Global perspectives on structured research

training in doctorates of design e what do

we value?
Gavin Melles, Swinburne University, Faculty of Design, 144 High Street,
Prahran, Victoria 3181, Australia

The development of doctorates of design has generated debate about the

characteristics of appropriate doctoral curriculum, including structured research
training. While such training has long formed part of the North American
doctorate it has more recently appeared as a component of European and
Australian programs. Despite its signicance, the global spread of structured
coursework in doctorates of design and faculty and student attitudes to this
remain unexamined. This study examined the signicance of research training in
doctorates of design (n 153) and attitudes to such training (n 102) among
faculty and students. This study concludes with observations about the nature
and growing signicance of research training in doctoral design and the need for
further detailed research of the issue.
Crown Copyright 2008 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: design education, design research, research training, doctorate,

survey

T
he nature and purposes of the doctorate has come under scrutiny in an
entrepreneurial environment of higher education (HE) provision
where industry and professional relevance have come to the fore-
ground (Hoddell et al., 2002; Usher, 2002; Boud and Tennant, 2006). Higher
education institutions have responded by developing practice-based and other
doctoral programs to challenge the hegemony of the traditional PhD (Katz,
1997; Neumann, 2002; Park, 2005; Wellington and Sikes, 2006). These alterna-
tive doctorates have placed a greater focus on workplace practice, creativity
and development of transferable skills (Pole, 2000; Demeritt, 2004; Gilbert
et al., 2004; Johnston and Murray, 2004). As a result of these developments,
the nature and purposes of the doctoral curriculum, including research
training, are being more narrowly scrutinized (McWilliam and Singh, 2002;
Denicolo, 2003; Gilbert, 2004).

In particular, debates around practice, project work and interdisciplinarity in

Corresponding author: doctorates of design and visual arts have come to the fore. Those keen to le-
Gavin Melles gitimate practice-based design research among the canons of established aca-
gmelles@swin.edu.au demic scholarship have argued that such degrees do not compromise academic
www.elsevier.com/locate/destud
0142-694X $ - see front matter Design Studies 30 (2009) 255e271
doi:10.1016/j.destud.2008.09.003 255
Crown Copyright 2008 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 rigour (Candlin, 2000; Prentice, 2000; Winter et al., 2000; Wood, 2000; Biggs
and Buchler, 2007). Nevertheless, it has been acknowledged that practice-
based doctorates of design present particular challenges to student identities
and supervision (Hockey and Allen-Collinson, 2000; Hockey, 2003). The in-
clusion of projects work as an expression of creative practice is also contested,
while some academics view the creative project work in practice-based and
professional doctorates as particularly appropriate to design (Newbury,
1996; Ball, 2002; Dallow, 2003; Hughes, 2006; Pedgley and Wormald, 2007).
Thirdly, despite the fact that disciplinarity for design remains a debated issue
(e.g. Cross, 1999), interdisciplinarity is often employed as an inherent feature
of design research (Pizzocaro, 2002; Harris et al., 2003; Kroelinger, 2003;
Tellefsen, 2003; Sutton and Kemp, 2006). These debates show a eld still work-
ing towards consensus, regarding the institutionalized forms of doctoral design
research (Roth, 1999; Seago and Dunne, 1999; Buchanan, 2001; Bayazit, 2004).

1 Doctoral education and research training in design

Three international conferences on doctoral education in design (1998 Ohio,
US; 2000 La Clusaz, France; 2003 Tsukuba, Japan) have explored the diversity
of oerings in doctoral design. Friedman (2000), for example, identied eight
dierent doctoral models with degrees of focus on Fine Arts, Engineering and
Technology, and professional and practice-based designations. Rust (2002),
however, cautions that doctoral degree distinctions do not necessarily trans-
late into substantive educational ones. Nevertheless, one area where the
cultural context of graduate education writ large (Lovitts, 2005, p. 150) is
associated with dierences is in approaches to research training in dierent
regional and disciplinary contexts. This variation has been the subject of
some previous analyses (e.g. Baird, 1990; Cresswell and Miller, 1997; Kyvik
and Tvede, 1998; Kiley and Liljegren, 1999; McWilliam et al., 2002; Pearson
and Brew, 2002; Demeritt, 2004; Manathunga et al., 2004).

