This item is non-discoverable
Quality assuring the professional doctorate Challenging traditional precepts through the supervisors’/advisers’ lens
Date
2019-05-03
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Emerald insight
Abstract
Purpose– This paper aims to critically examine the quality of professional doctorates (PDs) from the
perspective of programme supervisors in terms of how quality assurance provisions have to meet their
expectations.
Design/methodology/approach– The study employed an interpretative approach, using semi
structured interviews and online semi-structured questionnaire to generate data from 25 programme
supervisors across universities in the UK. Data analysis and interpretation were carried out using the
interactive data analysis approach (Miles and Huberman, 1994), the “bottom–up” approach to data
analysis (Creswell, 2012) and the interpretative strategy recommended by Mason (2002). Four themes
emerged from the data that encapsulated programme advisors’ perspectives: characteristics of
supervisors; opportunities in institutional quality assurance provision; challenges in quality assurance
process for PDs; and supervisors’ views on howquality assurance in PDcan be enhanced.
Findings– Quality assurance provisions have not adequately provided for the unique characteristics of
PDs owing to a number of issues including lack of clarity on the philosophy and focus of PDs and
conflicting perspectives among PD supervisors relating to what should ideally constitute a quality
assurance process for PDs. This paper argues that to develop a relevant and robust quality assurance
provision for PDs, it would be essential to ensure that the PD fundamental philosophy and focus are
coherently explained. In addition, it is crucial to ensure that quality assurance provisions cover not only
the academic rigor of higher level learning but also the value and potential impact of outcomes on practice
and the professions. The paper also highlights a list of useful suggestions from supervisors on how to
enhance quality assurance.
Research limitations/implications– The research identifies a number of issues confronting quality
assurance in PDs and the need for academics and policymakers to work together to deal with these to
achievethefullvalueinPDs.Astheresearchwasbasedonasampleof25supervisorsinaconference, it
would be difficult and unsustainable to generalise. Hence, further research using large sample sizes of
supervisors and other stakeholders based on whole programmes would be useful to achieve a sustained
understanding of how quality assurance provisions of PDs have to meet expectations of the professions
andprofessional contexts.
Practical implications– To get the practical value and benefits of PDs, all stakeholders (academics,
policymakers and professionals) would need to work together to ensure that appropriate quality assurance
processes are developed to reflecttheunique nature of the programmes.
Originality/value– The paper provides a critical perspective to the current debate on quality assuring
PDs from the perspective of PD supervisors who have generally been left out. It highlights issues related to
quality assuring PDs, the misalignment between quality assurance provisions and the philosophy and
expectations of PDs, and suggests ways through which these can be appropriately addressed to enhance
quality assurance in PDs. The main contribution from this research is that it brings to the fore what
supervisors, who are a part of the major players in the PD process, think about the current state of quality
assurance and what canbedonetomakeitmoreeffective.
Description
Keywords
Quality assurance, Supervisors, Professional doctorte, Research degree
Citation
Abukari, A. and David, S. (2019) “Quality Assuring the Professional Doctorate: Challenging Traditional Precepts through the Supervisors’/Advisers’ Lens,” Quality Assurance in Education: An International Perspective, 27(3), pp. 304–319.