View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

What Is a Doctorate? Changing Meanings and Practices in Communication Sciences in Switzerland

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: What Is a Doctorate? Changing Meanings and Practices in Communication Sciences in Switzerland
Language: English
Authors: Probst, Carole, Lepori, Benedetto
Source: European Journal of Education. Dec 2008 43(4):477-494.
Availability: Blackwell Publishing. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8599; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: customerservices@blackwellpublishing.com; Web site: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/jnl_default.asp
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 18
Publication Date: 2008
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Evaluative
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Foreign Countries, Doctoral Programs, Graduate Study, Graduate Students, Employment Level, Academic Education, Professional Education, Communication (Thought Transfer), Organization, Educational Change
Geographic Terms: Switzerland
DOI: 10.1111/j.1465-3435.2008.00368.x
ISSN: 0141-8211
Abstract: In this article, we analyse the organisation of the doctorate in communication sciences in the context of the overall discussion on the changing organisation of doctoral studies in Switzerland. We focus on three tensions which appear central for the field, namely the employment status of doctoral students, the importance of academic vs. professional training and, finally, the organisation of doctoral studies and the possibilities and difficulties in the introduction of a graduate school model. Our results show that in this field the doctorate has to be considered more as an orientation period, where professional and academic training coexist and where there is an extremely high diversity of objectives, activities and organisation forms, both between universities and individual students. This model is surprisingly well adapted to the situation of a field characterised by high internal diversity, rather low research intensity and strong orientation to application. Reforms like the introduction of graduate schools or the reinforcement of academic training have thus to be implemented with some care.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 70
Entry Date: 2008
Accession Number: EJ818745
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGwPQr5bnZ66Ge-G4zNFuzNAAAA4TCB3gYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHQMIHNAgEAMIHHBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDCNkQdqxqc9uY-InXgIBEICBmWvqwswSwj-EtlbKPtDpIHByKoG3Dny_ADM4yY-0ZCh8ZzSsl-eUK8jrRb0T78gQMIjhnK7xo-taJ4vmFCKDx1GXto7kg1nFHMasMY-zxXDg_hOjiW_7LI8mvJWom-7Xr4_tDba18blXEipCWgdYwUac3tkFNOs07zZ0W3MKNv-6GAaEFODjUojcTD0BAl9JRlXzNIRNpDw_wg==
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0035324039;eje01dec.08;2019May30.13:11;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0035324039-1">What is a Doctorate? Changing Meanings and Practices in Communication Sciences in Switzerland. </title> <p>In this article, we analyse the organisation of the doctorate in communication sciences in the context of the overall discussion on the changing organisation of doctoral studies in Switzerland. We focus on three tensions which appear central for the field, namely the employment status of doctoral students, the importance of academic vs. professional training and, finally, the organisation of doctoral studies and the possibilities and difficulties in the introduction of a graduate school model. Our results show that in this field the doctorate has to be considered more as an orientation period, where professional and academic training coexist and where there is an extremely high diversity of objectives, activities and organisation forms, both between universities and individual students. This model is surprisingly well adapted to the situation of a field characterised by high internal diversity, rather low research intensity and strong orientation to application. Reforms like the introduction of graduate schools or the reinforcement of academic training have thus to be implemented with some care.</p> <p>The answer to the question of the title of this article may seem obvious. Most academics and scholars in the field would agree that a doctorate is a process of socialisation and learning‐by‐doing in the academic community, where students learn how to carry out original research. Of course, the literature in the field has widely acknowledged the differences between disciplines in the organisation of academic life ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref2">5</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref3">15</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref4">50</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref5">68</reflink>]), as well as between national systems of higher education ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref6">6</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref7">15</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref8">33</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref9">36</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref10">55</reflink>]), but basically this meaning is seen as largely common and thus can be considered as being the 'core' of this concept.</p> <p>However, most scholars in the field agree that both the conception and the practices of the doctorate have increasingly been put under pressure by a series of deep changes both in the higher education system and in its wider socio‐economic landscape ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref11">25</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref12">33</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref13">35</reflink>]). These include the expansion of higher education at the doctoral level, also implying that access to the academic profession is now mostly controlled at the post‐doc level and that the doctorate is therefore no more than a basic <emph>sine qua non</emph> qualification for research; the increasing demand for a highly skilled workforce with research training and experience, meaning that the doctorate is also seen as an educational output towards the private economy and society (with different requirements concerning skills); and finally, a stronger emphasis on the applied nature of research and on the need for integration with society and economy, meaning that the academic conception of the doctorate as oriented towards basic knowledge is put under scrutiny, especially by political and economic circles.</p> <p>Faced with these conflicting requirements, which reflect different objectives and functions of higher education, one could argue that the best policy receipt has to be sought in differentiating the research training programmes, for example between academic and professional doctorates ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref14">12</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref15">35</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref16">60</reflink>]), and in defining more clearly the objectives, contents and access rules, to achieve selectivity, whilst granting wider access to advanced research training. We do not deny that this approach is useful, but in this article we argue that it has to be moderated with a complementary approach based on promoting the multifunctionality of doctoral education and the differentiation between students inside the same programme. As we shall see, our case study, namely Swiss communication sciences, is a clear example of such a model, and for this reason it bears some useful lessons on how to approach the organisation of the doctorate at least in the social sciences and humanities, which have a different social and cognitive structure than most hard sciences and, in particular, are characterised by a stronger internal diversity.</p> <p>In the first section, we review today's debate around the doctorate and identify some open issues to be discussed. In section two, we introduce the field of Swiss communication sciences, as well as some basic data on the organisation of the doctorate in this country and on the on‐going debate regarding this topic. In the following sections we examine three main issues in our case study, namely the employment status of doctoral students, the tension of academic vs. professional training and the organisation of doctoral studies. We conclude by summarising the main feature of today's doctorate model in Swiss communication sciences, its advantages and drawbacks and, finally, the policy implications of the whole discussion.</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-2">The Doctorate between Tradition and Change</hd> <p>The doctoral degree and the process leading to it have a long history ([<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref17">52</reflink>]) and differ considerably between countries ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref18">16</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref19">36</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref20">37</reflink>]). Initially, the doctoral degree was seen as a proof of one's ability to teach ([<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref21">43</reflink>]). With the Humboldtian idea of the university as the place where research and teaching (and therefore also study, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref22">16</reflink>]) are unified, training by doing research has emerged, first as training for practical professions, which was then considered as suitable also for research workers ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref23">6</reflink>]). Professors and students jointly work together and become colleagues ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref24">27</reflink>]). Research training was seen as necessary for every student, and future university teachers and research workers emerged as the elite out of the whole student population. Explicit organised training for research started with the implementation of graduate schools in the US ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref25">16</reflink>]). However, this model has not (yet) been adopted everywhere. A doctorate is, still today, often seen as an apprenticeship in which students learn through direct collaboration with the professor.