Defining Doctorateness: A Concept Analysis

Abstract

Aim/Purpose: This study analyses the concept of doctorateness and its defining characteristics and gives a definition for it by examining the various ways it is used in doctoral education literature. Background: The term ‘doctorateness’ is an immature unclarified concept referred to as a common quality for all doctoral awards. With the emergence of different types of doctoral studies worldwide, a clear definition for this concept is a requirement. Defining doctorateness can result in major implications for research and the practice of doctoral education, as determining attributes of doctorateness will pose serious expectations regarding standard setting for the process and outcome of doctoral programs and requirements of doctoral students. Methodology: In this study, Walker and Avant’s eight step method of concept analysis is used. The method is a systematic approach frequently used to analyze relatively new concepts. Contribution: The current study moves beyond the earlier studies by isolating defining attributes of the concept and giving a clear conceptual definition for doctorateness. Findings: Five defining attribute of doctorateness refined from literature include independent scholar, developmental and transformative apprenticeship process, original conceptual contribution/scholarship, highest academic degree, and stewardship of the discipline. Based on the defining attributes a definition is formulated for the concept of doctorateness. In addition to giving a definition a conceptual model consisting of five conceptual areas of purpose, process, product, prerequisite, and impact according to the usage of concept in the literature is also presented. Recommendations for Practitioners: By using the conceptual model and defining attributes presented in this study practitioners and professionals in doctoral education can study the effective design for doctoral programs and utilize the definition as a basis for evidencing doctoral awards. Future Research: Defining attributes can also contribute to psychometric researches related to tool development and constructing tools with explicit criteria for doctorate judgment.

An Archetypal Analysis of Doctoral Education as a Heroic Journey

“…The research on doctoral student success and attrition has identified several potential sources for this disconnect (e.g., Ehrenberg, Jakubson, Groen, So, & Price, 2007;Golde, 1998;Rockinson-Szapkiw, Spaulding, & Spaulding, 2016). Rather than instrumental needs such as finances and the environmental challenges of family and work however, the focus of this conceptual paper is on the internal struggles of becoming a person who holds a doctorate (Gardner, 2009;Yazdani & Shokooh, 2018).…”

“…Further, the journey is not a solo adventure nor some manner of academic vision quest, but rather also produces an outcome for the discipline and is taken with others who participate in the transformation, including peers and professors (Grant, Hackney, & Edgar, 2014;Green, 2007). In these ways, when applied to the doctoral experience, this metaphorical journey is akin to the archetypal heroic journey or adventure, where the student must pass various tests and cross over various thresholds on the road to "doctorateness" (Trafford & Leshem, 2009;Yazdani & Shokooh, 2018).…”

“…The heroic journey, as discussed in more detail below, is a complete narrative that involves a quest of some type where the actual "prize" is the transformation of the traveler. In other words, doctoral students are not on a journey to become "smarter smart people", but rather are seeking to become independent of the academic processes that have produced them in order to contribute to the discipline that they have embraced (Gardner, 2008;Lovitts, 2008;McAlpine & Lucas, 2011;Yazdani & Shokooh, 2018). The journey is heroic in that it is noble and above the mundane, but neither easy nor assured.…”

A Theoretical Perspective on How Doctoral Supervisors Develop Supervision Skills

“…By and large, most supervisors rely on their experience of being supervised during their doctoral studies (Askew et al, 2016;Bastalish, 2017). There is a need to offer supporting evidence that the skills they possess qualify them to supervise doctoral students and the overall doctorateness process in the contemporary world (Trafford & Leshem, 2011;Yazdani & Shokooh, 2018). Yazdani and Shokooh (2018) define doctorateness as a process which enables an individual to become an independent scholar through undergoing a developmental and transformative apprenticeship under a supervisor in order to realize the highest level of degree.…”

“…There is a need to offer supporting evidence that the skills they possess qualify them to supervise doctoral students and the overall doctorateness process in the contemporary world (Trafford & Leshem, 2011;Yazdani & Shokooh, 2018). Yazdani and Shokooh (2018) define doctorateness as a process which enables an individual to become an independent scholar through undergoing a developmental and transformative apprenticeship under a supervisor in order to realize the highest level of degree. As an output, the individual contributes original knowledge and demonstrates the stewardship of his or her discipline across various dimensions (Trafford & Leshem, 2011, p. 38).…”