An Overview and a Reflection of the Process and Product of Ph.D. Programs
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper aims to analyze the Ph.D. thesis process and outcomes through the perspectives of three key actors— upervisee, supervisor, and academic institution—by drawing upon the personal experiences of the authors. Reflections are based on the authors past experience as supervisees and firsthand involvement in supervision, program management, and committee participation, with the key findings highlighting the intricate dynamics of these roles in shaping Ph.D. education. The aspects discussed in this work are motivation, previous experience, the individual study plan, guidance, and contributions. The motivations for pursuing a Ph.D. were diverse, encompassing personal and professional goals, passion for research, career advancement, and societal contributions. Previous experience from all actors is recognized as a critical factor influencing the success of the Ph.D. journey, where considerations regarding academic background, research interests, and cultural factors may influence the time and the outcome. The individual study plan is recognized by the authors as a vital tool for modeling a Ph.D. student’s research and professional development trajectory. Guidance throughout the Ph.D. process is discussed in terms of frequent and consistent supervision, providing regular support and feedback, which gradually shifts towards fostering research independence. This approach emphasizes the importance of mentorship and effective communication among peers at every stage. Finally, contributions are discussed as a final phase of the Ph.D. journey, where students are expected to demonstrate their expertise and impact through publications, awards, patents, and other forms of recognition. Supervisors and institutions also play a crucial role in supporting and showcasing such contributions. This reflection paper shows the relations between these factors and the collective responsibility shared by the actors in producing a successful Ph.D. thesis and an independent researcher. We argue our reflections are a valuable resource for those involved in Ph.D. programs, offering insights into the various dimensions of the Ph.D. journey and highlighting the importance of collaboration and support among these critical actors.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
References
Michalski, D. S., & Fowler, G. (2016). Doctoral degrees in psychology: How are they different, or not so different? American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/psn/2016/01/doctoral-degrees
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2017). Education at a glance. OECD iLibrary. https://doi.org/10.1787/e13bef63-en
Swedish Higher Education Authority. (2022). An overview of Swedish higher education and research 2022. https://doi.org/10.53340/UKAP-6
Krauss, S., & Ismail, I. (2010). PhD students’ experiences of thesis supervision: ‘Management’ as acceptance and strategy for action. Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 18(1), 157–166.
Cattaneo, M., Horta, H., & Meoli, M. (2018). PhD funding as a determinant of PhD and career research performance. Studies in Higher Education, 43(3), 542–570.
Hoskins, C. M., & Goldberg, A. D. (2005). Doctoral student persistence in counselor education programs: Student–program match. Counselor Education and Supervision, 44(3), 175–188.
Spaulding, L. S., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. (2012). Hearing their voices: Factors doctoral candidates attribute to their persistence. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 199–219.
Brodin, E., Lindén, J., Sonesson, A., & Lindberg-Sand, Å. (2020). Doctoral supervision in theory and practice. Studentlitteratur AB.
Fedynich, L., Bain, S., & Knight, M. (2011). The successful graduate student: A review of the factors for success. Journal of Academic and Business Ethics, 3, 1–9.
Högskoleverket. (2012). Orsaker till att doktorander lämnar forskarutbildningen utan examen – en uppföljning av nybörjarna på forskarnivå läsåren 1999/2000 och 2000/01 (Rapport 2012:1 R).
Fokkens-Bruinsma, M., van Rooij, E., & Jansen, E. (2021). Factors that influence PhD candidates’ success: The importance of PhD project characteristics. Studies in Continuing Education, 43(1), 48–67.
Ndayambaje, I. (2018). Effect of supervision on timely completion of PhD program.
Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.