</p> <p>In this conception, the doctorate is seen as a period of secondary socialisation to the academic and scientific community ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref26">8</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref27">54</reflink>]), where students start participating in its activities first from an observing position, then moving on to bringing their own contribution to it ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref28">39</reflink>]). Socialisation involves appropriation of the community's knowledge of its — socially constructed — reality, attitudes, values and myths, including informal rules of behaviour and the skills necessary to perform research in a way that is accepted in the community. A doctorate is usually seen as a <emph>rite de passage</emph> ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref29">3</reflink>]), which ends with an examination on the students' written contribution. This conception also emphasises disciplinary differences and their impact on the doctorate, leading to different ways of organising the research and training of graduate students ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref30">14</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref31">23</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref32">51</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref33">53</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref34">54</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-3">Pressures and Factors of Change</hd> <p>If we look at the doctorate in the wider context of the higher education system, some interesting issues emerge, related to the system's evolution towards a mass system, but also to the strong differentiation pushed and allowed by the increase of the size of the system ([<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref35">46</reflink>]). Differentiation has taken place, at different paces and to different degrees, according also to the specific national contexts: between higher education institutions as a whole — either by creating different classes of institutions or by stratification of unitary systems ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref36">38</reflink>]) — between research and education inside the same institutions ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref37">16</reflink>]) and between subject fields, with increasing specialisation at the disciplinary level ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref38">17</reflink>]). Thus, the traditional model of the university with nearly private sessions is replaced by a more organised and to some extent industrial organisation, with large numbers of students, but also of teaching staff, and increasing differentiation of educational products ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref39">25</reflink>]). New organisational settings have emerged to handle the relationship between research and teaching, including stratification between research and teaching intensive institutions, concentration of the teaching‐research relationship at the postgraduate level or the emergence of specialised units devoted exclusively (or at least heavily) to research ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref40">6</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref41">16</reflink>]).</p> <p>A further relevant change has been the growing emphasis on the third mission of universities as promoting linkages and transfer of knowledge towards the economy and society, meaning that research can no longer be focused only on the development of basic knowledge and on the reproduction of academic practices. The doctorate, seen as the central locus where research personnel is trained, is directly concerned by this change. Thus, as from the 1980s, governments in Western Europe started addressing issues of postgraduate education ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref42">36</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref43">51</reflink>]), which before developed on their own ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref44">25</reflink>]). This shows that the doctorate is no longer considered solely as an internal practice of the academic community, but is increasingly linked to broader concerns about the training of highly‐skilled workers and the competitiveness of the European system.</p> <p>Some issues at stake — addressed also in the Bergen Communiqué— include the tension between the doctorate as craft education in small teams (or individual supervision) and the mass doctorate with larger numbers of students enrolled in graduate schools, the tension between doing a doctorate for an academic career and the doctorate as a step towards professional life and the tension between doctoral students as learning the research profession and doctoral students as workforce for the functioning of university activities. Overall, the <emph>Trends V</emph> report observes a very rapid change in doctoral education and an extreme diversity among institutions all over Europe — in most countries, a mix of different models prevails ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref45">19</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-4">Craft Education vs. Mass Education in the Doctorate</hd> <p>Even if at different paces and absolute levels, the number of doctoral students has strongly increased in recent years: in the 1990s, the increase in most countries was between 30% and a doubling of the doctoral student population ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref46">25</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref47">33</reflink>]). This does not seem to be compatible with the idea of the doctorate as an apprenticeship, in which students learn by doing research under the close observation of their supervisors ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref48">13</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref49">14</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref50">54</reflink>]). The introduction of organised doctoral training, often inspired by the graduate school model, is seen as a possible answer ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref51">26</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref52">65</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref53">66</reflink>]), the responsibility shifts from the individual to the institutional level ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref54">35</reflink>]) and also the format of the doctorate changes ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref55">29</reflink>]). In several cases, both systems are adopted in parallel ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref56">33</reflink>]).</p> <p>With the concentration of research at the postgraduate level, it is also becoming more difficult to evaluate doctoral candidates' research competences and their interest in an academic career. This makes the traditional model of choosing the future doctoral students among the best undergraduate students difficult to maintain. Thus, either an entry selection is introduced (through an exam or a proof period) or selection has to be done during or after the doctorate. In the apprenticeship model, there is usually no selection at entry, while graduate schools often admit only a limited number of students ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref57">9</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref58">33</reflink>]).</p> <p>However, while a graduate school model can partially remedy challenges created by the higher numbers of doctoral students through the offer of more structured training, it raises a number of questions. Thus, does this organised training lead to the acquisition of the same competences as an apprenticeship situation did? Doesn't individuality suffer from mass education? What competences are transmitted in graduate schools that have been omitted in the apprenticeship model? Is it possible to implement the graduate school model in scientific fields, where there is no agreement concerning theory, methods and research subjects? How can one take into account the increasing internal differentiation of research fields, meaning that the increase in the number of doctoral students does not necessarily mean a sufficiently large number per field and at the same (or neighbouring) places? And, finally, to what extent is the graduate school model compatible with the working status of most doctoral students?</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-5">Academia vs. Professional Life</hd> <p>Originally, research training in the universities was for practical professions, but in the course of time it became more and more specialised ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref59">6</reflink>]). Nowadays, however, there is a general claim that the doctorate should not only provide research training for an academic career, but transmit also competences that are transferable to a wider employment market ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref60">19</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref61">35</reflink>]).