2 Structured research training

Forms of training in research skills, such as literature review writing, methods
training, and research proposal writing, continue to be delivered in European
and Australian universities as optional student training; only recently has it be-
come a compulsory component of research training. Compulsory structured
research training through foundational and elective coursework has long
been a feature of the North American PhD model, and it has been argued
that the long tradition of cohort-based coursework in doctoral programs in
North America ensures a high level of skills and the common education moves
cohorts through programs in a far more successful stream (Durling and Fried-
man, 2002, p. 196). Europe (including the UK) and Australia have been slower
to follow this tradition and it has been within the curriculum of professional
and practice-based (e.g. Studio) doctorates that these countries now integrate
coursework. In design, practice-based and other doctorates incorporating
coursework (and projects) have generated debate about the nature of design

256 Design Studies Vol 30 No. 3 May 2009

 scholarship and the importance of research training (Durling, 2002; Newbury,
2002; Rust, 2002; Radu, 2006).

Research training choices reect substantive judgements about the value of

particular content in the doctoral curriculum (Schwartz-Shea, 2003, p. 380),
and the rst stage in a move from dependent to independent learning processes
(Schweinsberg and McManus, 2006). At this time students are initially im-
mersed in mastering the knowledge base of their disciplines and speciality
areas, learning their disciplines theories and methods, and establishing rela-
tionships with peers, faculty and their advisor (Lovitts, 2005, p. 140). The
peer networks and group learning can provide an environment for students
to be initiated into relevant research communities of practice (Johnston, 1995).

For design specically, Newbury (2002) sees research training preparing de-
sign students for research, developing research skills, and promoting method-
ological reexivity. The extent to which design doctorates now incorporate
compulsory coursework, however, has not been examined, nor have the atti-
tudes of faculty and students to such training been examined. This paper ad-
dresses the extent to which structured research training is a signicant feature
of the global doctoral design landscape and what values and characteristics the
eld approves of in relation to this.

3 Signicance of structured coursework in design

In a recent survey of doctoral programs in design, the author identied 153 dis-
tinct doctoral programs, including the more recent vocational design elds,
such as industrial, product, interior, and interaction design. A range of sources
were examined, including the recent Business Week D-School List of 60 top
design schools, and National Design associations in various countries. This
produced a list programs distinguished by a range of designations, including
PhD, PhD (Studio), DDes (Doctor of Design), DCD (Doctor of Communica-
tion Design), DVA (Doctor of Visual Arts), and DCA (Doctor of Creative
Arts).

In Table 1 below the rst two columns list the number of faculties or schools in
the respective countries oering doctorates which include the newer design dis-
ciplines; schools rather than institutions were chosen because design disci-
plines may be split across schools, and where this is the case they are noted
as distinct programs. A CW superscript indicates that the degree has some ex-
plicit compulsory structured coursework even if this is not given specic credit
values (as in the USA). Coursework (CW), in this sense, is distinguished from
the provision of optional research skills or methods courses by departments or
other institutional units, e.g. schools of graduate studies. Where the super-
script is enclosed in brackets (CW) this indicates that some of the degrees
have structured coursework or fuller information was not available. A pro-
gram indexed with (Project) or (Studio) in brackets indicates that these are

Global perspectives on structured research training 257

Table 1 Distribution of coursework in doctoral design programs

Countries FAC Degrees Total

Australia 18 PhD, PhD (Studio)CW, DDesCW, DVACW, DCACW 21

Belgium 1 PhD 1
Brazil 1 PhDCW 1
Canada 5 PhDCW 5
China 1 PhD 1
Denmark 4 PhD 4
Finland 2 PhDCW 2
Germany 6 Dr.Phil 6
India 4 PhDCW 4
Ireland 2 PhD, PhD (Project)CW 2
Italy 2 PhDCW 2
Japan 3 PhD 3
Korea 2 PhDCW 2
Mexico 1 PhDCW 1
Netherlands 2 PhD, ProfDocCW 3
New Zealand 4 PhD, DDesCW 5
Norway 2 PhD(CW) 2
Portugal 4 PhD(CW) 4
Singapore 1 PhDCW 1
Sweden 5 PhD 5
Taiwan 4 PhDCW 4
Turkey 7 PhDCW 7
UK 26 PhD(CW), PhD (Studio)CW PhD (Project)CW 50
USA 17 PhDCW, DDesCW, DCDCW 27
Totals 153

modes of PhD study which although not warranting a dierent degree desig-
nation, such as DDes, are in terms of process and submission distinct. Such
degrees are in many cases the equivalent of the so-called professional doctor-
ates (DDes, DVA, DCA) as they have coursework, a project component.

What is evident from this overview that in terms of geographic spread and
signicance structured coursework is indisputably the dominant model for
doctoral curriculum. The common denominator among structured course-
work oerings is research methods courses but may also extend in particular
cases to other areas including design philosophy, topicrelated electives, disci-
plinary or specialist issues subjects (e.g. current issues in interior design),
and other matters.

4 Survey methods
Although curriculum surveys provide a measure of the signicance of course-
work in the curriculum, it is faculty and students whose personal evaluation of
coursework is critical.

