Reframing doctoral education for diverse career trajectories: insights from multiple stakeholders in China

• In Event: Fostering global student engagement and success

Proposal

Introduction

In the past few decades, the global expansion of doctoral education, and the increasingly saturated academic market have resulted in constant debates regarding the nature of doctoral education (Smaglik, 2014; Sarrico, 2022). Meanwhile, there is a growing need for high-end human resources from non-academic sectors in the knowledge economy era (McAlpine, 2020). All these factors lead to increasingly diverse career trajectories for doctorates. More than half of PhD candidates indicate that they intend to pursue careers outside academia, including routes into public, private, and non-profit sectors (Nature, 2022).

Doctoral training has a consequential impact on student’s career development, setting the foundation of their professional paths through the acquisition of specialized knowledge and the development of self-identity. However, research has identified students’ dissatisfaction regarding their ineffective competence development (Austin, 2010). Moreover, what skills are expected from doctoral students ‘are often not articulated and taught in an explicit manner’ (Parker, 2012, p. 377), which negatively affects the quality of the advisor-advisee relationship due to a lack of explicit expectation from both sides (Golde & Dore, 2001). These controversies have prompted the advocacy of competence-based doctoral training, such as conceptual understanding, discipline-specific knowledge and skills, interpersonal skills, and professional attitudes and habits necessary for a successful transition into an academic career (Austin & McDaniels, 2006). However, there is an increasing need to explore more professional-oriented competencies to closely align with the needs of doctoral candidates and potential employers beyond academia, as well as design training programs accordingly with a controlled quality assurance process.

Existing literature mainly focuses on understanding the strengths and limitations of doctoral training from the perspectives of doctoral students (Gardner, 2008) or academics in given disciplines (Hermanowicz, 2016). The tensions, however, often stem from the discrepancies in their perceptions as doctoral education is undergoing the transformation from a traditional academia-oriented model to one that entails a complex relationship between academic training, competence development and employability. Moreover, disciplinary context plays an important role in one’s doctoral experience (Gardner, 2010), which should be taken into consideration when examining doctoral education, a field ‘still largely under-researched compared to other areas of research in higher education’ (Shin et al., 2018, p. 153). Hence, through 63 semi-structured interviews with doctoral students and academics in China, the study explores the following research questions: 1. How do doctoral students and academics conceptualize essential competencies for doctoral education? 2. In comparison, are there consensuses and discrepancies regarding their perceptions between different stakeholders? 3. How could we develop quality doctoral training to better prepare students for diverse career trajectories?

Theoretical and methodological considerations

In addressing the research questions, the study adopted the activity theory (Engestrom, 2000) to provide an analytical framework for exploring the relationship between individuals, their contexts, and the tools that are proactively utilized by individuals and confined by contexts. Here the subject is doctoral students, with the ultimate object of employment in diverse career paths. The latter is constituted of a range of sub-system objects, achieved through activities situated in one’s contextualized disciplinary and institutional context. Students’ doctoral experiences are therefore shaped by the tensions that exist within and between those sub-systems.

For data collection, interviews were conducted with 43 academics and 20 doctoral students to explore how they perceive competencies that are essential for doctoral candidates. They were also asked to reflect on factors that facilitate or impede the acquirement of those competencies as well as professional learning opportunities in their doctoral experiences.
Informants were selected from a top-tier research university in China through purposive sampling and snowball sampling. For PhD students, they were sampled by their disciplinary areas and expected career designations: Humanities and Social Sciences (9), Sciences and Engineering (11); Academia-route(3), Non-academia-route(9), Open to both(8). For academics, they were varied by disciplines: Humanities and Social Sciences (20), Sciences and Engineering (23); ages: below 40 (27), 41 or above (16); professional stages: professor (15); assistant/associate professor (28). They also have varying doctoral supervision experiences.

Each interviewee was given a consent sheet containing essential information about the study. Each interview lasted 45-75 minutes and was guided by a semi-structured interview protocol. All data were transcribed and imported into NVivo 11 for qualitative data analysis following the analytical ‘codes-categories-themes’ protocols (Saldana, 2009). Serious ethical considerations were given throughout the research, including informed consent, voluntary participation, and confidentiality.

Findings and discussion

The study identifies a range of competencies deemed essential for doctoral students to enhance their employability in and outside academia. A growing consensus between the two key types of stakeholders is that doctoral education should more closely align with the needs of the labor market and develop differentiated programs to increase students’ employability. A further comparison of their views shows that professional and generic competencies are identified as increasingly important by students in all disciplines, who often suffer from a shortage of institutionalized professional learning opportunities. It agrees with the existing studies (Cuthbert & Molla, 2015). Although academics in practice-based disciplines are more open-minded to the growing trend of doctorates’ diverse career paths, collectively they tend to continuously prioritize a ‘traditional’ set of skills related to scientific research and problem-solving, holding the entrenched belief that doctoral students are ‘stewards of the discipline’ (Golde & Walker, 2006) and those competencies have transferable values beyond the academic profession.

It reveals the potential discrepancies in the understanding of quality doctoral education between doctoral candidates and their supervisors, and the potential tensions between doctoral education, competence development, and employment, which might explain the often slow and reluctant change of doctoral training in universities despite the callings for transformation. The reframing of doctoral education is further complicated due to the non-linear nature of competence development, necessitating an inherent design within the education system, influenced by a complex interplay of individual, institutional, and cultural factors (Cardoso et al, 2022). The facilitation of consensus-building among stakeholders, the establishment of more diversified doctoral training programs, and a closer alignment of doctoral education with the economic and social sectors, are suggested strategies for reforms.

Author

• Shuangmiao Han, Zhejiang University