</p> <p>The degree's appropriateness for the labour market is also addressed because the economic environment has changed ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref62">33</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref63">36</reflink>]) and the need for flexible knowledge workers in other areas than the academic environment has increased ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref64">25</reflink>]). The Bergen Communiqué (2005) states that doctoral training should aim at building transferable skills in an interdisciplinary way, and therefore train students for a wide employment market. Since a good share of doctoral degree recipients is expected to continue their career outside the university ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref65">35</reflink>]) they should to some extent be trained also with this purpose. There are efforts towards the implementation of alternative programmes, e.g. of professional doctorates ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref66">12</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref67">33</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref68">47</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref69">60</reflink>]).</p> <p>However, these pressures raise some questions. How is it possible to bring together training for an academic career and for a career outside academia? Do the outputs of doctoral training (respectively the needed skills) differ in the two cases? How can this approach be compatible with the idea of the doctorate as a socialisation in the academic community and culture? Should different 'types' of doctorates be officially recognised? Does the early differentiation of academic and professional careers make sense, when the first proof of the student's research ability is in fact at the doctoral level?</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-6">PhD Students or Low‐paid Workforce?</hd> <p>A third issue concerns the employment status of doctoral students ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref70">33</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref71">34</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref72">37</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref73">44</reflink>]). Namely, in many countries, a large share of doctoral students is <emph>de facto</emph> employed by the university. Often, their relationship to the university (and the supervisor) is not only being a student or only an employee, but a hybrid relationship that includes both roles ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref74">28</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref75">33</reflink>]).</p> <p>At the international level, there is no consensus about whether doctoral students should be considered as being in their last cycle of education or in the first stage of professional activity ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref76">37</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref77">44</reflink>]). The Bergen communiqué (European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education, 2005) considers them both as students and as early stage researchers. If doctoral candidates are seen as students, they have to pay tuition fees, while if they are employed as researchers, they have duties, rights and a regular salary — this is the case for example in the Netherlands and in the Scandinavian countries ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref78">34</reflink>]). When they are employed by the university, their tasks include teaching and student supervision activities, collaboration in research projects and management and service activities ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref79">24</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref80">28</reflink>]).</p> <p>This model proved to be a cheap way for expanding both research and educational activities with temporary staff and also for funding increasing numbers of PhD students. However, it raises a number of questions on compatibility and potential conflicts between these activities and the doctorate. This includes issues of time availability and constraints due to other activities, but also concerning the type of activities and developed skills — e.g. between teaching and research, or between basic research and applied research in a project mandated by external partners — and, finally, the self‐conception of the doctoral students, between their apprentices status and their employee status working for the university.</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-7">Looking for Context‐related Solutions?</hd> <p>Faced with these tensions, it is unlikely that a unique model for doctoral studies can emerge across domains and countries. Namely, if we accept that doctoral education today is at the crossroads between different cultures and functions of higher education — e.g. between reproducing the academic community against training highly‐skilled people for the work market — it is likely that the chosen solution will also depend on the context — related to the subject domains, but also to the organisation of national higher education systems and to the positioning of individual institutions, for example in the balance between research, education and third mission function, or between general and professional education.</p> <p>Hence, the main research question becomes to understand which combination of the described choices is compatible with the specific situation of each domain. Moreover, one needs to think about context‐specific development paths — related to the available resources, to the constellation of actors, to the goals and functions to be fulfilled and, finally, to the cultural environment — which allow doctoral education to answer the external change pressures. A further issue lies in understanding the potential of differentiation at the level of individual students to address the described tensions and to what extent this differentiation needs to be formally recognised — e.g. distinguishing between an academic and a professional doctoral title — or if it is more functional to leave them tacit, at least until the end of doctoral studies. Our small‐scale case study must be understood as a first attempt in this direction, whose interest also lies in the specificities of the field considered.</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-8">Swiss Communication Sciences and their Doctorate</hd> <p>With 2.9 doctoral degrees per 100 undergraduate students, Switzerland is one of the European countries with the highest density of doctorates ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref81">40</reflink>]). Most doctoral students are employed directly by their host university: some work in basic research projects funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation which are strongly linked to their dissertation, others are engaged in projects funded by other sources and as teaching assistants in the university. Even if it is difficult to obtain precise data, it is likely that the 17,000 doctoral students enrolled in Swiss universities constitute the bulk of the about 21,000 assistants and researchers and thus provide the lion's share of the workforce in research and teaching support. As a comparison, in 2005, Swiss universities had just 3,000 professors and about 7,000 other teachers (source: Swiss Federal Statistical Office). These figures make it clear that doctorate recipients have limited chances of finding a university position and that their main career perspectives lie outside the university.</p> <p>However, the situation varies according to domain. In natural and technical sciences, Swiss universities are quite strong in research and most doctoral students work in research projects; given the strength of private research in these domains, they have quite good employment prospects in companies. But in the social sciences and humanities, undergraduate student numbers are high and the share of research is much lower ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref82">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref83">22</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref84">40</reflink>]). Thus, it is not surprising that the organisation of the doctorate in social sciences has been debated. Claims for clearer definitions and recognitions of tasks doctoral students accomplish in their role as research/teaching assistants are made ([<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref85">41</reflink>]); and also insufficient funding is a topic of complaint (for communication sciences, see [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref86">10</reflink>]). Doctoral students in these fields are often overloaded with teaching and administration work and do not have enough time to develop their own research ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref87">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref88">41</reflink>]).