Abstract
Generations from now, observers will likely look back at early twentyfirst century higher education and note a chaotic system in a state of change. Evidence of this chaos abounds. The funding structure of higher education remains in flux, regardless of national context, as countries seek to balance public and private contributions to postsecondary learning. Colleges and universities are encouraged to participate in a global conversation, while simultaneously increasing their commitment to their local community. Issues of staffing, particularly among full-time faculty, raise concerns about professional stability and engagement. More students are pursuing higher education, bringing with them a diversity unmatched in previous generations. These students are part of the deepening conversation regarding lifelong learning (Schuetze & Slowey, 2013). Not only are higher education institutions expected to facilitate critical thinking and intellectual openness, but they are also responsible for the provision of educational opportunities over the course of an individual’s life (Stephenson & Yorke, 2013). Taken as a whole, these changes require higher education institutions to more deeply examine the ways in which they define knowledge and enable its dissemination (Christensen & Eyring, 2011).
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Christensen, C., & Eyring, H. (2011). The innovative university: Changing the DNA of higher education from the inside out. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Council of Graduate Schools (CGS). (2009). Graduate education in 2020: What does the future hold?. Washington, DC: Council of Graduate Schools.
European Commission (2011). Report of mapping exercise on doctoral training in Europe. Brussels: European Commission.
Gardner, S. (2008). Fitting the mold of graduate school: A qualitative study of socialization in doctoral education. Innovative Higher Education, 33(2), 125–138.
Marginson, S. (2006). Dynamics of national and global competition in higher education. Higher Education, 52(1), 1–39.
Nerad, M., & Heggelund, M. (2011). Toward a global PhD?: Forces and forms in doctoral education worldwide. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.
OECD. (2012). Careers of doctorate holders. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Schuetze, H., & Slowey, M. (Eds.). (2013). Global perspectives on higher education and lifelong learners. London: Routledge.
Stephenson, J., & Yorke, M. (Eds.). (2013). Capability and quality in higher education. London: Routledge.
Taylor, R., & Storey, V. (2013). Leaders, critical friends, and the education community: Enhancing effectiveness of the professional practice doctorate. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 5(1), 84–94.
UNCTAD. (2011). Applying a gender lens to science, technology, and innovation. New York: United Nations.
Wellington, J. (2013). Searching for ‘doctorateness’. Studies in Higher Education, 38(10), 1490–1503.
Wellmon, C. (2015). Organizing enlightenment: Information overload and the invention of the modern research university. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Editor information
Copyright information
© 2016 Karri A. Holley
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Holley, K.A. (2016). Epilogue: Lessons Learned from a Global Examination of the Doctorate. In: Storey, V.A. (eds) International Perspectives on Designing Professional Practice Doctorates. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137527066_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137527066_16
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-56385-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-52706-6
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)