To explore this a convenience sample (n 102) of faculty (research coordina-

tors, supervisors, and heads of program) and students from a range of

258 Design Studies Vol 30 No. 3 May 2009

 institutions (n 67) was recruited with the majority from the UK, USA, and
Australasia. In Table 2 below country of origin of faculty and research stu-
dents (including recent graduates), responding to the survey is noted. Recruit-
ment for the faculty survey over a nine-month period was through personal
contacts of the author and professional lists, and consent was by completion.
In the initial recruitment faculty (heads of department, deans, research coor-
dinators, and supervisors) were enrolled. In the second recruitment PhD stu-
dents were encouraged to respond.

The rst section of the on-line questionnaire (delivered using Opinio) gath-
ered a range of respondent institutional demographics, including academic
status, role, and institution.

The second section proposed a set of twelve ve-point Likert scale

agreementedisagreement statements on coursework (see headings of Section
5 below). Questions were polarized negatively (e.g. 8, 9, 12) and positively
and each question had a text box for qualitative comments, allowing for meth-
odological triangulation. In addition to general discussion of the relevant
headings, qualitative comments are discussed below.

5 Survey results and qualitative comments

In the percentages attached to pie charts, ve-point Likert scale results are also
collapsed into three broad categories: agree, disagree, neutral and n/a. Percent-
age results are also given as adjusted relative frequency, excluding the

Table 2 Respondent demographic spread and status

Country Institutions Faculty Students Total

Australia 9 11 7 18
Belgium 1 2 0 2
Canada 4 2 2 4
Denmark 3 3 1 4
Finland 2 1 5 6
Germany 4 1 3 4
Greece 1 1 0 1
Ireland 1 0 1 1
India 3 2 1 3
Korea 1 0 1 1
Norway 3 2 1 3
New Zealand 4 6 2 8
Singapore 1 n/a n/a 1
Slovenia 1 0 1 1
Sweden 1 2 0 2
Taiwan 2 3 0 3
Turkey 2 2 2 4
UK 11 10 6 16
USA 13 9 10 18
Not stated n/a n/a n/a 1
Totals 67 57 45 102

Global perspectives on structured research training 259

 percentage of unanswered questions. Given the convenience sampling proce-
dure (and size) and the exploratory nature of the survey, means, standard de-
viations were not deemed relevant. Despite the small sample size the
qualitative comments allow for a range of nuances to responses to emerge. Re-
gional dierences meant that some respondents found certain questions un-
clear or contentious; future studies should address these limitations. In what
follows, general results are followed by qualitative themes, which emerged in
comments; where relevant I link these comments to previous studies and dis-
cussions in the literature.

5.1 Coursework and completions

In North America coursework (Figure 1) is intended to ensure students have
a basis for independent research, a rationale now beginning to form part of
the European and Australian models (Moses, 1984; Baird, 1997). This ques-
tion also addresses whether the recent inclusion of coursework (in professional
and other doctorates) has increased completion rates, an issue little studied to
date but with some indications that it does (but see Stricker, 1994; De Valero,
2001; Martin et al., 2001; Neumann, 2002; McAlpine and Norton, 2006).
Smeby (2000), for example, has suggested that the resistance of the Humanities
and Social Sciences to structured guidance contributes to the lower completion
rates in these elds in relation to the hard sciences.

Although a majority supported this claim, many respondents pointed to how

the outcome of the coursework-completion link depended on the individual
project. Despite overall general approval, there was some scepticism about
the relevance of coursework with several respondents suggesting designers
only needed professional experience. Three respondents claimed there was
no evidence to link coursework and completion or it was dicult to test. A
number of respondents pointed to social benets of building stronger student
communities (e.g. Johnston, 1995) through coursework, and its obligatory or
methodical nature was an advantage to two respondents. Other comments
included the need for personal self-reection in coursework, the ability of
coursework to weed out weak proposals or bring them up to scratch, and
the value of coursework for making it possible for faculty skills to be exploited
and shared among students. Coursework could also be an important catalyst
to engage with research in fresh ways and within relevant contexts.

20%

Agree
Disagree
Figure 1 Coursework ensures Neutral
17% 55%
more students complete their n/a

doctorate 8%

260 Design Studies Vol 30 No. 3 May 2009

 5.2 Student backgrounds in research methods
While the level of understanding for the doctorate needs development
(Figure 2), where a Masters degree (as in the US) is a prerequisite for enrol-
ment in a doctorate it might be expected that students have addressed
research methods. Refresher courses for those having been in industry for
new recruits into practice-oriented doctorates might also be expected. A
signicant number of respondents agreed with this claim although a near equal
number either disagreed or were neutral. Qualitative comments again revealed
interesting clarications, including the regional particularities in curriculum
requirements, for example, in the UK, US, Germany, Denmark, and Scandina-
via. There was some debate about the levels of graduate and undergraduate
exposure to methods, and a frequent comment among respondents was the
lack of previous research training of students often due to their professional
but not academic background. Interestingly, there were a few comments about
the dismissive attitude practice-oriented design faculty could take to research
methods. Some specic claims were that overseas students were particularly
poorly prepared, that students that do a good proposal have been researching
before, and that lack of research training was more characteristic of profes-
sional doctorates compared to PhD candidates.