</p> <p>Since Swiss universities are under cantonal authority and adopt their own regulations, the organisation of doctoral training differs greatly between the regions. In the French‐speaking part, the idea of a doctoral school, inspired by the French model and including the preliminary degree DEA (<emph>Diplôme d'Etudes Approfondies</emph>), is already widespread, while it is only recently that it has gained ground in the German‐speaking part, where, at least in social sciences and humanities, the individual supervision model is still largely prevalent. There is a general claim for the introduction of more organised doctoral training ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref89">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref90">41</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref91">48</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref92">64</reflink>]). The Swiss National Science Foundation has also recently established a funding programme for graduate schools, primarily in social sciences and the humanities (Pro*Doc programme). Also, the enhancement and dissemination of the doctorate are central elements in the 2008–2011 strategy of the Rectors' Conference of the Swiss Universities ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref93">20</reflink>]), while in 2004, a common declaration of the rectors' conferences of German‐speaking countries was made, which promoted more structured, organised doctoral training ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref94">21</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-9">A Case of a Divergent Field with Largely Distinct Sub‐communities</hd> <p>Our study covers Swiss communication sciences as identified by the institutes in the 10 cantonal universities active in this field ([<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref95">61</reflink>]); in eight of them, there are doctoral students in the field. As a preliminary step, we analysed the organisation and research structure of the field, using information from the institutes themselves, from CVs of the professors and from an analysis of journals ([<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref96">56</reflink>]). Furthermore, we analysed the corresponding doctoral regulations and conducted 40 in‐depth interviews with doctoral students at seven universities, representing approximately one third of the population. Our sample covers the largest units of communication sciences and some smaller ones, the three linguistic regions and a wide range of research topics, as well as students in the beginner's phase, in the middle of the process and near the end of their doctorate. Thus, even if the institutional definition of the sample is not necessarily identical with the whole population of students working on communication‐related topics, our data are quite representative of the diversity of situations.</p> <p>Communication sciences overall are well‐known as a case of a divergent scientific field ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref97">5</reflink>]), where there is no uniform profile, neither institutionally nor regarding topics of interest or research methods and where there are distinct sub‐communities with differing publication channels ([<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref98">42</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref99">67</reflink>]). Also, there have been several discussions about the identity of the field, and there is no agreement as to whether it can be qualified as a discipline ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref100">2</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref101">7</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref102">18</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref103">57</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref104">58</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref105">59</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref106">62</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref107">63</reflink>]). Further characteristics of the field, pushing its fragmentation, are its relatedness to the linguistic communities and the importance of national literatures ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref108">30</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref109">31</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref110">45</reflink>]).</p> <p>In Switzerland, the field is characterised by a separation between the linguistic regions, shown for example in the fact that most publications are written in the local languages and often published locally or in the neighbouring country of the same language ([<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref111">56</reflink>]). Moreover, the field is young and rapidly evolving, since a major development only occurred in the late 1990s with the opening of new curricula at several universities. The number of students enrolled has grown enormously, from about 150 in 1995–96 to more than 3000 in 2003 ([<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref112">61</reflink>]). As a result, every Swiss university now has a unit that is interested in aspects of communication.</p> <p>It is estimated that in 2002 there were 90 doctoral students in communication sciences in Switzerland ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref113">11</reflink>]), a figure which has probably slightly increased recently. In its evaluation, the Swiss Association of Communication and Media Sciences ([<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref114">61</reflink>]) concludes that the field needs a strategy for the promotion of young researchers. Problems are seen mainly in the lack of scientific positions and of long‐term support programmes; an ad‐hoc commission recommends the introduction of graduate schools at the national level ([<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref115">69</reflink>]). Also, a study on doctoral students in communication sciences in Austria, Germany and Switzerland (Mögerle <emph>et al.</emph>, 2005) concludes that the field is attractive, that young scientists are motivated and also interested in internationalisation. Dissatisfaction lays mainly in the missing opportunities for advancement. In line with others ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref116">32</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref117">41</reflink>]), this study concludes in favour of the introduction of new positions in the middle of an academic career, as for example in a tenure track system. The authors also suggest the identification of more alternative career paths outside university. Clear conditions of employment (regarding time and content) and binding agreements on objectives are advised (Mögerle <emph>et al.</emph>, 2005).</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-10">Working for the University and Doing a PhD: Synergies and Incompatibilities</hd> <p>Most doctoral students in our sample (34 out of 40) are employed by a higher education institution, in most cases for the unit in which they are enrolled for their doctoral studies, and often directly with their supervisor. Out of the 39 doctoral students having a job, 17 are not involved in any kind of research, while in 22 cases, the tasks include a research component; 4 doctoral students are employed exclusively on research projects. Variety of functions (in research, teaching and administration) is thus more common than specialisation in a specific activity. Thus, also in communication sciences in Switzerland, there is a hybrid relationship (student and employee) between doctoral students and the universities, and, as in other cases, their tasks include several areas.</p> <p>A closer look reveals an amazing pattern of diversity. Thus, at one university, the job description of doctoral students includes research as a basic task. If they are not involved in a larger research project, this means that doctoral students do some research on their own, trying for example to publish in areas that are related to their doctoral project. Others participate only partially in research projects, while their main tasks are in teaching and administration. Also, among those doctoral students who devote a great deal of their time to research, we find different situations: some are working on their own, under the supervision of their supervisor, on a (often third‐party funded) project, which corresponds largely also to their dissertation project, whilst others work on research projects that have only some or almost no synergies with their doctorate.</p> <p>Involvement in teaching also varies. Doctoral students' tasks in teaching range from the preparation of photocopies or overhead slides through the implementation and administration of online course platforms, preparation and marking of exams and active participation in some parts of the courses (e.g. exercises) to the responsibility for whole seminars and courses (depending on the university). Most employments also include an organisation/administration component, ranging from smaller tasks in student administration to the organisation of international conferences.</p> <p>Synergies of varying nature between employment and doctorate are perceived. Besides synergies in research, there are also synergies in teaching tasks, especially at the beginning of a doctorate: assistantship to a course which covers at least partially topics close to one's dissertation is seen as a possibility for deepening this topic; at some universities, doctoral students teach seminars and courses and often try to do this on topics that are close to their own research; another possibility is seen in the supervision of bachelor and master students' theses — if there are several doctoral students working for one professor, they can try to distribute supervision in a way that suits their own research topics, or even try to push students to work on topics that are helpful for their dissertation. For those students aiming at an academic career, however, it is also seen as important to work on different topics and therefore some doctoral students see it as a good opportunity to be assistants also to courses that are not related to their project.</p> <p>Since employment constitutes an important part of a doctoral student's life in communication sciences in Switzerland (percentages of employment range from 50 to 100%), it cannot be neglected when thinking of the organisation of doctoral studies. Different employment situations lead to different types of supervision, and compatibility with organised doctoral training such as graduate schools is not always given. When asked about courses they have followed for their doctoral studies, respondents often state that they do not have enough time to attend courses because of their day‐to‐day work. Supervision also often suffers from the day‐to‐day tasks doctoral students and their supervisors must carry out. Doctoral students who work as (especially teaching) assistants for their supervisors often state that they have regular meetings with their supervisors, but that these are about courses and students and organisational aspects and rarely about their dissertation.