Non-coursework PhDs: About comprehesives?

This is a question for the folks who are working (or have worked) through a "non-coursework" Ph.D.

How are you expected to demonstrate comprehensive knowledge / skill? (The dreaded Comps)

Side note: Notice that I didn't use the oft-used phrase "Research Doctorates". Any Ph.D. program should be a research doctorate. That's why I opted for the 'non-coursework' word (even 'coursework' is an inadequate word for the Ph.D. level).

Barry Foster
(just curious)

 

This is reflected in the final thesis product. The whole point is "becoming" a Ph.D., that is, able to research and write in one's chosen field. The skills necessary for high level are reflected (or not) in the thesis.

Comprehensives examine one's ability to write a test, not engage in doctoral level research. I should think that they also inhibit critical thinking, as one fills his brain with the predominant paradigm in the field.

Craig

 

My D.Min. director earned his Th.D. from the University of Basil. Although he lived there, he told me that he was not required to attend even one academic class--i.e., no coursework. The entire degree was earned via the thesis, under the mentoring faculty. This is also the UK, as well as South African and Aussie model.

Russell,
Curious about many things

 

Not to belabor the point, but shouldn't a PhD have some breadth of knowledge in his/her discipline? I understand the need for a thesis and how it demonstrates one's ability to do research in a field. But if I do a dissertation in some obscure area of a discipline - say research on business ethics in 3rd world countries - shouldn't I have some breadth of knowledge about business as a discipline? How can I have a doctorate in business, while only being conversant in a single area? There are so many areas of business and roots to the discipline.

As for inhibiting creativity - how can one do original research in a field without knowing the predominat paradigms of the disciplines?

In my case, the DBA program at NSU required two comprehensive exams after completing specific coursework. It wasn't fun - but it did cause me to look into the broad foundations of my discipline.

Among PhD programs in business in the U.S., comprehensive exams covering at least two areas of study are the norm.

Perhaps this is a major difference between the US model for doctorates and those of other countries. I can't help but think that this results in a real difference in the education received.

Thanks - Andy

 

Hi Craig. First a question: Are you (or have you) earning a Ph.D. from a non-coursework program?

Second - from my experience - "test" is a weak description of comps. (That invokes the kinds of tests I took for the lower-level degrees I had earned.) For me, it wasn't merely passing a written test. It was a series of doctoral-level activities geared at demonstrating - to a doctoral commitee - my knowledge, ability and skill at producing new knowledge. My comps took about 6 months to complete. The comps had to be completed before moving to the dissertation stage.

I must disagree: My comps *were* doctoral-level research! Instead of filling my head with a single paradigm (via pre-dissertation work and comps), I was *forced* to think critically about multiple paradigms.

Third, I agree wholehearted with Andy regarding the critical need for Ph.D.s to understand the many, many paradigms of one's chosen field. Geez, there's a lot of ideas/theory out there!!! Without some kind of deep exploration and experimentation within the knowledge landscape (you can call it coursework if you'd like), it would have been impossible for me to pass the comps.

Even though the comps were a substantial amount of hard work, I learned through the process. They really helped prep me for the dissertation.

Barry Foster

 

Barry,

Yes, I am in the beginning stages of one.

I may have understated the depth of comps. But I do see them as simply another "hoop" by which academics seek to control entrance into the profession.

A non-coursework Ph.D. is no picnic, as anyone who has experienced it can testify. Likely the best book on the subject is <i><B>"How to Get A Ph.D."</B></i> by Phillips and Pugh. They state, in the first chapter, "You will not be traversing a set course laid out by others. You will be expected to initiate discussions, ask for the help you need, argue about what you should be learning, and so on. You are under self management; so it is no use sitting around waiting for somebody to tell you what to do next, or worse, complaining that nobody is telling you what to do next."

Essentially, as I see it, the American model is one of teaching research, and the British model is one of learning research. And in the British model, though one is not taking classes, one is continually being tutored in the process of research.

Craig

 

Craig - Important things first: Best wishes on completing your degree! I hope you have as much "fun" as I did! Sincerely, I'm sure it is absolutely no picnic!

I enjoyed the quote. But it describe my experience at Fielding well. I did all that - in the pre-dissertation stage, the comps stage, and the dissertation stage.

While I can't speak for other programs, Fielding provides an powerfully creative educational framework that places tremendous emphasis on self-directed/initiated learning - while being carefully mentored (mentored, not controlled) by some of the best in the field - both as a scholar and a practioner.

(I suspect that other programs exercise similar educational frameworks. Thoughts? Steve? Andy? North? John W.? Russell? - etc.)

My point is that looking through the lens of the paradigm of "American model verses British model" may be too much of a broadbrush - and self-limiting. I'm certain that both have effectively cross-pollenated over the years.

