CE  Vol.3 No.6 A , October 2012
To Publish or Not to Publish before Submission? Considerations for Doctoral Students and Supervisors
ABSTRACT
Postgraduate research education is multi-faceted incorporating the teaching of a range of skills and study behaviours. A key skill for doctoral students is that of scholarly writing that Aitchison (2009) argues is often difficult to teach, with students unclear about the standards required for doctoral work. One benchmark of standards of academic literacy is published outputs, with Kamler (2008) pressing for greater pedagogical attention to be given to writing for publication within doctoral education. However, the case for pursuing publication as part of doctoral research experience is subject to a number of variables. This discussion paper debates some of these variables to consider writing for publication within diverse doctoral education. Features of difference will be discussed to reveal that the choice of whether or not to “publish as you go” (Taylor & Beasley, 2005: 130) is influenced by the personal, disciplinary and institutional context that frames the doctoral undertaking.

Cite this paper
Watts, J. (2012). To Publish or Not to Publish before Submission? Considerations for Doctoral Students and Supervisors. Creative Education, 3, 1101-1107. doi: 10.4236/ce.2012.326165.
References
[1]   Aitchison, C. (2009). Writing groups for doctoral education. Studies in Higher Education, 34, 905-916. doi:10.1080/03075070902785580

[2]   Baker, V. L., & Lattuca, L. R. (2010). Developmental networks and learning: toward an interdisciplinary perspective on identity development during doctoral study. Studies in Higher Education, 35, 807- 827. doi:10.1080/03075070903501887

[3]   Barnacle, R., & Mewburn, I. (2010). Learning networks and the journey of “becoming doctor”. Studies in Higher Education, 35, 433-444. doi:10.1080/03075070903131214

[4]   Barnes, B. J., Williams, E. A., & Stassen, M. L. A. (2012). Dissecting doctoral advising: A comparison of students’ experiences across disciplines. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 36, 309-331. doi:10.1080/0309877X.2011.614933

[5]   Bourner, T., Bowden, R., & Laing, S. (2001). Professional doctorates in England. Studies in Higher Education, 26, 65-83.

[6]   Cumming, J. (2010). Doctoral enterprise: A holistic conception of evolving practices and arrangements. Studies in Higher Education, 35, 25-39. doi:10.1080/03075070902825899

[7]   Delamont, S., Atkinson, P., & Parry, O. (2004). Supervising the doctorate—A guide to success. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

[8]   Dinham, S. & Scott, C. (2001). The experience of disseminating the results of doctoral research. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 25, 45-55. doi:10.1080/03098770020030498

[9]   Evans, T. (2010). Understanding doctoral research for professional practitioners. In M. Walker, & P. Thomson (Eds.) The Routledge doctoral supervisor’s companion (pp. 66-75). London and New York: Routledge.

[10]   Franke, A., & Arvidsson, B. (2011). Research supervisors’ different ways of experiencing supervision of doctoral students. Studies in Higher Education, 36, 7-19. doi:10.1080/03075070903402151

[11]   Gardner, S. K. (2007). “I heard it through the grapevine”: Doctoral student socialization in chemistry and history. Higher Education, 32, 383-408. doi:10.1007/s10734-006-9020-x

[12]   Gardner, S. K. (2010). Faculty perspective on doctoral student socialization in five disciplines. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 5, 39-53.

[13]   Gasper, D. (2010). Interdisciplinarity and interdisciplinarity—Diverse purposes of research: Theory-oriented, situation-oriented, policy-oriented. In P. Thomson, & M. Walker (Eds.), The Routledge doctoral student’s companion (pp. 52-67). London and New York: Routledge.

[14]   Golde, C. M. (2005). The role of the department and discipline in doctoral student attrition: Lessons from four departments. Journal of Higher Education, 76, 669-700. doi:10.1353/jhe.2005.0039

[15]   Golde, C. M. (2010). Adapting signature pedagogies in doctoral education: The case of teaching how to work with the literature. In M. Walker, & P. Thomson (Eds.), The Routledge doctoral supervisor’s companion (pp. 106-120). Abingdon: Routledge.