</p> <p>On the other hand, most doctoral students see employment at the university as the best way of doing a doctorate. Besides the already mentioned synergies, this gives them direct access to different resources: infrastructures they can use when working on their doctorate, but mainly information, for example about publications, conferences and other important events. They can interact with others — peers and senior researchers — and build their own network; doctoral students can be — informally — supervised by several people. Those who are involved in a higher education institute through their employment get socialised to this small community, which allows them to cover gaps in the supervision process — several doctoral students in our sample reported that they talked about their doctoral projects with other people than their official supervisor. Additionally, tasks in the area of administration and teaching also include learning opportunities. By performing these tasks, doctoral students can acquire skills in areas that are useful for a future job in or outside the research environment.</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-11">Academic vs. Profession: A Largely Open Choice</hd> <p>As we have seen, there is a tendency towards new forms of doctorate. This degree is, at an international level, increasingly seen as not only preparing for roles inside the academic community.</p> <p>According to our interviews, many doctoral students in communication sciences in Switzerland start a doctorate without even knowing what they are on to. What it means to do a doctorate is often discovered only in the process. In our sample, ten doctoral students said that they had started a doctorate because they were offered the possibility by a professor, two even stated that the doctorate was not their preferred choice after the university degree, but that there was no alternative. They often did not consciously decide that they wanted to do a doctorate, but rather decided that they wanted to go on doing research or that they wanted to accept the teaching/research assistant position offered to them. This holds true especially for doctoral students starting their doctorate more or less immediately after their undergraduate studies at the same university (14 doctoral students in our sample). Those starting a doctorate after a break of several years of professional activity (nine in our sample) take a more active, conscious decision despite the inconveniences (e.g. lower income or work to be done in the evenings and week‐ends), and they often decide to do a doctorate because they want to have time to reflect on their everyday practices. An academic career was explicitly mentioned only by one student as the main reason for enrolling for the doctorate.</p> <p>When asked about the meaning they give to their doctorate, students mainly refer to two aspects: they tend to first mention the doctorate as a learning experience and then add, often saying that this is secondary, aspects relating to the doctoral degree as a title. Doing a doctorate is therefore seen as an investment in personal development, in competences, as an experience of learning, of deepening topics one is interested in, but also as a personal challenge. The doctoral degree is hardly seen as offering better chances on the private job market, and only a few students of those planning a future outside the academic context think that the degree is necessary for their career; on the other hand, the degree's status as a <emph>sine qua non</emph> for an academic career is admitted. Regarding all possible future contexts, a doctoral degree is seen as a proof of one's ability to do independent work, to manage a project over several years, but also as an additional professional qualification, as a title that allows for distinction from the mass of graduates in communication sciences.</p> <p>Preferences regarding the future career are constructed or revised during the doctorate. In this period, doctoral students get insights into academic life. It happens that they completely change their plans during the doctorate. Some state that in principle they would like to pursue an academic career, but there are some points about it they don't like, such as the incertitude regarding future employment possibilities or the need to go abroad for a post‐doc period. Some also state that they would like to stay in the academic environment and do research, but that they do not want to become professors — because they observe with their own supervisors that being a professor often consists largely in management and administration tasks and teaching. At the moment of the interviews, half of our sample (<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref118">20</reflink>) was undecided about their future; they considered both a career inside and outside academia. The other half was divided between 10 preferring the option of an academic career and 10 who did not see their future after the doctorate in the academic environment. Besides jobs in private companies, an often‐considered option outside academia is a career in public administration.</p> <p>Even though there are no official distinctions between different kinds of doctorates in communication sciences in Switzerland, it seems that the doctorate serves several purposes and that within the existing configuration it is possible to create personalised doctorates that suit future careers inside or outside academia.</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-12">Craft Education vs. Mass Education: a diverse situation</hd> <p>As already discussed in the introduction, organised doctoral training that groups together larger numbers of doctoral students is seen as a good solution to cope with increasing numbers of students, as was the case with undergraduate education. If we take a closer look at the situation in communication sciences in Switzerland, however, there are some issues that emerge.</p> <p>Firstly, since most doctoral students are employed by the university where they do their doctorate, time to devote to the doctorate seems a scarce commodity, day‐to‐day tasks often outrank the doctorate and need to be done in specific moments (for example assistance in courses), therefore the doctoral students' time flexibility is reduced. Thus, graduate schools might not be compatible with a system that needs doctoral students as workforce for the university machinery. If funding is available through scholarships, like in the new doctoral programme launched by the Swiss National Science Foundation (Pro*Doc), graduate schools seem more feasible. In our sample, however, only two doctoral students are part of such a programme, and only one of them benefits from a scholarship from a private foundation, organised through the university. This number will increase in the near future, since two new Pro*Docs have been assigned in interdisciplinary fields related to communication.</p> <p>Another challenge for the introduction of organised doctoral training lies in the diversity of the field: internal differentiation is considerable, there are hardly three or four doctoral students working on enough similar topics and at similar stages in the process to allow for common courses besides some general methodology or epistemology teachings or for fruitful discussions in colloquia. Even students working with the same supervisor often do not know enough about their colleagues' topics to give good contributions in discussions. The critical mass for the introduction of structured doctoral programmes is often lacking — at least at the local level. National collaboration in doctoral training is envisaged, but it has to deal with challenges such as the language borders and different conceptions of the field.</p> <p>If we look at doctoral regulations, we can, however, see an ongoing process of change: all regulations except one date from the period 2005–2007. Already a first look at their titles shows that they regulate different things: In Basel, Zurich, Lucerne and St. Gallen they are about the 'Promotion', the graduation, while in Geneva, Lugano and Berne the regulations' titles put the focus on doctoral studies. There are some elements that are contained in all regulations, while others are regulated only at some faculties. All regulations contain information about admission criteria, as well as about the committee(s) that review and evaluate the final dissertation and/or defence and about the 'grades' that are conferred ('summa cum laude', etc.). In all these points, however, the regulations differ, not even the grades or the conferred titles are unitary.</p> <p>There are signs of a planned implementation or at least discussion of more organised doctoral training: out of the eight regulations we analysed, five contain an indicative or maximum duration of doctoral studies (3–5 years). Five regulations or additional documents at the department/institute level mention courses to be done, two of them require a certain number of ECTS points (24 / min. 30 to be obtained by participating in courses, attending summer schools or doing presentations at conferences and colloquia) and one university has already an established, clearly organised doctoral programme similar to the graduate school model. This very specific case is found at the University of St. Gallen, where communication research is strongly oriented towards corporate communication. There, doctoral students usually work on third party funded projects that are paid for by industry partners and there is a mandatory graduate school programme. This is also where doctoral studies have the shortest duration — doctoral students at this university state that the target is to finish within two to three years, including one year of courses and project definition; interestingly, none of them stated they were aiming only at an academic career.