Premium
A National Profile of Research Degree Awards: Innovation, Clarity and Coherence
Author(s) -
Bourner Tom,
Bowqden Rachel,
Laing Stuart
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
higher education quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.976
H-Index - 42
eISSN - 1468-2273
pISSN - 0951-5224
DOI - 10.1111/1468-2273.00130
Subject(s) - clarity , government (linguistics) , coherence (philosophical gambling strategy) , variety (cybernetics) , public relations , political science , sociology , management , computer science , economics , philosophy , biochemistry , chemistry , linguistics , physics , quantum mechanics , artificial intelligence
In 1993 the Government expressed its concern that:‘the traditional PhD is not well‐matched to the needs of careers outside research in academia or an industrial research laboratory’ (OST, 1993, p. 3). This government concern appeared to encourage innovation in developing the doctorate to meet a wider range of career needs. By contrast, in 1996, the Harris Committee Report recommended that standardisation of the forms and nomenclature of postgraduate courses, including research degree courses, ‘could bring national coherence and hence clarity in an international marketplace’ (Harris, 1996, p. 38). In this article we have developed a national profile of research degree awards using data from individual universities. This profile allows us to explore empirically issues of variety and standardisation in research degrees and seek ways of reconciling the need for innovation with the need to protect coherence and clarity.