Chapters in Books (Centre for Higher and Adult Education)

Permanent URI for this collection

https://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/101594

Browse

Browsing Chapters in Books (Centre for Higher and Adult Education) by Author "Frick, Liezel"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Candidates, supervisors and institutions: pushing postgraduate boundaries: an overview
    (SUN PRESS, 2014) Frick, Liezel; Bitzer, Eli; Albertyn, Ruth
    INTRODUCTION: Academic boundaries are in some ways similar to national boundaries – they are set up to colonise and govern, but at the same time are constantly challenged to reaffirm their authority and meaning. The postgraduate environment has been and is still colonised and governed by a variety of boundaries: inter/national, geographical, cultural, institutional, disciplinary and paradigmatic; also those of knowledge and relationships, and many more. The contributions to this book set out to explore and challenge such boundaries as they exist within the postgraduate environment. The work of Thomas Kuhn (1962) and others on paradigms set the scene for establishing boundaries both within and between academic disciplines in terms of research. The earlier work of Becher and Trowler (2001) on academic tribes and their territories may also be useful to explain academics’ search for a scholarly identity in the higher education environment. An academic tribe provides its members with an identity and a particular frame of reference. The characteristic identity of a particular academic tribe is developed from an early age – usually already at the undergraduate level, where patterns of thought are imprinted. These ‘tribal’ associations are often solidified at the postgraduate level.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Conceptualising risk in doctoral education: Navigating boundary tensions
    (SUN PRESS, 2014) Frick, Liezel; Albertyn, Ruth; Bitzer, Eli
    Introduction: If you are not willing to risk the unusual, you will have to settle for the ordinary. – Jim Rohn Risk-taking is an important form of human behaviour, but can be conceptualised in different ways (Byrnes, Miller & Schafer 1999). Some researchers in higher education point to the association between academic risk and its negative consequences (McWilliam, Lawson, Evans & Taylor 2005; McWilliam, Sanderson, Evans, Lawson & Taylor 2006; McWilliam, Singh & Taylor 2002) and therefore conceptualise risk as something that should be avoided or at least carefully managed. Others highlight risk as an opportunity for achievement (Backhouse 2009; Frick 2011, 2012; Holligan 2005). If innovation is key to the generation of new knowledge, then risk is seen to be an integral part of this process (Brown 2010). Knowledge and innovation are considered to be critical contributors to national wealth and welfare and therefore doctoral education has gained increasing significance within the context of human capital development (Bloland 2005; CHE 2009). In this context, the dynamics of balancing risk and innovation (Brown 2010; Latham & Braun 2009) may provide challenges for the supervisory relationship and the research process. Education – and more specifically doctoral education – seems to be risky given the requirement to produce original knowledge. Students need to have “the courage and confidence to take risks, to make mistakes, to invent and reinvent knowledge, and to pursue critical and lifelong inquiries in the world, with the world, and with each other” (Freire 1970, cited in Lin & Cranton 2005:458). MacKinnon (1970) agrees that the courage to take risks is an important characteristic of creative endeavours – such as doctoral studies. In this chapter we therefore take the position that risk is unavoidable within the context of doctoral education, but in order to extend the boundaries and manage risk constructively, supervisors could gain from understanding the concept of risk within this context.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    PHD by publication : an institutional analysis
    (SUN MeDIA, 2016) Frick, Liezel
    INTRODUCTION: PhD1 theses generally follow one of two different formats. Firstly there is the (more traditional) monograph, which is written as a unified and coherent work, and which is most commonly found in non-laboratory areas. Secondly, the PhD by publication2 has evolved, which comprises a number of papers written during a period of postgraduate training, as well as an introduction to and summary of the papers included. The PhD by publication has become established as a form of doctoral knowledge production across disciplines. Increased demands for shorter completion times, lower dropout rates and higher so-called productivity during postgraduate study are instrumental in driving the pressure to publish internationally (Boud & Lee 2009). National funding and subsidy formulas,3 relatively low doctoral production rates and the aging profile of active researchers (ASSAf 2010; Backhouse 2008) may furthermore contribute to the promotion of PhD formats that are thought to address these issues. These trends have (at least in part) led to the two different kinds of doctoral dissertations. Both the national and international drivers of the PhD by publication format seem to originate mostly from calls for accountability and quality assurance, appraisal and excellence, and effectiveness and efficiency. Such drivers are mostly aimed at managerial imperatives and policy adherence, rather than at the scholarly development of students or the advancement of scientific knowledge (see, for instance, Giroux 2014; Altbach 2012, 2013). Scholars warn that students and supervisors alike may not be well prepared for doctoral education in general (Manathunga 2007), or for such an alternative format as such (Paré 2010), as it may demand a different doctoral supervisory pedagogy (Lee 2010).
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The professional development of academics: In pursuit of scholarship
    (AFRICAN SUN MeDIA, 2009) Frick, Liezel; Kapp, Chris
    In this chapter we explore the development of academic staff as an area or theme for study and research in the field of higher education – from both a theoretical and a practical stance. We start by providing a broad definition and an overview of a number of theories underlying the concept and continue to discuss the issues and challenges that it faces in higher education. The notion of scholarship forms the basis of the discussion. A brief discussion on how academic professional development is practised ensues and a South African case study of formal education for academic professional development and the scholarship of teaching is explored. We conclude this chapter with a number of ideas on future developments in the field, which may be of interest to scholars who wish to study the professional development of academics within institutions of higher education.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The role of doctoral education in early career academic development
    (SUN MeDIA, 2016) Frick, Liezel; Albertyn, Ruth; Brodin, Eva; McKenna, Sioux; Claesson, Silwa
    POINT OF DEPARTURE: The social and economic significance of the doctorate is recognised across the world, as doctoral candidates are considered to be key contributors to the knowledge society by contributing to socio-economic development through innovation (Barnacle 2005; Taylor 2012). Doctoral students – regardless of their discipline – are expected to take part actively in the knowledge creation process at universities, and this is especially important for those who will remain in academia and continue to contribute in this way.1 But knowledge creation is a complex process. Knowledge creation at the doctoral level and beyond requires a comprehensive understanding of relevant knowledge, sound judgment, and the ability to advise with insight. Doctoral learning also includes aspects such as abstract reasoning, the ability to conceptualise, and problem solving. Thus, through the original contribution candidates are expected to create during the doctorate, they are supposed to become experts in their chosen field of study. This process has been described by Evans (2014) as disciplinary acculturation. Various authors (for example Danby & Lee 2012; Lin & Cranton 2005; Manathunga & Goozée 2007) point out that this process of becoming an expert is by no means easy or straightforward. Rather, developing as a scholar is a lifelong process in which moving from a novice to an expert is an essential rite of passage into academic practice (Dreyfus & Dreyfus 1986). Benmore (2014) states that for those pursuing academic careers, it involves coming to know, but also coming to be an academic. Such a process of becoming doctorate implies movement over time, progression, and transformation (Barnacle, 2005).