5.3 Coursework and research independence

There was general disagreement with this claim (Figure 3), which reects an
issue still debated in the UK, Australia and some other countries, where cour-
sework has only recently been introduced as a distinctive feature of profes-
sional doctorates (e.g. Trigwell et al., 1997; Bourner et al., 2001). A number
of respondents noted how the coursework-research relationship depended
on the project and the individual themselves. Several claimed that even course-
work involves independent work and individual choice (of courses) and could
avoid an unnecessarily painful trial and error approach to study. Many re-
spondents signalled their belief that coursework could contribute to students
developing as independent researchers by promoting critical thinking and
open possibilities for the nal doctoral thesis. Some respondents emphasized
the fact that lack of background scholarship among students made course-
work unavoidable. Also this question elicited comments on the nature of the
PhD as communal apprenticeship in the formation of accomplished indepen-
dent researchers. Two respondents suggested that coursework could be too
heavy and hinder our students to other independent research work.

5%
21%
Agree
46%
Disagree
Figure 2 Most students have Neutral
no previous training in re- n/a

search methods 28%

Global perspectives on structured research training 261

 10% 10%
17% Agree
Disagree
Figure 3 Coursework hinders Neutral

students from becoming inde- n/a

pendent researchers 63%

5.4 Qualitative and quantitative methods

Training in research methods (Figure 4) and methodologies is a common de-
nominator in doctoral coursework and qualitative and quantitative methods
are often mentioned as dividing up this domain (Cresswell and Miller, 1997;
Kiley and Liljegren, 1999). In some elds there is a recognition of the value
of students addressing both approaches (qualitative and quantitative) and
even mixing methods (Kaplan and Duchon, 1988; Page, 2001). A clear ma-
jority agreed with this proposal and research methods that are taught in
PhD programs often address these two broad traditions or strategies of
inquiry. A number of respondents alluded to the fact that an exposure to
these two traditions was part of the general responsibility of research train-
ing to provide students with a basic grounding even if they did not then go
on to use such methods, e.g. is certainly advisable in terms of personal de-
velopment as a researcher. It was noted several times that design research
was not limited to these two inquiry paradigms. Some specic comments in-
cluded the value of multiple methods for triangulation with other possible
methods as well and to avoid the many mistakes in methodology that are
seen in the design area. The value of learning such social science methods
as they could then be transferred to other disciplines and complemented
within projects where several disciplines have to intervene.

5.5 Design specic methods (e.g. research visualization)

Although there was a clear majority in favour of this proposal a number of
respondents referred to such skills as professional skills students (Figure 5)
should have on entry to the doctoral program. Many respondents again
note training is dependent on the individual project. Multiple methods, includ-
ing visualization, were seen by one respondent as particularly relevant to
design and a good help for the student to manage and communicate his/her
research project. Several comments highlighted the intrinsic value of such
methods and their link with professional practice although the level of

4%
14%

8% Agree
Disagree
Figure 4 Students should Neutral
learn conventional qualitative n/a
and quantitative methods 74%

262 Design Studies Vol 30 No. 3 May 2009

 5%
19%
Agree
Disagree
Figure 5 Students should
Neutral
learn design specic methods 6%
n/a
(e.g. research visualization) 70%

instruction, e.g. foundations should be taught was questioned. Two individ-

uals suggested the need for more attention to teaching such methods.

5.6 Coursework and academic status of the doctoral degree

A clear majority disagreed (Figure 6) with this claim which takes up the per-
ception in the European (and Australian) tradition that coursework does
not belong in a doctoral program, which should exclusively address indepen-
dent research. Several respondents acknowledged that this was a dependent
and subjective issue and somewhat mitigated by new forms of doctorates
which did include coursework. A number of respondents emphasized the
intrinsically academic status of coursework and the contribution to not detrac-
tion from academic status coursework gave, especially in the US, e.g. not in
the US, not in the Ivy League. One respondent noted the detrimental eect
of coursework-less degrees in some institutions. Several respondents also
pointed to the overall value of coursework to research eciencies such as
time-eciency.

