Opportunities and Challenges: European PhD Students Researching Citizenship
Keywords:
European doctoral education, researching citizenship, opportunities, challengesCopyright (c) 2016 REICE. Iberoamerican Journal on Quality Effectiveness and Educational Change
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Abstract
This article describes ongoing work from within Children’s Identity and Citizenship in Europe (CiCe) a European Thematic Network project (see Alistair Ross in this issue). The Research Student Strand of that network is made up of a group of colleagues (including the authors of this article) who are co-operating to provide guidance for PhD research students and their supervisors. We report here on a small-scale project designed to explore debates about the nature of work being undertaken by PhD students who have interests in citizenship. In particular we wished to discuss the extent to which these students as researchers exercise freedom or are constrained. Following some contextual remarks about PhD research in Europe and the work of CiCe we describe the small scale research project and suggest that there are significant and, perhaps, increasing constraints that affect the work of students as they seek to create new knowledge. In essence we ask how we may guarantee the achievement of valuable new work if in effect we impose more common practice in line with market reforms and heightened quality assurance mechanisms. While recognising the need for appropriate standards we suggest that we need to exercise caution if we are to avoid the PhD becoming a constrained and constraining training exercise for those who are to be accepted into existing academic debates and established academic communities.Downloads
References
Act LXIII of 1992 on the protection of personal data and the publicity of data of public interest (Hungary) Allan, G., y Skinner, C. (Ed) (1991). Handbook for Research Students in the Social Sciences. London: Falmer.
Allwood, C. M. (2003). The selection of the dissertation problem for the Ph.D. theses in psychology and social anthropology/ethonlogy from the graduate students’ perspective. Lund Psychological Reports, 1(4), pp. 1-25.
British Educational Research Association, BERA (2004). Revised ethical guidelines for educational research.
http://www.bera.ac.uk/publications/pdfs/ETHICA1.PDF?PHPSESSID=cf062eac9afb59c98fbd8107e4e7219c, retrieved May 18, 2007.
Cryer, P. (2000). The research student’s guide to success. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Delamont, S., Atkinson, P., y Parry, O. (2004). Supervising the Doctorate: A guide to success. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Fell, T. (2006). Training research supervisors. Presentation at UKCGE European Summer Conference New Dimensions for Doctoral Programmes in Europe: Training, Employability and the European Knowledge Agenda, Florence, Italy.
Floud, R. (2006). Defining doctoral programmes in Europe: the EUA role. Presentation at UKCGE European Summer Conference New Dimensions for Doctoral Programmes in Europe: Training, Employability and the European Knowledge Agenda, Florence, Italy.
Gilbert, R. (2004). A framework for evaluating the doctoral curriculum. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 29(3), pp. 299-309.
Golde, C., y Walker, G.E. (Eds.) (2007). Envisioning the future of doctoral education: preparing stewards of the discipline. San Francisco: Jossey Bass
Graves, N. y Varma, V. (Eds) (1997). Working for a Doctorate. London: Routledge. Hart, C. (2001). Doing a Literature Search. London: Sage.
Heater, D. (1999). What is citizenship? Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hill, S.C. (1995). The formation of the identity as a scientist. Science Studies, 8, pp. 53-72.
Ley Orgánica 1/1996, de 15 de enero, de Protección Jurídica del Menor, BOE de 17 de enero de 1996.
Ley Orgánica 15/1999, de 13 de diciembre, de Protección de Datos de Carácter Personal, BOE de 14 de diciembre de 1999.
Ley Orgánica 3/2007, de 22 de marzo, para la igualdad efectiva de mujeres y hombres, BOE de 23 de marzo de 2007.
Leonard, D., Becker, R. y Coate, K. (2005). To prove myself at the highest level: the benefits of doctoral study.
Higher Education Research and Development 24 (2), pp. 135-149.
MacLure, M. (2005). Clarity bordering on stupidity: where’s the quality in systematic review? Journal of Education Policy, 20 (4), pp. 393-416
Park, C. (2007). Redefining the doctorate (Discussion paper). The Higher Education Academy.
http://www.npc.org.uk/whatiswherecanifindhowdoi/Useful_Documents/Redefining_the_Doctorate.pdf, retrieved May 15, 2007.
Phillips, E. y Pugh, D. (2000). How to get a PhD (3rd edition). Buckingham: Open University Press.
Powell, S. (2006). Models for Doctorates in Europe. Presentation at UKCGE European Summer Conference New Dimensions for Doctoral Programmes in Europe: Training, Employability and the European Knowledge Agenda, Florence, Italy.
Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone: the collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Roberts, G. (2002). SET for Success. London: HM Treasury.
Stewart, D. W. (2006). Patterns and Developments in Doctoral Education in the United States: the innovator’s challenge. Presentation at UKCGE European Summer Conference New Dimensions for Doctoral Programmes in Europe: Training, Employability and the European Knowledge Agenda, Florence, Italy.
Tinkler, P.y Jackson, C. (2004). The Doctoral Examination Process. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Verba, S., Lehman Scholozman, K., y Brady, H.E. (1995). Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Ziman, J. (1995). What are the options? In J.Ziman (Ed.), In one mind: the collectivistaion of science (pp. 265- 310). Woodbury: American Institute of Physics Press.