The doctoral review is on course for an outcome that is likely to subvert its own noble intentions of assuring – and developing – quality, says the writer. Photo: YWAD / ya-webdesign.com |
This announcement was followed by two years of planning for the review of all doctoral qualifications across all universities. As the review was originally scheduled for completion in April 2020, universities can expect lots of review activity this year.
The story that follows tracks developments to the present. It’s a troubling story, as we shall see. At the outset though, to the credit of the CHE, the doctoral review process in fact got off to a good start. In line with the principle of peer review, the “Qualification Standard for Doctoral Degrees, November 2018” (the qualification standard), was compiled with the input of a reference group of 19 eminent professors from a representative range of universities. An earlier draft had also gone out for public comment. We thus have credible benchmarks for the review, established through a legitimate process.
In providing benchmarks for assessing quality, the qualification standard follows a clear logic comprising:
- Purpose of the doctoral qualification;
- Graduate attributes that manifest that purpose; and
- The contexts and conditions for the assessment of those attributes.
In conclusion, at this stage we don’t yet know what sense universities will make of all this; and whether the CHE will then have sufficient common understanding across institutions to enable it to draw valid conclusions across the sector. A lot depends on the peer reviewers who will do the site visit rounds later this year. Let’s hope that scholarship and good professional judgement can mitigate the CHE’s shortcomings.
Read more...
Source: Daily Maverick