[16]   Green, R., Hutchison, E., & Sra, B. (1992). Evaluating scholarly performance: The productivity of graduates of social work doctoral programs. Social Services Review, 66, 441-466. doi:10.1086/603932

[17]   Halse, C., & Malfroy, J. (2010). Retheorizing doctoral supervision as professional work. Studies in Higher Education, 35, 79-92. doi:10.1086/603932

[18]   Hawley, P. (2010). Being bright is not enough: The unwritten rules of doctoral study (3rd ed.). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

[19]   Hunt, C. (2001). Climbing out of the void: moving from chaos to concepts in the presentation of a thesis. Teaching in Higher Education, 6, 351-367. doi:10.1080/13562510120061214

[20]   Ives, G., & Rowley, G. (2005). Supervisor selection or allocation and continuity of supervision: Ph.D. students’ progress and outcomes. Studies in Higher Education, 30, 535-555. doi:10.1080/03075070500249161

[21]   Johnston, B., & Murray, R. (2004). New routes to the Ph.D.: Cause for concern? Higher Education Quarterly, 58, 31-42. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2273.2004.00258.x

[22]   Kamler, B. (2008). Rethinking doctoral publication practices: Writing from and beyond the thesis. Studies in Higher Education, 33, 283- 294. doi:10.1080/03075070802049236

[23]   Kwan, B. S. C. (2010). An investigation of instruction in research publishing offered in doctoral programs: The Hong Kong case. Higher Education, 59, 55-68. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9233-x

[24]   Lee, A., & Kamler, B. (2008). Bringing pedagogy to doctoral publishing. Teaching in Higher Education, 13, 511-523. doi:10.1080/13562510802334723

[25]   Lee, A. (2011). Professional practice and doctoral education: Becoming a researcher. In L. Scanlon (Ed.), “Becoming” a professional: An interdisciplinary analysis of professional learning (lifelong learning book series, Volume 16) (pp. 153-169). London: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-1378-9_8

[26]   Lillis, T., & North, S. (2006). Academic writing. In S. Potter (Ed.), Doing postgraduate research (2nd Edition, pp. 114-151). London: Sage Publications.

[27]   Lucas, R., & Willinsky, J. (2010). Open access and the ongoing transformation of scholarly publishing. In P. Thomson, & M. Walker (Eds.), The Routledge doctoral student’s companion (pp. 344-355). London and New York: Routledge.

[28]   Miller, B. (2010). Skills for sale: What is being commodified in higher education? Journal of Further and Higher Education, 34, 199-206. doi:10.1080/03098771003695460

[29]   Molesworth, M., Nixon, E., & Scullion, R. (2009). Having, being and higher education: The marketisation of the university and the transformation of the student into consumer. Teaching in Higher Education, 14, 277-287. doi:10.1080/13562510902898841

[30]   Morley, L., Leonard, D., & David, M. (2003) Quality and equality in British Ph.D. assessment. Quality Assurance in Education, 11, 64-72. doi:10.1108/09684880310471489

[31]   Morrison-Saunders, A., Moore, S. A., Hughes, M., & Newsome, D. (2010). Coming to terms with research practice: Riding the emotional rollercoaster of doctoral research studies’ in M. Walker, & P. Thomson (Eds.), The Routledge doctoral supervisor’s companion (pp. 206-218). Abingdon: Routledge.

[32]   Mullins, G., & Kiley, M. (2002). It’s a Ph.D., not a Nobel Prize: How experienced examiners assess research theses. Studies in Higher Education, 27, 369-386. doi:10.1080/0307507022000011507

[33]   Nettles, M. T., & Millett, C. M. (2006). Three magic letters: Getting to Ph.D. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

[34]   Pearson, M., Evans, T., & Macauley, P. (2008). Growth and diversity in doctoral education: Assessing the Australian experience. Higher Education, 55, 357-372. doi:10.1007/s10734-007-9059-3

[35]   Phillips, E. M., & Pugh, D. S. (2000). How to get a Ph.D.: A handbook for students and their supervisors (3rd ed.), Maidenhead: Open University Press.