If I had experienced a "traditional" Ph.D. program, I might feel as you do. Again, best wishes on your educational journey!!

Barry Foster

 

First, it's nice to see an intelligent discussion on the main board as opposed to the usual, "I'm thinking about Canyon College. Does anyone know anything about them?" Well done, Barry, as usual.

As far as comps, the philosophy at The Union Institute might come under the heading of, "Comps? We don' need no stinkin' comps." (Shades of Blazing Saddles . . .)

That is not to say that the process does not exist, it simply was not put into those terms. The set-up of Union's Ph.D. program involved at least two in-person meetings of the learner's entire doctoral committee: The Certification Meeting and the Pre-Graduation Meeting (which usually serves as the final graduation meeting, but not always). The terms comps and [/i]dissertation defense[/i] do not enter the picture, although the respective meetings functionally serve that purpose. At Union, unlike other schools, the doctoral committee consists of seven persons - the learner, two core professors, two adjunct professors, and two peers or graduates. (In most academic programs, there is a doctoral committee of three professors.) Trivia note: One might think that the presence of peers or graduates would allow the learner to sluff off, but the peers are often the toughest members of the committees, knowing that the learner's work will reflect on their own degrees.

The Certification Meeting signifies the advancement into candidacy via the approval of the Learning Agreement (sometimes called a Study Plan or Program Plan in other schools). Since the development of the Learning Agreement must take at least six months from the date of matriculation (and most learners take at least a year), there has already been significant work put into developing/scoping the program, attending colloquium/seminars/peer days, and laying down the foundation for what will become the dissertation phase (the PDE in Union "jargon").

In short, the process is as comprehensive (and can be quite challenging, depending on the make-up of one's committee), but from a functional perspective is oriented toward being supportive rather than competitive. One can use the term "Ph.D. candidate" once the Learning Agreement has been approved by the dean's office (a dean's review, also fairly comprehensive, taking place after the Certification Meeting). Likewise, although the second core professor does not actively pariticipate in the meetings (since the second core is intended to function as a distant observer rather than one involved with the everyday process), he or she provides a comprehensive review that must be addressed in the Meeting. Also, all meetings are taped for possible review by the administrative "powers-that-be" in order to help ensure the integrity of the process.

The dissertation (or PDE) defense works the same way - a formal meeting of the entire doctoral committee. It's not the usual ceremonial setting of a panel of professors questioning the student in front of an audience, but is still rigorous (and usually results in some modifications being made to both the dissertation and the final portions of the program).

In short, the process is there, but the model and the jargon are somewhat different (as they tend to be in any nontraditional program at the graduate level).

 

Here's something that worries me:

One of the reasons that people earn Ph.D.s or their equivalents is to pursue a career in college and university teaching, right?

That suggests that a graduate might be called upon to teach courses from the entire undergraduate syllabus.

If a person enters a doctoral program immediately after earning a bachelors degree, and if that doctoral program is focused minutely on one specialized research problem, then where does the necessary breadth come from?

People conceivably could be teaching a class based only on a course that they took as an undergraduate. The cool-looking Ph.D. would be irrelevant if the professor had no graduate level experience in the subject of the course he or she was teaching.

 

Barry,

While the Potch Ph.D. program has no comps per se, the process is certainly rigorous. Admission into the Ph.D. program requires a masters degree in the specific field one will be researching/writing the thesis in. One's transcripts are examined thoroughly to assure that the correlation between masters/doctoral subject matter is congruent.

The entire process is facilitated by two promoters (mentors/doctoral advisors who are specialists in their field) and an external examiner. At each phase of the program all submitted work must be approved by each of these facilitators.

The research proposal process requires approximately six months (this is stated in the prospectus, and this is exactly how long I was involved in the process), which, when accepted, becomes the first chapter of the thesis. The research proposal details exactly how the thesis aim will be accomplished, including one's grasp of the current body of knowledge relevant to the thesis research. Once the RP is accepted by the promoters, it must be approved by the full Faculty of Theology at Potch, then by the Committee for Advanced Degrees, then by the University Senate.

Once the RP is accepted, each chapter (in sequence) is then written, submitted, guidance given, resubmitted until approved. Then the completed thesis must also be approved by the promoters, external examiner, Faculty of Theology, Committee for Advanced Degrees and University Senate. The degree can be completed in three years, at which time there is an annual fee of 250 pounds until the program is completed, up to 7 years.

Russell

 

Barry - My expience in the business school at NSU was a positive one. Coursework provided a fertile ground to explore the functional areas of business. Beyond providing breadth, these courses gave me a chance to write a significant paper. In fact, I used these experiences to "try out" ideas for my dissertation. As for the dissertation - yes, I had to manage myself. NSU had a well define path to follow - but if I didn't act, I didn't make progress.

Thanks - Andy

------------------
Andy Borchers, DBA
NSU (1996)

 

Thanks for the well wishes. I am sure I will need them.

