewed national and international literature in order to understand what issues are currently debated within higher education. Results indicate three main categories: Connection with Non-Doctoral Education Groups; Re-visioning the Doctoral Education Process; and Aligning Dissertation/Capstone Projects with Type of Doctoral Program. Within the categories, eleven themes also emerged. Implications of the study include emphasis for new and revised doctoral programs to remain aware of the increasing influence of industry, the main employment location for most doctoral graduates.


Author(s):  
Christian Falaster ◽  
Manuel Portugal Ferreira ◽  
Fernando Ribeiro Serra

Purpose Doctoral programs are primarily intended to train new professors and researchers to take positions requiring research competency. This paper aims to observe the scientific production of 734 Brazilian new PhDs in management and the possible link between the scientific output of the graduates and doctoral program rank. Design/methodology/approach Methodologically, the authors built a database collecting the journal publications of the first six years after doctoral degree of all PhDs in management graduated by Brazilian doctoral programs during the period of 1998-2008. The authors use cluster and descriptive analysis to explore PhD publication. Findings Results show a great disparity of productivity, where 10 per cent of all new PhDs account for most of the Brazilian research productivity, while most of the PhDs have a very low performance – and that the CAPES (the Brazilian institutional system) qualification of doctoral programs is not a good predictor of the performance of the future graduates. Results are discussed to understand this productivity gap among researchers in a context of a developing country where support institutions are working to improve quantity and quality of publication. Practical implications The results are useful for recruiters that need to decide between hiring new PhDs with low productivity graduated from high-ranked programs or new PhDs with high productivity from programs with more modest ranking. At least in part, the authors’ results question the real impact that the doctoral program’s prestige has on the performance of its graduates. Social implications There are implications for the future candidates to a management PhD program, for the Directors of these programs and for the institutional agencies that regulate and promote science and that establish the prevailing rules and norms that researchers and institutions follow. Originality/value The results are adamant in pointing out that there is a small group of highly productive new PhDs – that the authors called “stars”. Generally speaking, they may find these “star” new PhDs in several doctoral programs. They have also found that some of the new PhDs have a relatively higher level of international papers published, but not necessarily a larger volume of publications. Meanwhile, most PhDs present a very low level of performance. This has important contributions to the way they perceive the doctoral education in management, especially in Ibero-America, revealing insights about the quality of PhDs and PhD courses.


10.28945/4408 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 525-542
Author(s):  
Daniel W. Salter

Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this conceptual paper is to align key aspects of the heroic journey archetype with existing research and writing about doctoral students, thereby extending previous discussions of this topic. Background: While obtaining a doctoral degree is often described as a heroic journey, that assertion has not been fully explored from a depth psychology standpoint. Because myth is a form of pedagogy, key heroic archetypes (Pearson, 1986; 1991) provide a means to describe and understand the student experience. Methodology: This synthesis of the scholarship on doctoral education is framed within an alignment of the heroic journey monomyth described by Campbell (2008) to the progression of doctoral student experiences (Gardner, 2009). Various movie characters are used to illustrate the three primary stages of the heroic journey: the departure, initiation, and the return. Contribution: Consistent with other applications of archetypal psychology to education (e.g., Mayes, 2010), the paper presents a way for faculty and students to understand and reflect on the overall educational process. Findings: A more elaborated view of the doctoral journey is provided, including the sequence of challenges faced by students in the process and the types of Hero energies expressed at different points. Recommendations for Practitioners: The responsibilities of doctoral program faculty to create an experience that helps assure success and to mentor students appropriately are reinforced. Recommendation for Researchers: While not a research study, the discussion in this conceptual paper provides a broader context for use of the monomyth as an organizing framework for studies of doctoral education. Impact on Society: The commonly recognized 50% success rate of the best-and-brightest in higher education speaks to the size and scope of the challenge and the resulting stresses from taking this journey. Based on the apparent congruency of the monomyth to the process of doctoral education, continued use of this archetype to address these challenges would seem to be indicated.


10.28945/3529 ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 217-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen L MacLennan ◽  
Anthony A Pina ◽  
Kenneth A Moran ◽  
Patrick F Hafford

Is the Doctor of Business Administration (D.B.A) a viable degree option for those wishing a career in academe? The D.B.A. degree is often considered to be a professional degree, in-tended for business practitioners, while the Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degree is por-trayed as the degree for preparing college or university faculty. Conversely, many academic programs market their D.B.A. programs to future academicians. In this study, we investigat-ed whether the D.B.A. is, in fact, a viable faculty credential by gathering data from univer-sity catalogs and doctoral program websites and handbooks from 427 graduate business and management programs to analyze the terminal degrees held by 6159 faculty. The analysis indicated that 173 institutions (just over 40% of the total) employed 372 faculty whose ter-minal degree was the D.B.A. This constituted just over 6% of the total number of faculty. Additionally, the program and faculty qualification standards of the six regional accrediting agencies and the three programmatic accrediting agencies for business programs (AACSB, IACBE, and ACBSP) were analyzed. Results indicated that all these accrediting agencies treated the D.B.A. and Ph.D. in business identically and that the D.B.A. was universally considered to be a valid credential for teaching business at the university level. Suggestions for future research are also offered.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document