Authors: Matthew W Kemp John P Newnham Elaine Chapman
Publish Date: 2011/07/12
Volume: 63, Issue: 5, Pages: 631-644
Abstract
The form and functions of doctoral education continue to be a subject of much debate by stakeholders internal and external to the university Notable concerns driving this debate derive from a seemingly discursive array of factors including increasing student numbers increased understanding of the economic value of doctoral graduates capitalisation of the academic market and a focus on allocating funding using ostensibly narrow arbitrary measures of ‘program success’ such as completion rates/time to completion all framed by a wider debate regarding precisely what constitutes valid knowledge in contemporary society Within the university the biomedical sciences are one area of scholarship undergoing rapid change in this respect One of the salient outcomes of these internal and external dialogues is the apparent transition of biomedical doctoral education towards a ‘training model’ that places increasing emphasis on rapid completion and the generation of ‘industry ready graduates’ a transition that is potentially occurring at the expense of the edifying and transformative aspects of biomedical doctoral education Focusing on the effects of academic capitalisation this paper draws on data from Australia and Europe to examine the drivers and potential effects of this shift on contemporary doctoral education in the biomedical sciences This paper acknowledges the potential benefit of contemporary developments whilst simultaneously concluding that by progressing too far towards a quantitatively assessed industrydriven training model we risk eliminating the intellectual and societal transforming aspects of biomedical doctoral education that make graduates increasingly valuable to our economy and just as importantly to our society as a whole
Keywords: