Error during command authentication.

Aspects of doctoral education have undergone substantial change in recent years, and we argue that as a result many PhDs programmes may be out of alignment.  We draw on the concept of ‘constructive alignment’ (Biggs, 1999) who proposed that learning outcomes should be well aligned with teaching and learning methods and the assessment regime. The learning outcomes for doctoral candidates have expanded considerably in recent years in response to the desire to graduate candidates with a wider skill set, well equipped for a range of jobs beyond academia. Corresponding to this, in some programmes, the teaching and learning activities have altered, so rather than just doing a supervised project, candidates now often take workshops and courses to gain a broader skill set.  However, the assessment has remained much the same, narrowly focussed on a written thesis and, in some cases, an oral defence. The rise of professional doctorates has allowed a rethinking of doctoral education. For example, the outcomes might include professional competency so the teaching methods involve professional practice and the assessment often uses a portfolio approach, allowing examiners to be assured candidates are meeting the various outcomes. Professional doctorate portfolios may include evidence of having met certain competencies (e.g. clinical), as well as leadership, project management, and communication in a range of modes etc.  But where does this leave doctoral education for traditional PhDs? In this session we will discuss this issue to envision what doctoral education could look like and how alignment might be achieved.

Register for this session: http://libcal.dartmouth.edu/event.php?id=825174