Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background This study aimed to map and summarise the state of the research regarding doctoral programs in nursing, as well as the issues debated in the context of nursing doctoral education. A Scoping Review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension scoping reviews statement (PRISMA-ScR) was conducted. Three electronic bibliographic data bases were searched: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Complete, Medline (on EBSCO Host) and SCOPUS to identify empirical studies published between January 2009 and December 2019. The review process was based on framework identified by Arksey and O’Malley and further revised by Levac and colleagues. Analysis was performed with the use of the Donabedian framework regarding the structure of the doctorate programmes, the process, and the outcomes. Results The review included 41 articles, mostly originating in the United States ( n =26) and Europe ( n =8), mainly by collecting the perceptions of students and faculty members with descriptive studies. The following issues were investigated at the (a) structure level: Prerequisite for doctoral candidates , Qualifications of faculty members , Mission of doctoral programs ; (b) process level: Doctoral programs contents, Doctoral programs resources and quality, Mentoring and supervision, Doing doctorate abroad ; and (c) outcome level: Academic performance outcomes in doctoral programs, Doctoral graduates’ competences, Doctoral students/graduates’ satisfaction, Doctoral graduates’ challenges. Conclusions Doctoral programs have mainly been investigated to date with descriptive studies, suggesting more robust research investigating the effectiveness of strategies to prepare future scientists in the nursing discipline. Doctorates are different across countries, and there is no visible cooperation of scholars internationally; their structure and processes have been reported to be stable over the years, thus not following the research development in nursing, discipline and practice expectations. Moreover, no clear framework of outcomes in the short- and long-term have been established to date to measure the quality and effectiveness of doctorate education. National and global strategies might establish common structure, process and outcome frameworks, as well as promote robust studies that are capable of assessing the effectiveness of this field of education.

Aim/Purpose: This study investigates the professional development needs of educators with a Master’s degree and seeking or having a doctoral degree in education. Background: Understanding the professional development needs of educators is important for meeting these needs. The literature focuses on post-bachelor education but does not address professional development and doctoral degree needs. Methodology: Educators with a Master’s degree in education seeking or having completed a doctoral degree participated in one 30 minute semi-structured interview. Contribution: This research can be used as a guide for how to support Master’s-level educators seeking doctoral degrees. Findings: Master’s level students earning a doctorate degree in education found professional development satisfied through their programs when experiential learning opportunities were provided and in-depth institutional support. Recommendations for Practitioners: Educators seeking a doctorate degree in education to meet their professional development needs should seek out higher education opportunities that include mentorships and experiential learning opportunities. Recommendation for Researchers: Further research is necessary to understand how additional professional development needs can be met in higher education and in the creation of successful professional development partnerships. Impact on Society: Required teacher professional development can increase classroom performance if necessary educator needs are met. Future Research: Additional research on professional development successes in schools partnering with higher education institutions potentially for a dual purpose of obtaining doctorate degrees may provide an invaluable increase in classroom performance.

In this second installment of the themed issue on redesigning research methods coursework for CPED-inspired EdD programs, EdD faculty and students share empirical research, conceptual insights, and practitioner-oriented coursework and activities to contribute to the conversation on research methods training and skill development for scholar-practitioners.

This essay highlights the value of an applied methodology course in program evaluation in the education doctorate program by exploring several benefits that it offers to enhance a doctoral student’s ability to solve complex problems of practice. Observations and recommendations are made based on designing and teaching two cohorts of EdD students in a program evaluation course. Improvement science is referenced throughout to highlight how the two may complement each other, not to place a higher value on one or the other. How and where program evaluation and improvement science appear to have possible areas of overlap, along with a brief overview of the major differences, are discussed. The author maintains that both program evaluation and improvement constitute a tremendous capacity to provide the ideas, tools, and approaches to prepare students to be the change agents they hope to aspire to be in their present and future roles as scholarly practitioners.

Purpose This study, which is part of a larger project, was conducted to profile the nursing faculty in the United States teaching in PhD and DNP programs. Design This is a descriptive study. A sample of 554 nursing faculty who teach in PhD and DNP programs was recruited by email solicitation to represent all geographic regions of the United States. Data were collected from November 2013 through January 2014 using an online survey instrument. Methods The instrument was developed based on results of review of the literature and of focus groups of doctoral faculty (faculty teaching in doctoral programs) to ascertain characteristics of faculty teaching in doctoral programs and of the schools in which they teach. Frequencies and descriptive statistics are reported. Findings Growth in DNP programs has outpaced growth in PhD programs, and DNP graduates have moved into doctoral education in greater numbers than PhD graduates. DNP faculty report less prior experience and current productivity scholarship than faculty in PhD programs only or both types of programs. Conclusions Strategies are needed to ensure that doctoral programs are staffed by faculty who are prepared for doctoral education and the development of nursing science. Clinical Relevance The Institute of Medicine has recommended doubling the number of doctorally prepared nurses in the United States by 2020 to ensure that sufficient numbers of faculty are available to prepare the nursing labor force that is needed for delivery of healthcare services. Nurse scientists are needed to contribute to improvement in patient care quality and safety, and practice leaders are needed to facilitate the translation of research into safe, high‐quality, and cost‐effective care. The landscape of doctoral education in nursing is rapidly changing.