</p> <p>The diversity is also visible in the answers of doctoral students to the question about what the university requires of them. Some students, however, state that there are points that are not clear to them — for example regarding how the members of the jury judging the doctoral theses are selected or regarding courses to attend. Others also report that in their university there is no offer of doctoral courses. If there are doctoral colloquia, they are implemented usually at the level of the single professor, involving all doctoral students and senior researchers of his/her unit. There are, however, also students that never have had any doctoral colloquia and rarely ever attended a course, and have exchanges on their doctorate only with their supervisor.</p> <p>Admission to the doctorate is somehow regulated in all regulations; often there are additional requirements for those with a degree from another university or another field of study. When looking at the interviews, however, formal criteria seem to be less important: in our sample, no doctoral student has reported any selection mechanism. Often, the doctorate seems to be the natural consequence of an assistant position, and assistants are selected by the professors employing them. Personal relationships play a certain role in this process: in several cases the supervisor has already been supervisor of the doctoral student's undergraduate thesis or knows the undergraduate supervisor personally. There are only six doctoral students in our sample who have done their undergraduate studies at another university in Switzerland, so the mobility inside the country is not very high. Those with an undergraduate degree from another university usually come from abroad (16 in our sample) and have chosen to apply for a position in Switzerland also because of the good working conditions compared to the academic environment in their home country.</p> <p>Thus, from our sample we can see that there is no one prevailing model in doctoral training in Switzerland, but several models, with individual adaptations, existing side by side, even amongst doctoral students working with the same supervisor. The graduate school model is implemented to some extent, but in ways that suit local needs.</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-13">Conclusion: a model that is well‐adapted to the situation of the field</hd> <p>Based on this analysis, we can characterise the model of doctorate in Swiss communication sciences as follows:</p> <p>A doctorate usually lasts between three and five years; most students are employed by the university and have a salary that allows them to cover their livelihood. Their tasks include support and administration activities, teaching and/or teaching assistance, research on projects and personal research on their dissertation. All these tasks are part of their doctoral experience, and therefore also of the output of the doctorate. A doctorate in communication sciences in Switzerland does not aim at educating students only for an academic career; it is also a kind of professional training. Doctoral students only rarely start a doctorate because they want to pursue an academic career. They usually enter the process with an open mind regarding their future, and during the doctorate they discover their preferences and capacities, which direct them towards interests in different sectors. Communication sciences are not an exclusively academic field of study; applied research and concrete application play an important role. Therefore, in contrast to doctorates in other fields such as, for example, mathematics or natural sciences, where the aim is to train future researchers, it is appropriate that a doctorate in communication sciences prepares also for other roles, and it is useful that it includes other aspects than research.</p> <p>This model does not correspond to the traditional apprenticeship model, in that doctoral students are usually integrated in a social context that goes beyond the direct relationship to their supervisor. They do not depend only on the supervisor, and therefore can fill the gaps of his weaknesses with other contacts. But it is not a graduate school model either — there is no (or only a few) structured training and supervision teams are not established, organisational structures for doctoral students (such as, for example, graduate schools that go beyond organised courses and colloquia) seem far from being introduced. Probably, the implementation of graduate schools will be a difficult endeavour, due to the diversity in the field: the critical mass of doctoral students working on topics that are similar enough cannot be found. One can also question whether the introduction of a graduate school model aiming at structured research training is really the right way to go — in that the purpose of the doctorate in communication sciences does not seem to be the preparation for a career exclusively in academia. In any case, these future perspectives of doctoral students have to be considered when implementing graduate schools in the field.</p> <p>Our conclusion is that, even if many features of this model would seem at odds with the most widespread conceptions of how a doctorate should work — with a strong emphasis on research training and performing research of international level — this model is surprisingly well adapted to the context of Swiss communication sciences, with their strong internal diversity, the rather low development of research, the need for workforce to support teaching in front of strongly increasing numbers of students and, finally, lack of career prospects inside the university. Moreover, the model is flexible enough to find different applications in different contexts (universities) and cases (individuals), which can be situated on a continuum from an academic to a professional doctorate. Internal differentiation is essential because the doctorate is a period of orientation between largely alternative outcomes and thus the ability to design different paths during the doctorate itself is critical for its success.</p> <p>This does not mean that improvements are not possible or required — most observers agree that it is critical to improve the quality of research (and research training) during the doctorate, but the chosen solutions need to be carefully targeted to the actual situation and practices of the field and leave sufficient room for flexibility to adapt to individual cases. Moreover, reforms such as a more structured training or quality control on the research performed would certainly help to instrument the development of research in communication sciences, but would not necessarily bring better career perspectives for the doctoral students themselves, nor improve the quality of education of undergraduate students. Hence, choices about the organisation of the doctorate are closely related to policy choices on the broader mission of the field and on the balance between external pressures and the specific needs of the field. In the general euphoria of implementing organised doctoral training in the context of the ongoing reforms worldwide, one must not forget to consider the particular characteristics of the field of study and of the local academic organisation and community.</p> <hd id="AN0035324039-14">Acknowledgements</hd> <p>A preliminary version of this article was presented at the 20<sups>th</sups> Annual CHER Conference, Dublin, 30 August–1 September 2007. The authors would like to thank Ben Jongbloed and Christine Musselin for their useful comments.</p> <ref id="AN0035324039-15"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Abbott, A. (2001) Chaos of Disciplines (Chicago/London, The University of Chicago Press).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref100" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Atkin, D. & Jeffres, L. W. (1998) An analysis of research article productivity by telecommunication scholars over the past decade, Journal of the Association for Communication Administration, 27, pp. 18 – 29.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref29" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bartelse, J., Beerkens, E. & Van Der Wende, M. (1999) Doctoral education in the Netherlands: the labour market perspective, in: O. Kivinen, S. Ahola & P. Kaipainen (Eds) Towards the European Model of Postgraduate Training (Turku, Painosalama Oy, University of Turku, RUSE).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref82" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> BBW (B undesamt für B ildung und W issenschaft) (2002) Förderung der Geistes‐ und Sozialwissenschaften (Bern, Bundesamt für Bildung und Wissenschaft).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref2" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Becher, T. & Trowler, P. R. (2001) Academic Tribes and Territories. Intellectual Enquiry and the Culture of Disciplines (Ballmoor, Buckingham/Philadelphia, PA, The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref6" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Ben‐David, J. (1992) Centers of Learning: Britain, France, Germany, United States; with a New Introduction by Philip G. Altbach (New Brunswick, New Jersey, Transaction Publishers).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref101" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Berger, C. R. (1991) Chautauqua: Why are there so Few Communication Theories? Communication Theories and Other Curios, Communication Monographs, 58, pp. 101 – 113.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref26" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Berger, P. L. & Luckmann, T. (1977) Die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit. Eine Theorie der Wissenssoziologie (Frankfurt am Main, Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref57" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Berning, E. & Falk, S. (2005) Das Promotionswesen im Umbruch, Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung, 27, pp. 48 – 72.