While taking in all that has been posted heretofore on this, the British model presupposes depth rather than breadth.

Also, most (?) doctoral programs would require a research master's of some sort, and it would add some breadth to one's education. I seriously doubt that many Americans could successfully attack a Ph.D. program with just a bachelor's degree.

I dare say that for many, if not most, doctoral students who select the research model over the coursework model, the problem is not a dearth of breadth; it is narrowing a topic to the level where it can tackled appropriately with a thesis.

Craig

 

That is part of the reason why less than 15% of the PhDs in Australia find work in their field. If you learn more and more about less and less and then end up knowing everything about nothing - THAT is what you can teach.

Hence a program that i am involved with in looking at developing a coursework PhD as opposed to coursework professional dectorates.

Peter French

 

Interesting topic Barry.

I suppose there are arguments on both sides as there were with the issue of the Bachelors & Masters. Someone posted a site here giving Canadian/British 3 yr B.A.'s the equivalence of an American 4 yr B.A. This brought about the issue of depth (Canada Britain) vs breadth (US).

In looking at my own situation, when I looked at a doctorate from the University of Sarasota I was going to end up doing redundant busy work. In other words repeating what I had already learned at the Masters level and then toping it off with a dissertation. Instead I will be doing a larger dissertation & original research into the field. In a sense that is what doctoral study should be. Much of the foundation should be laid by the time you get to doctoral level work. I feel the doctorate should be an extensively research oriented degree aided by a mentor who gives guidance to the doctoral student. I have no need to repeat the courses I took for my Masters degree. To do so is simply redundant hoop jumping. I think this is where the focus of British/Australian/South African doctoral programs is on depth and developing scholars.

There are no doubt valid arguments to be made on the other side of the issue as well. I have a GI Bill to use up so I shall at some point do an American doctorate. Then I will be able to compare the experience. The other thing is that the US certainly produces it's share of leaders in doctoral fields and you can't very well argue with success.

North

 

I don't know the situation at Sarasota - but at NSU, this really wasn't the case. I took a marketing course in my DBA program that may have sounded like it was a repeat of an MBA course. The instructor, however, knew that all of us had already taken a graduate course in marketing in order to get in the DBA program. So, he took us much further and did a "meta" analysis of marketing theories and spent a lot of time in advanced marketing literature. It was an excellent experience - and hardly a "repeat".

Regards - Andy

------------------
Andy Borchers, DBA
NSU (1996)

 

Thank you for sharing your situation Andy. As I said there are many sides to the argument. Including the idea by a couple of Gen Xer Ph.D.'s I know that any kind of DL doctoral program is below par and suspect. One is a Cornell Grad and the other is an Texas A&M grad.

It makes for interesting debate but beyond that someone with an accredited DL Ph.D. is still legit as is someone with a *GAAP* research doctorate Ph.D. as is someone with an accredited traditional full residential Ph.D. Does not mean that negative remarks will not be made. I remember what Dr. Bear had in his book regarding traditional Minnesota academics and TGSA (Capella). Such is life. The fact is you are still Dr. Borchers & Rick Walston is Dr. Walston (Ph.D. PUCHE) and the debate could go on regarding methodology. I was absolutely appalled at the idea that anyone could get credit for life experience or CLEP at the undergraduate level. From my traditional Canadian University background I felt everyone should have to sit through the same traditional semesters in the same way I did. I was hard pressed to acknowledge that as real undergraduate credit. Incidentally, does anyone know if the British award CLEP or life experience credit?

North

 

There was a rather heated, three-page thread regarding the relative merits of US vs. UK/AU/SA/CA degrees. On page three, in two posts, links to prior learning assessment policy at various UK, AU and CA universities were provided: http://www.degreeinfo.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000080-3.html

If you want to suffer through the whole thing, start at: http://www.degreeinfo.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000080.html

 

Thanks for posting that link. I remember the heated exchange. Interesting.

North

There was a rather heated, three-page thread regarding the relative merits of US vs. UK/AU/SA/CA degrees. On page three, in two posts, links to prior learning assessment policy at various UK, AU and CA universities were provided: http://www.degreeinfo.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000080-3.html

If you want to suffer through the whole thing, start at: http://www.degreeinfo.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000080.html [/B][/QUOTE]

 

I agree that whatever doctorate, there shld be some amount of coursework to ensure a certain level of grounding in the areas where one wants to do more research. From what I understand, most UK PhD, except their EdD programs which require coursework and dissertation, while they do not require significant coursework do require coursework in research methods.

 

@ ms: not all US-Bachelor´s, and not even all US-master´s, do need a thesis at the end of your studies, European ones almost all do - together with courses in academic writing, so I do not see a problem in doing a totally researched based degree in the UK...

greets,
trigger