[36]   Rugg, G., & Petre, M. (2004). The unwritten rules of Ph.D. research. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

[37]   Sankey, M., & St. Hill, R. (2009). The ethics of designing for multimodality: Empowering nontraditional learners. In U. Demiray, & R. C. Sharma (Eds.), Ethical Practices and Implications in Distance Learning (pp. 125-154). Hershey: Information Science Reference.

[38]   Seddon, T. (2010). Doctoral education in global times: “Scholarly quality” as practical ethics in research. In M. Walker, & P. Thomson (Eds.), The Routledge doctoral supervisor’s companion (pp. 219-230). London and New York: Routledge.

[39]   Servage, L. (2009). Alternative and professional doctoral programs: What is driving the demand? Studies in Higher Education, 34, 765- 779. doi:10.1080/03075070902818761

[40]   Shulman, L. S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134, 52-59. doi:10.1162/0011526054622015

[41]   Taylor, S. (2002). Managing postgraduate research degrees. In S. Ketteridge, S. Marshall, & H. Fry (Eds.), The effective academic: A handbook for enhanced academic practice (pp.131-147). London: Kogan Page Ltd.

[42]   Taylor, S., & Beasley, N. (2005). A handbook for doctoral supervisors. Abingdon: Routledge.

[43]   Thomson, P., & Walker, M. (2010). Doctoral education in context: The changing nature of the doctorate and doctoral students. In M. Walker, & P. Thomson (Eds.), The Routledge doctoral supervisor’s companion (pp. 9-26). Abingdon: Routledge.

[44]   Trigwell, K. (2010). The relationship between doctoral students’ approach to research and experiences of their research environment. In M. Walker, & P. Thomson (Eds.), The Routledge doctoral supervisor’s companion (pp. 282-291). London & New York: Routledge.

[45]   Unsworth, K. L., Turner, N., Williams, H. M., & Piccin-Houle, S. (2010). Giving thanks: The relational context of gratitude in postgraduate supervision. Studies in Higher Education, 35, 871-888. doi:10.1080/03075070903348396

[46]   Wagner, J. (2010). Ignorance in educational research: How not knowing shapes new knowledge. In P. Thomson, & M. Walker (Eds.), The Routledge doctoral student’s companion (pp. 31-42). London & New York: Routledge.

[47]   Watts, J. H. (2008). Challenges of supervising part-time Ph.D. students: Towards student-centred practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 13, 369-373. doi:10.1080/13562510802045402

[48]   Watts, J. H. (2009) From professional to Ph.D. student: Challenges of status transition. Teaching in Higher Education, 14, 687-691. doi:10.1080/13562510903315357

[49]   Watts, J. H. (2010) Supervising part-time doctoral students: Issues and challenges. In P. Thomson, & M. Walker (Eds.), The Routledge doctoral supervisor’s companion (pp. 123-130). London & New York: Routledge.

[50]   Watts, J. H. (2012). Preparing doctoral candidates for the viva: Issues for students and supervisors. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 36, 371-381. doi:10.1080/0309877X.2011.632819

[51]   Wellington, J. (2010). Weaving the threads of doctoral research journeys. In P. Thomson, & M. Walker (Eds.), The Routledge doctoral student’s companion (pp. 128-142). London & New York: Routledge.

[52]   Wellington, J., & Torgerson, C. J. (2005). Writing for publication: What counts as a “high status, eminent academic journal?” Journal of Further and Higher Education, 29, 35-48. doi:10.1080/03098770500037739

[53]   Wisker, G., Robinson, G., Trafford, V., Warnes, M., & Creighton, E. (2003). From supervisory dialogues to successful Ph.D.s: Strategies supporting and enabling the learning conversations of staff and students at postgraduate level. Teaching in Higher Education, 8, 383- 397. doi:10.1080/13562510309400

[54]   Yates, L. (2010). Quality agendas and doctoral work: the tacit, the new agendas, the changing contexts. In P. Thomson, & M. Walker (Eds.), The Routledge doctoral student’s companion (pp. 299-310). London & New York: Routledge.

 
 
Top