5.7 Amount of coursework in doctoral program

Doctoral programs vary greatly in the coursework to research ratio (Figure 7).
This question produced the most indistinct pattern of all questions and results
were vitiated by the fact that many respondents found making a judgement
based on some existing experience dicult to answer, e.g. more than
what?. A number of respondents did refer to the specics of their institutions,
e.g. we already require too high amount of coursework: 80 full-time weeks;
one respondent arguing that more was needed, e.g. the coursework taught
should deal with design research methods and it does not. Acknowledging
that the question was program and institution dependent, one respondent
claimed that in general doctoral design programs had too little coursework
partly because schools lack the teaching resources for such courses and partly
because they dont usually make appropriate use of courses in other schools.

12% 10%

15% Agree
Disagree

Figure 6 Coursework detracts Neutral

n/a
from the academic status of
the doctoral degree 63%

Global perspectives on structured research training 263

 11%
25%
Agree
Disagree
Neutral
Figure 7 Students should have
35% n/a
more coursework in their doc-
toral program 29%

One respondent suggested more specic was relevant e not more but more
specic and related to the dierent disciplines and their dierent natures.

5.8 Individualizing coursework

Group or cohort delivery of coursework (Figure 8) at the initial and medial
stages of the doctorate means that learning and teaching are generic to some
extent. While there was general agreement with this claim many respondents
also pointed to the need for balance between generic and individual skills e
balance is important too. Foundation level coursework programs typically
involves group teaching across disciplinary and research topic boundaries.
Several respondents highlighted the problem of providing such a balanced
program, for example, in an ideal world, we should be able to oer dozens
of small seminars and narrow individual courses. The fact is that none but
the wealthiest universities can do this. While highlighting the need for bal-
ance, several comments pointed to the need for some compromise towards
the individual project, e.g. often the project has a very specic scope and it
may be dicult to nd courses that serve this scope. A minority focused on
the value to students of personalization, e.g. makes it more independent
and more relevant. Taking up comments made in previous questions, several
respondents highlighted the benets of the community aspect of group course-
work, e.g. its useful for collegiality to have a shared basis for discussion; it
gives you a sense of group and community.

5.9 The transition from coursework to research

The transition to independent research (Figure 9) from coursework is chal-
lenging for novice researchers (Lovitts, 2005; Schweinsberg and McManus,
2006). While a near majority agreed with this claim an equal number wither
disagreed or were neutral. This was again viewed as dependent but some gen-
eralizations were made, e.g. the former [diculty] usually occurs with students
from professional design backgrounds. Many respondents suggested the op-
posite was true, i.e. that coursework could ease the transition to research.

8%
17%
Agree
Disagree
Figure 8 Coursework should
Neutral
be individualized to the stu-
58% n/a
dent project and not generic 17%

264 Design Studies Vol 30 No. 3 May 2009

 Certain comments attempted to clarify the causes of the challenge, e.g. no, I
think that some students have a problem moving from surface learning to deep
learning. Another comment reected on limitations in a specic school con-
text, e.g. they never received a formation in this sense. And for us (the profes-
sors engaged in this), this is hard also.

5.10 Sharing coursework between Masters

and Doctoral students
For a variety of reasons, including institutional eciencies, coursework
(Figure 10) is shared between both groups although typically the assessment
outcomes for the doctoral students are expected to be of a greater quality. A
majority found this statement problematic as responses are based on what
the meaning of the same means. A number of respondents referred to the
shared and dierentiated purposes of coursework. Among those who agreed
that overlap was possible, and others, there were clear statements about the
distinction between the two degrees including claims about the two levels,
for example Masters, in part, is research training, and a PhD is about new
knowledge/design.

5.11 Doctoral portfolios

Portfolios are a growing global phenomenon (Figure 11), common in certain
disciplines (including the creative arts), and particularly in professional doc-
torates in applied disciplines (e.g. Maxwell, 2003; Thyer, 2004). Although
many found this idea palatable some found the question dicult to interpret,
one referring to it as jargon from your region. Comments pointed to this
practice being an option for certain programs. A signicant number referred
to the existing practice of ongoing publication as part of this process, e.g.
there is scope for all forms of written work to be included in the written sub-
mission, such as publications, chapters, posters and coursework. Notwith-
standing, some respondents preferred a strict separation of coursework
and dissertation writing, e.g. the PhD should be a whole entity. Anything
else leads to dilution of standards. Others pointed to the general value of
ongoing writing through the process, e.g. it should support supervision dis-
cussion. A few respondents noted that such portfolios of work could con-
tribute to the US mid-point comprehensive exam, e.g. we submit papers
from our coursework as the body of our comprehensive exam.

10%

22% 44% Agree

Disagree

Figure 9 Students nd transi- Neutral

n/a
tion from coursework to re-
search dicult 24%

Global perspectives on structured research training 265

 6%
13% 22%
Agree

Figure 10 Coursework train- Disagree

Neutral
ing and assessment should be
n/a
the same for Masters and
Doctoral students 59%

5.12 Design projects and interdisciplinarity

Interdisciplinarity is often suggested to be a distinctive characteristic of design
research (Figure 12) although it presumes the somewhat debatable fact of
whether design has a disciplinary structure (Cross, 1999; Pizzocaro, 2002;
Harris et al., 2003; Tellefsen, 2003). A clear majority found this claim to be
appropriate to design although dependent on the individual project. Conrm-
ing multiple meanings of the term, other respondents provided examples of
existing doctoral practices, including coursework, where interdisciplinarity
was dened, e.g. designing should be researched within social, cultural, polit-
ical, economic, psychological and technological contexts. One respondent
suggested a change to curriculum e maybe a subject on contextualizing design
would be a good idea. In general however, there was a general conrmation of
the signicance of interdisciplinarity, an oft-cited term on institutional
websites regarding doctoral programs in design.

6 Conclusion
This study has examined the nature of structured research training in doctor-
ate of design programs. Compulsory structured research training through elec-
tives and foundation courses appears to be not just a North American
phenomenon and appears to be becoming the international norm, as Kyvik
and Tvede (1998) have suggested. This study suggests certain convergences
of opinion regarding the characteristics and quality of structured research
training, such as the need for qualitative and quantitative method training,
while also indicating some divergence on certain issues, e.g. portfolio. Qualita-
tive comments supplied by respondents provide critical caveats on responses
and the need to contextualize each question within a specic disciplinary
and regional context. Particular practices, such as the doctoral portfolio,
remain geographically distinct.

9%

22% 42% Agree

Figure 11 Assessed course- Disagree

Neutral
work (e.g. written assign-
n/a
ments) should be part of
a doctoral portfolio 27%

266 Design Studies Vol 30 No. 3 May 2009

 10%
10%
Agree
3%
Disagree
Figure 12 Design projects are Neutral
interdisciplinary and course- n/a

work should address this 77%

There is, nonetheless, a consensus that coursework is a valuable contribution

to doctoral research and should in general address multiple methods and par-
adigms in a eld characterized by interdisciplinarity. The communal and social
aspect of learning in cohorts through foundational and discipline specic
phases of research training was a repeated theme in responses to several ques-
tions. In addition, structured coursework was generally deemed a direct and
positive contribution to student independence as researcher. A signicant
number of respondents identied limitations in existing practices in their insti-
tutions regarding the quality and need for a substantive structured research
program.

Further studies employing more qualitative methods and individual institu-

tional case studies should be conducted in the future to build on this prelimi-
nary analysis. Nowell (1988) has argued that the British tradition of doctoral
study should learn from the success of North American programs which pro-
vide structured coursework to ease the transition from coursework to research
studies. Kyvik and Tvede (1998) have also suggested that Europe and North
America are converging in terms of the characteristics of doctoral programs.
One reason for this convergence is that even the UK model in art and design
has had to move some way to incorporating research training, simply because
the various research councils are increasingly make it a condition for funded
studentships.1 This study suggests that the provision of structured coursework
in design doctoral programs is an indicator of this convergence. In its multiple
disciplinary aliations it seems that some design elds must decide whether to
shift their allegiance from the humanities and arts to improve time to comple-
tion and structured coursework may prove to be the catalysts for this shift.

References
Baird, L L (1990) Disciplines and doctorates: the relationships between program
characteristics and the duration of doctoral study, Research in Higher Education
Vol 31 No 4 pp 369e385
Baird, L L (1997) Completing the dissertation: theory, research, and practice, New
Directions for Higher Education Vol 25 No 3 pp 99e105
Ball, L (2002) Preparing graduates in art and design to meet the challenges of
working in the creative industries: a new model for work, Art, Design and Com-
munication in Higher Education Vol 1 No 1 pp 10e24

