The PhD system under pressure: an examiner’s viewpoint

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to review the issues and challenges associated with examining PhD theses in the modern, rapidly changing academic world. The PhD degree has been described as the “pinnacle of academic qualifications”, but it is under threat in terms of the quality of supervision and the outcome of examinations. By bringing the issues into the open and discussing them, more can be done to safeguard the health of the modern doctorate.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper reviews the mainstream academic literature on doctoral degrees from the point of view of the origin and development of the contemporary PhD. Then it offers some reflections on supervision, examination, standards of judgement, benchmarking of results and different routes to the doctorate. The pressures upon the modern university are related to issues encountered in examining doctoral theses.

Findings

In modern neo-liberal environments, the PhD degree is under pressure in terms of its quality and rigour. This paper offers a simple conceptual model of the challenges involved in ensuring the quality of PhD examinations and their outcomes. Priorities for the various stakeholders are suggested to ensure that PhD research continues to set the “gold standard” for excellence.

Practical implications

Recognising and confronting the problems with the modern PhD and how it is examined will help guarantee the quality of the degree. A more open debate on the pressures under which supervision and examinations are conducted will help establish rules or guidelines for conduct.

Originality/value

There are remarkably few evaluations of the PhD examination process, which in recent years has become increasingly problematic. The authors adopt a comprehensive approach to the issues and relate them to the societal context in which universities are developing.

Citation

Alexander, D.E. and Davis, I.R. (2019), "The PhD system under pressure: an examiner’s viewpoint", Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 2-12. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-04-2018-0033