No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Quality Enhancement in Doctoral Education: Developing a More Public Process
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 September 2015
Abstract
Governments play an important role in providing an appropriate national framework and structure for the development of doctoral education. Nevertheless, ultimate responsibility for quality supervision processes lies with institutions, in particular with their departmental units and their policies and processes (DETYA, 1999c). This paper presents a case study of recent developments in the quality enhancement of doctoral supervision in the Macquarie Graduate School of Management (MGSM). In doing so it looks at three areas in particular: (1) the key role of infrastructure support, including the introduction of a code of practice in doctoral supervision; (2) the induction and acculturation processes; and (3) supervision quality, including the selection, development and training of supervisors. The aim of the developments is to make a recognized private process more public and transparent. MGSM currently enrolls a significant number of doctoral students and the enhancement of their doctoral experience is a key priority. The paper concludes by highlighting key issues for future development.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2001
References
REFERENCES
Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management (1999) Spring Newsletter http://www.gsm.mq.edu.au/anzam/newsletters/98spring/springweb98.htmlGoogle Scholar
Australian Research Council (1998) Management Research in Australia Comments on Discipline Research Strategies Canberra: Australian Research CouncilGoogle Scholar
Australian Vice Chancellor's Committee (1998) Code of Practice for Maintaining and Monitoring Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Degree July 1998Google Scholar
Becher, T, Kogan, M and Henkel, M (1994) Graduate Education in Britain London: Jessica KingsleyGoogle Scholar
Biglan, A (1973) ‘Relationships Between Subject Matter Characteristics and the Structure and Output of University Departments’ Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 57 No 3 pp 204–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, D and Esson, K (1999) ‘Creating Spaces: Postgraduate Voices in the Quality Agenda’ Paper presented at the 1999 HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 07, 1999Google Scholar
Chubb, I (2000) The Challenge of Making Ends Meet in Postgraduate Research Training’ in Kiley, M and Mullins, G (Eds) Quality in Postgraduate Research: Making Ends Meet Proceedings of the 2000 Quality in Postgraduate Research Conference, Adelaide 13-14 04 University of Adelaide pp 15–23Google Scholar
Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations (CAPA) (1998) A Strategy Guide to Postgraduate Supervision including the 1998 Model Code for the Conduct of Postgraduate Research and Statement of Minimum Resources Melbourne: CAPAGoogle Scholar
Clark, B (1984). ‘The Organizational Conception’ in Clark, BR (ed) Perspectives on Higher Education: Eight Disciplinary and Comparative Views Berkeley: University of California Press pp 106–131Google Scholar
Clegg, S (1997) ‘A Case Study of Accredited Training for Research Awards Supervisors Through Reflective Practice’ Higher Education Vol 34 pp 483–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, S and Gall, I (1998) ‘The Discourse of Research Degrees Supervision: A Case Study of Supervisor Training’ Higher Education Research and Development Vol 17 No 3 pp 323–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, S and Green, H (1995) ‘Training and Accreditation of Research Award Supervisors’ Journal of Graduate Education Vol 2 pp 3–7Google Scholar
Cullen, D, Pearson, M, Saha, L. and Spear, (1994) Establishing Effective PhD Supervision Canberra: AGPSGoogle Scholar
Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Higher Education Division (1998a) Research Training for the 21st Century Canberra: DETYAGoogle Scholar
Department of Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (1998b) Selected Higher Education Research Expenditure Statistics, 1996 Canberra: DETYA, 06Google Scholar
Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (1999a) New Knowledge, New Opportunities: A Discussion Paper on Higher Education Research and Research Training (Green Paper) Canberra: DETYAGoogle Scholar
Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (1999b) Knowledge and innovation: A Policy Statement on Research and Research Training (White Paper) Canberra: DETYAGoogle Scholar
Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (1999c) Quality Assured: A New Australian Quality Assurance Framework for University Education Seminar on the Quality Assurance Framework Canberra: DETYAGoogle Scholar
Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (1999d) Higher Education Report for the 2000-2002 Triennium Canberra: DETYAGoogle Scholar
Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (1999e) 1999: Higher Education Statistics Collections Canberra: DETYAGoogle Scholar
Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (1999f) 1999: Higher Education Statistics Collections - Students (Preliminary) Canberra: DETYAGoogle Scholar
Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DETYA) (1999g) Knowledge and Innovation Canberra: DETYAGoogle Scholar
Elliott, GR (1998) ‘Australian Management Research: Prospects for the New Millennium’ Journal of the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management Vol 4 No2 pp 18–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, T (2000) ‘Meeting What Ends? Challenges to Doctoral Education in Australia’ in Kiley, M and Mullins, G (Eds) Quality in Postgraduate Research: Making Ends Meet Proceedings of the 2000 Quality in Postgraduate Research Conference Adelaide 13-14 04. University of Adelaide pp 59–67Google Scholar
Frankland, M (1999) ‘The Master/apprentice Model for the Supervision of Postgraduate Research and a New Policy for Research Education Australian Universities' Review Vol 42 No 1 pp 8–11Google Scholar
Fraser, R and Mathews, A (1999) ‘An Evaluation of the Desirable Characteristics of the Supervisor’ Australian Universities Review Vol 42 No 1 pp 5–7Google Scholar
Gallagher, M (2000) ‘The Challenges Facing Higher Education Research Training’ in: Kiley, M and Mullins, G (Eds) Quality’ in Postgraduate Research: Making Ends Meet Proceedings of the 2000 Quality in Postgraduate Research Conference, Adelaide, 13-14 04 University of Adelaide pp 9–13Google Scholar
Golde, C (2000) ‘Should I Stay or Should I Go? Student Descriptions of the Doctoral Attrition Process’ The Review of Higher Education Vol 23 No 2 pp 199–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guthrie, JGray, R and Parker, L (2000) ‘Exploring the Changing Nature of the Higher Education Sector in Australia and the UK: The Commodification of Quality in Accounting and Management Researching’ Unpublished Working Paper MGSMGoogle Scholar
Johnston, S (1995) ‘Professional Development for Postgraduate Supervision’ Australian Universities Review Vol 38 No 2 pp 16–19Google Scholar
Kemp, D (1999) Quality Assured: A New Australian Quality Assurance Framework for University Education Seminar on the New Quality Assurance Framework Canberra: DETYA 10 12Google Scholar
Kiley, M (1996) ‘“How Do I Know How I Am Going?” Assessment in Posgraduate Research Degrees’ Paper presented at the National Conference on Quality in Postgraduate Education Adelaide, 04Google Scholar
Kiley, M and Liljegren, D (1999) ‘Discipline-related Models for a Structured Program at the Commencement of a PhD’ Teaching in Higher Education Vol 4 No 1 pp 61–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, J (2000) ‘Business Schools Lack the IT Factor’ Business Review Weekly 01 14 pp 62–65Google Scholar
Noble, KA (1994) Changing Doctoral Degrees: An International Perspective Buckingham: SRHE and Open University PressGoogle Scholar
Olsen, O, Guthrie, J and Humphrey, C (eds) (1998) Global Warning: Debating International Developments in New Public Financial Management Bergen: Cappelen Akademisk ForlagGoogle Scholar
Parker, L, Guthrie, J and Gray, R (1998) ‘Accounting and Management Research: passwords from the Gatekeeper’ Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal Vol 11 No 4 pp 371–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parry, S and Hayden, M (1994) Supervising Higher Degree Research Students Canberra: AGPSGoogle Scholar
Pearson, M (1999) ‘The Changing Environment for Doctoral Education in Australia: Implications for Quality Management, Improvement and Innovation Higher Education Research and Development Vol 18 No 3 pp 269–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, C and Zuber-Skerrit, O (1996) ‘Principles of Total Quality Management in Postgraduate Research Programs’ in Zuber-Skerrit, O (ed) Frameworks For Postgraduate Education Lismore NSW: Southern Cross University Press pp 178–194Google Scholar
Powles, M (1984) The Role of Postgraduates in Australian Research Melbourne: Council of Australian Postgraduate AssociationsGoogle Scholar
Research Office, Macquarie Graduate School of Management (1999a) Internal Memorandum: MGSM Completion Rates 1989-1998 Sydney: MGSMGoogle Scholar
Research Office, Macquarie Graduate School of Management (1999b) Internal Memorandum: Postgraduate Studies Review Sydney: MGSMGoogle Scholar
Research Office, Macquarie Graduate School of Management (2000) Code of Practice: Roles and Responsibilities Relating to Doctoral Programs Sydney: MGSMGoogle Scholar
Shannon, AG (1995) ‘Research Degree Supervision: ‘More Mentor than Master’ Australian Universities’ Review Vol 38 No 2 pp 12–15SGoogle Scholar
Trigwell, K, Shannon, T and Maurizi, R (1997) Rescarch-coursework Doctoral Programs in Australian Universities Canberra: DEETYAGoogle Scholar
West, R (Chair) (1998) Learning for Life: Final Report. Review of Higher Education Financing and Policy (West Report) Canberra: DETYAGoogle Scholar