Global perspectives on structured research training 267

 Bayazit, N M (2004) Investigating design: a review of forty years of design
research, Design Issues Vol 20 No 1 pp 16e29
Biggs, M and Buchler, K (2007) Rigor and practice-based research, Design Issues
Vol 23 No 3 pp 62e69
Boud, D and Tennant, M (2006) Putting doctoral education to work: challenges to
academic practice, Higher Education Research and Development Vol 25 No 3 pp
293e306
Bourner, T, Bowden, R and Laing, S (2001) Professional doctorates in England,
Studies in Higher Education Vol 26 No 1 pp 65e83
Buchanan, R (2001) Design research and the new learning, Design Issues Vol 17
No 4 pp 3e17
Candlin, F (2000) Practice-based doctorates and questions of academic
legitimacy, Journal of Art and Design in Education Vol 19 No 1 pp
96e101
Cresswell, J W and Miller, G A (1997) Research methodologies and the doctoral
process in L F Goodchild (ed) Rethinking the dissertation process: tackling personal
and institutional obstacles, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, California pp
33e46
Cross, N (1999) Design research: a disciplined conversation, Design Issues Vol 15
No 2 pp 5e10
Dallow, P (2003) Representing creativeness: practice-based approaches to research
in creative arts, Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education Vol 2 No 1
pp 49e57
Denicolo, P (2003) Assessing the PhD: a constructive view of criteria, Quality
Assurance in Education Vol 11 No 2 pp 84e92
Demeritt, D (2004) Research training and the end(s) of the PhD, Geoforum Vol 35
No 6 pp 655e660
De Valero, Y F (2001) Departmental factors affecting time-to-degree and comple-
tion rates of doctoral students at one land-grant research institution, The Journal
of Higher Education Vol 72 No 3 pp 341e367
Durling, D (2002) Discourses on research and the PhD in design, Quality Assur-
ance in Education Vol 10 No 2 pp 79e85
Durling, D and Friedman, K (2002) Guest editorial e best practices in PhD educa-
tion in design, Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education Vol 1 No 3 pp
133e140
Friedman, K (2000) Form and structure of the doctorate in design: prelude to
a multilogue, in Paper Presented at the Doctoral Education in Design, La Clusaz,
France
Gilbert, R (2004) A framework for evaluating the doctoral curriculum, Assessment
and Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 29 No 3 pp 299e307
Gilbert, R, Balatti, J, Turner, P and Whitehouse, H (2004) The generic skills de-
bate in research higher degrees, Higher Education Research and Development
Vol 23 No 3 pp 375e388
Harris, R, Giard, J, and Pijawka, D (2003, October 14e17) Interdisciplinary doc-
toral education in environmental design: assessment of programs, issues, struc-
ture, and vision, in Paper Presented at the 6th Asian Design International
Conference, Tsukuba, Japan
Hockey, J (2003) Art and design practice-based research degree supervision: some
empirical ndings, Arts and Humanities in Higher Education Vol 2 No 2 pp
173e185
Hockey, J and Allen-Collinson, J (2000) The Supervision of practice-based re-
search degrees in art and design, International Journal of Art and Design Education
Vol 19 No 3 pp 345e355

268 Design Studies Vol 30 No. 3 May 2009

 Hoddell, S, Street, D and Wildblood, H (2002) Doctorates e converging or diverg-
ing patterns of provision, Quality Assurance in Education Vol 10 No 2 pp 61e70
Hughes, R (2006) The poetics of practice-based research writing, The Journal of
Architecture Vol 11 No 3 pp 283e301
Johnston, B and Murray, R (2004) New routes to the PhD: cause for concern?
Higher Education Quarterly Vol 58 No 1 pp 31e42
Johnston, S (1995) Building a sense of community in a research masters course,
Studies in Higher Education Vol 20 No 3 pp 279e291
Kaplan, B and Duchon, B (1988) Combining qualitative and quantitative methods
in information systems research: a case study, MIS Quarterly Vol 12 No 4 pp
571e586
Katz, E L (1997) Key players in the dissertation process, New Directions for
Higher Education Vol 99 No Fall pp 5e16
Kiley, M and Liljegren, D (1999) Discipline-related models for a structured pro-
gram at the commencement of a PhD, Teaching in Higher Education Vol 4 No
1 pp 61e75
Kroelinger, M (2003) Issues for initiating interdisciplinary doctoral programmes,
Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education Vol 1 No 3 pp 183e194
Kyvik, S and Tvede, O (1998) The doctorate in the Nordic countries, Comparative
Education Vol 34 No 1 pp 9e25
Lovitts, B E (2005) Being a good course-taker is not enough: a theoretical perspec-
tive on the transition to independent research, Studies in Higher Education Vol 30
No 2 pp 137e154
Manathunga, C, Smith, C and Bath, D (2004) Developing and evaluating authentic
integration between research and coursework in professional doctorate programs,
Teaching in Higher Education Vol 9 No 2 pp 235e246
Martin, Y M, Maclachlan, M and Karmel, T (2001) Postgraduate completion rates
ACT: Department of Education, Training and Youth Aairs Commonwealth of
Australia, Canberra
Maxwell, T (2003) From rst to second generation professional doctorate, Studies
in Higher Education Vol 28 No 3 pp 279e291
McAlpine, L and Norton, J (2006) Reframing our approach to doctoral programs:
an integrative framework for action and research, Higher Education Research and
Development Vol 25 No 1 pp 3e17
McWilliam, E L and Singh, P (2002) Towards a research training curriculum:
what, why, how, who?, Australian Educational Researcher Vol 29 No 3 pp
4e18
McWilliam, E, Taylor, P G, Thomson, P, Green, B, Maxwell, T and Wildy, H
(2002) Research training in doctoral programs: what can be learned from profes-
sional doctorates? Dept of Education, Science and Training, Canberra
Moses, I (1984) Supervision of higher degree students e problem areas and pos-
sible solutions, Higher Education Research and Development Vol 3 No 2 pp
153e165
Neumann, R (2002) Diversity, doctoral education and policy, Higher Education
Research and Development Vol 21 No 2 pp 167e178
Newbury, D (1996) Knowledge and research in art and design, Design Studies Vol
17 No 2 pp 215e219
Newbury, D (2002) Doctoral education in design, the process of research degree
study, and the trained researcher, Art, Design and Communication in Higher
Education Vol 1 No 3 pp 149e159
Nowell, D E (1988) Postgraduate studies in North American and British geogra-
phy: a comparative review, Journal of Geography in Higher Education Vol 12 No 1
pp 95e106