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blum, R. (2004) Das Drama: Vielfalt und Überlast. Wohin geht die Reise für die Kommunikations‐ und Medienwissenschaft in der Schweiz? (Zürich, Medienkonferenz SGKM 3.12.2004).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bonfadelli, H. (2007) Publizistikwissenschaft und Medienforschung: Berufsfelder mit Perspektive, in M. Marr (Ed) Kommunikationsallrounder für die Mediengesellschaft Schweiz (Zürich, vdf Hochschulverlag AG).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Boud, D. & Tennant, M. (2006) Putting doctoral education to work: challenges to academic practice, Higher Education Research & Development, 25, pp. 293 – 306.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brown, G. & Atkins, M. (1988) Effective Teaching in Higher Education (London, New York, Routledge).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Burgess, R. G. (Ed) (1994) Postgraduate Education and Training in the Social Sciences (London, Bristol, Pennsylvania, Jessica Kingsley Publishers).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clark, B. R. (1983) The Higher Education System. Academic Organization in Cross‐National Perspective (Berkeley and Los Angeles, University of California Press).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clark, B. R. (1995) Places of Inquiry: Research and Advanced Education in Modern Universities (Berkeley, Los Angeles/ London, University of California Press).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clark, B. R. (1996) Diversification of higher education: viability and change, in: V. L. Meek, L. Goedegebuure, O. Kivinen & R. Rinne (Eds) The Mockers and the Mocked: Comparative Perspectives on Differentiation, Convergence and Diversity in Higher Education (Oxford, Pergamon Press).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Craig, R. T. (2003) Discursive Origins of a Communication Discipline. Paper Presented at the Annual Convention of the National Communication Association, Miami Beach, FL, November 21, 2003.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Crosier, D., Purser, L. & Smidt, H. (2007) Trends V: Universities Shaping the European Higher Education Area (Brussels, European University Association).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> CRUS (R ectors ' C onference of the S wiss U niversities) (2006) Planification stratégique 2008–2011 des hautes écoles universitaires suisses. Rapport de la CPC‐CRUS adopté par la CRUS le 10 mars 2006.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> CRUS, ÖRK & HRK (2004) Zur Zukunft des Doktorats in Europa. Gemeinsame Erklärung der Rektorenkonferenz der Schweizer Universitäten (CRUS), der Österreichischen Rektorenkonferenz (ÖRK) und der Hochschulrektorenkonferenz (HRK).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> CSS (C onseil S uisse de la S cience) (1993) Revitalising Swiss Social Sciences. Evaluation Report. Bern.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Debeauvais, M. & Livesey, M. (1986) Doctoral theses in France: a case of 'Reformitis', European Journal of Education, 21, pp. 375 – 384.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Enders, J. (1996) Die wissenschaftlichen Mitarbeiter. Ausbildung, Beschäftigung und Karriere der Nachwuchswissenschaftler und Mittelbauangehörigen an den Universitäten (Frankfurt am Main, Campus).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Enders, J. (2004) Research training and careers in transition: a European perspective on the many faces of the Ph.D, Studies in Continuing Education, pp. 419 – 430.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Enders, J. (2005) Brauchen die Universitäten in Deutschland ein neues Paradigma der Nachwuchsausbildung? Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung, 27, pp. 34 – 47.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gellert, C. (1993) The German model of research and advanced education, in B. R. Clark (Ed) The Research Foundations of Graduate Education (Berkeley, Los Angeles/ Oxford, University of California Press).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gerhardt, A., Briede, U. & Mues, C. (2005) Zur Situation Der Doktoranden in Deutschland — Ergebnisse Einer Bundesweiten Doktorandenbefragung, Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung, 27, pp. 74 – 95.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Green, H. & Powell, S. (2005) The Doctorate in Contemporary Higher Education (Buckingham, The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hicks, D. (1999) The difficulty of achieving full coverage of international social science literature and the bibliometric consequences, Scientometrics, 44, pp. 193 – 215.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hicks, D. (2004) The four literatures of social science, in: H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel & U. Schmoch (Eds) Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research (Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jarren, O. (2000) Aufbruch und Umbruch. Situation und Perspektiven der Publizistik‐ und Kommunikationswissenschaft in der Schweiz. Anmerkungen eines Einsteigers oder: Muss Aschenbrödel heiraten? Medien Journal, 24, pp. 10 – 18.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kehm, B. (2005) Developing doctoral degrees and qualifications in Europe. Good practice and issues of concern, Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung, 27, pp. 10 – 33.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kehm, B. (2006) Doctoral education in Europe and North America: a comparative analysis, in: U. Teichler (Ed) The Formative Years of Scholars. Proceedings from a Symposium Held at the Haga Forum, Stockholm, 9–11 November 2005 (London, Portland Press Ltd).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kehm, B. (2007) Quo Vadis Doctoral Education? New European Approaches in the Context of Global Changes, European Journal of Education, 42, pp. 307 – 319.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kivinen, O., Ahola, S. & Kaipainen, P. (Eds) (1999) Towards the European Model of Postgraduate Training (Turku, Painosalama Oy: Research Unit for the Sociology of Education (RUSE), Research Report 50. University of Turku).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kupfer, A. & Moes, J. (2004) Promovieren in Europa. Ein internationaler Vergleich von Promotionsbedingungen (Frankfurt am Main, Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kyvik, S. (2004) Structural changes in higher education systems in Western Europe, Higher Education in Europe, Vol. XXIX, pp. 393 – 409.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation (New York, Cambridge University Press).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lepori, B. (2007) Diversity in the Swiss higher education system, in: A. Bonaccorsi & C. Daraio (Eds) Universities as Strategic Units. Productivity and Efficiency Patterns in the European University System (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lévy, R., Roux, P. & Gobet, P. (1997) La situation du corps intermédiaire dans les hautes écoles suisses (Bern, Conférence universitaire Suisse, Conseil Suisse de la science, Fonds national de la recherche scientifique).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leydesdorff, L. & Park, H. W. (2007) The Journal of Communication and the Field of Communication Studies: Mapping Scientific Communication Online. <ulink href="http://users.fmg.uva.nl/lleydesdorff/communicationstudies/index.htm">http://users.fmg.uva.nl/lleydesdorff/communicationstudies/index.htm</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Libner, K. & Morgan, K. (2004) Ph.Digital? Lessons from the History of the Doctorate and the Dissertation. Paper Presented at the Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2004 Conference, Lexington, Kentucky.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mangematin, V., Mandran, N. & Crozet, A. (2000) The careers of social science doctoral graduates in France: the influence of how the research was carried out, European Journal of Education, 35, pp. 111 – 124.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Masip, P. (2005) European Research in Communication during the Years 1994–2004: A Bibliometric Approach. Paper presented at the 1st European Communication Conference: Amsterdam, 24–26 November 2005.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meek, V. L., Goedegebuure, L., Kivinen, O. & Rinne, R. (Eds) (1996) The Mockers and Mocked: Comparative Perspectives on Differentiation, Convergence and Diversity in Higher Education (Oxford, International Association of Universities and Elsevier Science Ltd.).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Metcalfe, J. (2006) The changing nature of doctoral programmes, in: U. Teichler (Ed) The Formative Years of Scholars. Proceedings from a Symposium Held at the Haga Forum, Stockholm, 9–11 November 2005 (London, Portland Press Ltd).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meyer, T. & Nyffeler, B. (2001) Akademische Nachwuchsförderung im Spannungsfeld zwischen Beruf und Berufung (Bern, Bundesamt für Bildung und Wissenschaft).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moegerle, U., Matthes, J. & Wirth, W. (2005) Zur Situation des wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchses in der Schweiz. Ergebnisse einer Befragung von Nachwuchswissenschaftlerinnen und Nachwuchswissenschaftlern bis zur Promotion, Medienwissenschaft Schweiz, 2/2005.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Multrus, F. (2004) Fachkulturen — Begriffsbestimmung, Herleitung und Analysen. Eine empirische Untersuchung über Studierende deutscher Hochschulen. Dissertation, Universität Konstanz, Konstanz.