The doctoral experience in science: challenging the current orthodoxy

Abstract

Drawing on the literature this article identifies five characteristics that are frequently attributed to the doctoral student experience in the natural and physical sciences. These are then used to assist with the interpretation of qualitative data derived from a study in the earth sciences at a research‐intensive university in Australia. Case narrative is employed to synthesise three insider perspectives—a candidate and her co‐supervisors—as well as to capture the particularity of the contemporary doctoral enterprise. While similarities to the current orthodoxy can be identified in this study, it is the subtle variations and significant points of departure that reveal a higher level of complexity than is generally acknowledged.

Acknowledgements

The research on which this article is based was funded through the Australian Research Council’s Linkage Grant program. An earlier version of this article was presented at the Annual Conference of the British Educational Research Association, September 2007, London. The cooperation of the three informants involved in this case, together with comments received on a later version of the article, are also gratefully acknowledged.

Notes

1. Funded by the Australian Research Council, the aim of this Linkage Project was to develop detailed information from two related studies, in distinctive but complementary sites, about the contemporary doctoral experience. In addition to three chief investigators (Evans, Pearson and Macauley), three postgraduate student associations participated as industry partners. As one of two doctoral candidates engaged in the project my focus was on full‐time students while the focus of my counterpart was on part‐time students.

2. The case studies prepared as part of my research that can be classified in the domain of natural and physical science include Astronomy, Earth Sciences, Engineering, Human Sciences and Molecular Biology. Cases that can be grouped under the banner of social sciences and humanities include Anthropology, Business Management, Creative Arts, Cultural Studies and Regional Studies.

3. Stenhouse (1978) has distinguished between case data, case record and case study. In the development of this article, three edited and verified transcripts constitute case data; given its polyvocal nature the case narrative is a variation of the case record; and the combination of the narrative and interpretation constitutes the case study.

4. In order to maintain the confidentiality of informants, certain aspects of this narrative have been modified. For example, pseudonyms are used for the main characters, ‘Brenda’, ‘Jack’ and ‘David’. Also fictitious are ‘Brissenden’ and ‘Wentworth’ Universities; ‘Geol‐1’ and ‘Geol‐2’ Departments; and Aridland and Nobleland—countries in the Northern Hemisphere.

5. Conceived in 1990 as a government‐inspired initiative, Cooperative Research Centres make a significant contribution to producing ‘industry‐ready’ graduates via an integrated industry‐based work study scheme in Australia (Harman, 2004, p. 388).

6. This information was obtained after the interview by accessing the website of the agency identified by the informant.