Global perspectives on structured research training 269

 Page, R N (2001) Reshaping graduate preparation in educational research
methods: one schools experience, Educational Researcher Vol 30 No 5 pp
19e25
Park, C (2005) New variant PhD: the changing nature of the doctorate in the
UK, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management Vol 27 No 2 pp
189e207
Pearson, M and Brew, A (2002) Research training and supervision development,
Studies in Higher Education Vol 27 No 2 pp 135e150
Pedgley, O and Wormald, P (2007) Integration of design projects within a PhD,
Design Issues Vol 23 No 3 pp 70e85
Pizzocaro, S (2002) Re-orienting PhD education in industrial design: some issues
arising from the experience of a PhD programme revision, Art, Design and Com-
munication in Higher Education Vol 1 No 3 pp 173e182
Pole, C (2000) Technicians and scholars in pursuit of the PhD: some reections on
doctoral study, Research Papers in Education Vol 15 No 1 pp 95e111
Prentice, R (2000) The place of practical knowledge in research in art and design
education, Teaching in Higher Education Vol 5 No 4 pp 521e534
Radu, F (2006) Inside looking out: a framework for discussing the question of
architectural design doctorates, The Journal of Architecture Vol 11 No 3 pp
345e351
Roth, S (1999) The state of design research, Design Issues Vol 15 No 2 pp
18e26
Rust, C (2002) Many owers, small leaps forward: debating doctoral education in
design, Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education Vol 1 No 3 pp
141e148
Schwartz-Shea, P (2003) Is this the curriculum we want? Doctoral requirements
and offerings in methods and methodology, PS: Political Science and Politics
Vol 36 pp 379e386
Schweinsberg, S and McManus, P (2006) Exploring the transition: coursework to
research-based study in the geography honours year, Geographical Research Vol
44 No 1 pp 52e62
Seago, A and Dunne, A (1999) New methodologies in art and design research: the
object as discourse, Design Issues Vol 15 No 2 pp 11e17
Smeby, J C (2000) Disciplinary differences in Norwegian graduate education,
Studies in Higher Education Vol 25 No 1 pp 53e67
Stricker, L (1994) Institutional factors in time to the doctorate, Research in Higher
Education Vol 35 No 5 pp 569e587
Sutton, S and Kemp, S (2006) Integrating social science and design inquiry
through interdisciplinary design charrettes: an approach to participatory commu-
nity problem solving, American Journal of Community Psychology Vol 38 No 1 pp
125e139
Tellefsen, B (2003) Integrating research education across departments and disci-
plines: theory and experience, Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education
Vol 1 No 3 pp 161e172
Thyer, B (2004) A student portfolio approach to conducting doctoral social work
comprehensive examinations, Journal of Teaching in Social Work Vol 23 No 3/4
pp 117e126
Trigwell, K, Shannon, T and Maurizi, R (1997) Research-coursework doctoral pro-
grams in Australian universities Australian Govt Pub Service, Canberra
Usher, R (2002) A diversity of doctorates: tness for the knowledge economy?
Higher Education Research and Development Vol 21 No 2 pp 143e153
Wellington, J and Sikes, P (2006) A doctorate in a tight compartment: why do
students choose a professional doctorate and what impact does it have on their

270 Design Studies Vol 30 No. 3 May 2009

 personal and professional lives?, Studies in Higher Education Vol 31 No 6 pp
723e734
Winter, R, Griths, M and Green, K (2000) The academic qualities of practice:
what are the criteria for a practice-based PhD?, Studies in Higher Education Vol
25 No 1 pp 25e37
Wood, J (2000) The culture of academic rigour: does design research really need
it?, The Design Journal Vol 3 No 1 pp 44e57

1. Many thanks to anonymous reviewer 3 for pointing this out.

Global perspectives on structured research training 271