Doctorate level attainment has increased significantly in developed economies. In 2019, the average share of 25–64-year-olds with a doctorate across the OECD was around 1%. However, if current trends continue, 2.3% of today’s young adults will enter doctoral studies at some point in their life. This essay starts by describing the expansion of doctoral education. It then reflects on the causes of this growth and the consequences for the nature and purpose of the doctorate. This reflection is mostly based on published research in Higher Education in the last 50 years and the author’s work on policy analysis for the OECD on this topic. The paper finishes with a research agenda on doctoral education and the career of doctorate holders.

The Policy Framework on the Internationalisation of Higher Education in South Africa (PF) acknowledges the strategic priority of international research collaboration for the country, and the role of cross-border and collaborative provision of higher education in this. Joint and double degrees are considered effective means for enhancing and expanding international research collaboration. However, implementing these international collaborative degrees is complex. Arranging for joint supervision, examination and award of a joint degree with a global partner institution, or establishing a joint programme by integrating two existing programmes and delivering the offering collaboratively, is intricate because these efforts intersect with countries' national regulations and policies governing the delivery and award of qualifications. While the PF permits “joint degrees”, it does not allow “double (or dual) degrees”. We assert that the PF exhibits several shortcomings. The parameters for collaborative degrees are challenging to implement due to outdated influences on prescribed definitions and practices, and the ban on all so-called double (or dual) degrees undermines the PF's goal of strengthening international research collaboration. This article illustrates the value of the “joint programmes” concept to unlock understanding that not all double degrees conform to the PF's definition. It also demonstrates the utility of 'integration' and 'jointness' as criteria that can be applied to distinguish a double degree resulting from joint programmes from those that do not, but which may also be identified as double, dual or consecutive degrees. This challenges the exclusion of all so-called “double” degrees from the PF.

Aim/Purpose: This paper explores how professional doctorate candidates responded to the restrictions and changed context of COVID-19. Using connectivism as a theoretical framework, it explores the ways in which their patterns of study were recalibrated in light of the restrictions caused by the pandemic. Specifically, this study aims to: explore the experience of the professional doctorate student during the pandemic; and demonstrate the ways in which networks are recalibrated and adapt to changing circumstances. Background: In 2020, in response to COVID-19 many countries, including the UK, went into lockdown resulting in most doctoral candidates being confined to their homes and restricted to online contact with peers and supervisors. Part-time students have a finely balanced pattern of work which was required to be recalibrated and refocused which required considerable adaptation on the part of the candidates. Methodology: A qualitative methodology was used comprising four focus groups, each consisting of four professional doctorate candidates. Participants were professional doctorate candidates and as such were all mid-career professionals from a variety of backgrounds. Purposeful sampling was combined with theoretical sampling, which ensures the sample is deliberately selected and ensures the emergent development of the theoretical ideas. The focus groups were recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data and identify the main findings, allowing themes to be identified. Contribution: The findings indicated that professional doctorate candidates were highly adaptable and were able to adjust rapidly in response to COVID-19 restrictions. The networks they had previously established had to be refocused through adapting and adjusting patterns of study and developing digital skills to enable them to progress in their doctoral studies. Findings: Three themes emerged from the analysis: recalibrating work-life-study balance; adaptivity in studies and research; and empowerment through Information and Communications Technology (ICT). To progress their doctoral studies, the networks they had previously established had to be refocused through adapting and adjusting patterns of study. Recommendations for Practitioners: While lockdown was an unusual experience, some factors can inform future developments for doctoral education, mainly: the importance of establishing a pattern of study; the importance of connectivism and Information Technology (IT); and how such use can enhance and expand the research process. Recommendation for Researchers: Adaptivity achieved through IT; connectivity and the recalibration of networks were key to enabling doctoral candidates to continue their research. The use of connectivism as a theoretical framework for research merits further exploration, as do methods for online learning and approaches to incorporating digital skills into doctoral studies. Impact on Society: According to connectivism, learning is through the establishment of net-works, and these consist of both the means of gaining and accessing knowledge and the work-life study balance. It is important to examine and improve these networks. Many of the changes imposed by the COVID-19 restrictions are here to stay and this study highlights the ways in which the student experience can be enhanced through digital learning. Future Research: This research could be expanded through further analysis of how IT can enhance research practice. The interaction with digital learning sources could be explored and highlighted. The pattern of networks could also be explored and developed, and the positive and negative aspects could be highlighted.

Northeastern University’s EdD faculty faced unique challenges during the pandemic and racial reckoning following George Floyd’s murder. During this period, however, we found opportunities to adapt and improve our program. We prioritized compassion and connection. We made significant strides in curriculum development through design and implementation of three new concentrations. We focused all program elements on how social justice works in a variety of educational settings. We altered our approach to data collection and doctoral supervision. In so doing, we were able to maintain consistency for our students and develop a closer bond with our faculty colleagues.

The purpose of the study was to examine education doctoral student perspectives on their experience of enrolling in a fully online EdD program during a global pandemic and achieving career advancement during their enrollment through the lens of transformative learning theory. A qualitative study of 12 participants was conducted to examine in what ways the pandemic influenced their decision to enroll in an online doctorate program, in ways their thinking progressed throughout the program, and the factors affecting their decision to take on a career advancement while enrolled in the program. The findings indicate that there were elements of transformative learning that occurred for many of the participants. Faculty teaching in doctorate programs are encouraged to explore how they might foster transformative learning experiences for their students.