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Neave, G. (1993) Séparation de corps: the training of advanced students and the organization of research in France, in: B. R. Clark (Ed) The Research Foundations of Graduate Education (Berkeley/ Los Angeles/ Oxford, University of California Press).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Noble, K. A. (1994) Changing Doctoral Degrees. An International Perspective (Bristol, Open University Press).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Parry, O., Atkinson, P. & Delamont, S. (1994) Disciplinary identities and doctoral work, in: R. G. Burgess (Ed) Postgraduate Education and Training in the Social Sciences (London/ Bristol/ Pennsylvania, Jessica Kingsley Publishers).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Parry, S. (2007) Disciplines and Doctorates (Dordrecht, Springer).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Powell, S. & Green, H. (2007) The Doctorate Worldwide (Berkshire/New York, Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press, McGraw‐Hill).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Probst, C. & Lepori, B. (2007) Für eine Kartographie der Schweizer Kommunikationswissenschaften. Methodologische Überlegungen und ausgewählte Resultate, Studies in Communication Sciences, 7, pp. 253 – 270.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reardon, K. K. & Rogers, E. M. (1988) Interpersonal versus mass media communication. A false dichotomy, Human Communication Research, 15, pp. 284 – 303.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rogers, E. M. & Chaffee, S. H. (1993) The past and the future of communication study: convergence or divergence? Journal of Communication, 43, pp. 125 – 131.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schramm, W. (1983) The unique perspective of communication: a retrospective view, Journal of Communication, 33, pp. 6 – 17.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Scott, D., Brown, A., Lunt, I. & Thorne, L. (2004) Professional Doctorates (Berkshire/New York, Society of Research into Higher Education & Open University Press).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> SGKM (S chweizerische G esellschaft für K ommunikations ‐ und M edienwissenschaft) (2004) Evaluation der Kommunikations‐ und Medienwissenschaft in der Schweiz. Selbstevaluationsbericht (Bern).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shepherd, G. J. (1993) Building a discipline of communication, Journal of Communication, 43, pp. 83 – 91.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shepherd, G. (1999) Advances in communication theory: a critical review, Journal of Communication, 49, pp. 156 – 164.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> SWTR (S chweizerischer W issenschafts ‐ und T echnologierat) (2001) Förderung des akademischen Nachwuchses an Schweizer Hochschulen (Bern).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Teichler, U. (2006) Per aspera ad astra? The formative years of scholars, in: U. Teichler (Ed) The Formative Years of Scholars. Proceedings from a Symposium Held at the Haga Forum, Stockholm, 9–11 November 2005 (London, Portland Press Ltd).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ulhøi, J. P. (2005) Postgraduate education in Europe. An intersection of conflicting paradigms and goals, The International Journal of Educational Management, 19, pp. 347 – 358.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Van Den Besselaar, P. & Leydesdorff, L. (1996) Mapping change in scientific specialties. A scientometric reconstruction of the development of artificial intelligence, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47, pp. 415 – 436.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Whitley, R. (1984) The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences (Oxford, Clarendon Press).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Z ukunftskommission (2006) Empfehlungen der Zukunftskommission für die Kommunikations‐ und Medienwissenschaft in der Schweiz.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By CAROLE PROBST and BENEDETTO LEPORI</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref81"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref83"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref86"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref91"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref94"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref95"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref99"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref102"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref103"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref105"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref106"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref107"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref108"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref109"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref110"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref113"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref115"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref116"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ818745
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: What Is a Doctorate? Changing Meanings and Practices in Communication Sciences in Switzerland
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Probst%2C+Carole%22">Probst, Carole</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lepori%2C+Benedetto%22">Lepori, Benedetto</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22European+Journal+of+Education%22"><i>European Journal of Education</i></searchLink>. Dec 2008 43(4):477-494.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Blackwell Publishing. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8599; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: customerservices@blackwellpublishing.com; Web site: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/jnl_default.asp
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 18
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2008
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Evaluative
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Doctoral+Programs%22">Doctoral Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Graduate+Study%22">Graduate Study</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Graduate+Students%22">Graduate Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Employment+Level%22">Employment Level</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Education%22">Academic Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Professional+Education%22">Professional Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Communication+%28Thought+Transfer%29%22">Communication (Thought Transfer)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Organization%22">Organization</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Change%22">Educational Change</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Switzerland%22">Switzerland</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1111/j.1465-3435.2008.00368.x
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0141-8211
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: In this article, we analyse the organisation of the doctorate in communication sciences in the context of the overall discussion on the changing organisation of doctoral studies in Switzerland. We focus on three tensions which appear central for the field, namely the employment status of doctoral students, the importance of academic vs. professional training and, finally, the organisation of doctoral studies and the possibilities and difficulties in the introduction of a graduate school model. Our results show that in this field the doctorate has to be considered more as an orientation period, where professional and academic training coexist and where there is an extremely high diversity of objectives, activities and organisation forms, both between universities and individual students. This model is surprisingly well adapted to the situation of a field characterised by high internal diversity, rather low research intensity and strong orientation to application. Reforms like the introduction of graduate schools or the reinforcement of academic training have thus to be implemented with some care.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 70
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2008
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ818745
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ818745
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/j.1465-3435.2008.00368.x
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 18
        StartPage: 477
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Doctoral Programs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Graduate Study
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Graduate Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Employment Level
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academic Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Professional Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Communication (Thought Transfer)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Organization
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Change
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Switzerland
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: What Is a Doctorate? Changing Meanings and Practices in Communication Sciences in Switzerland
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Probst, Carole
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Lepori, Benedetto
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 12
              Type: published
              Y: 2008
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0141-8211
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 43
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: European Journal of Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1