Academics reflecting on the highlighting of creativity and originality in their PhD by Published Work synthesis

The growing diversity of doctoral programmes within a globalised higher education environment contributes to knowledge and enhances innovation and creativity. (Halse and Malfoy, 2010; Lee, 2011). Diversity in doctoral education is part of wider changes in higher education across the globe that has moved from an elite system with few participants to a mass system, “massification” (Sankey and St. Hill, 2009). Indeed, more teachers who work in Higher Education both in the UK and internationally are being required to have a PhD and there has been a subsequent expansion in enrolments. (Watts, 2012, p.1101). In parts of Europe, Scandinavia, South Africa and New Zealand this is a popular route, but in the UK the numbers are still relatively small. Many staff who have worked without a PhD in Universities in the UK for many years are now being encouraged to enrol for a PhD by published works. This PhD by publication /by existing published works award allows academic staff who have published regularly in the public domain to use their peer reviewed writing for a PhD award. This approach encourages staff to write new work around a coherent theme or review existing work (often written over many years) which may have been written in a particular subject or around a specific theme. In addition, candidates have to write a “reflective piece” or a “synthesis” of usually about 10000-15000 words which captures the originality, coherence, connectivity and their contribution to knowledge in their subject area. It is the synthesis that is examined in a viva with a panel of internal and external examiners. Focus groups of existing internal candidates (n=8)and an e mail survey of 20 UK and international candidates for this route adopted a qualitative approach and concentrated on a range of issues which explored candidates’ experiences and challenges in undertaking this route both retrospectively or ab initio. Thematic content analysis of the transcripts and surveys generated some key emergent issues which explored experiences and consistency of practice. These related specifically to how candidates can enhance the creativity and originality of their synthesis and develop connectivity in their published work. The findings also reveal how the candidates can best be supported in their paper writing and synthesis writing. This poster outlines their suggestions to i) enhance creative thinking and theme generation for synthesis writing ii) enhance the originality of their synthesis by drawing out particular elements from their published work iii) maximise the opportunity for using support networks (specifically writing groups) to share ideas, enhance their inquiry skills, and problem solve around theoretical and practical ideas for exciting and excellent academic writing and the subsequent demonstration of this in the viva. Participants reflected on how they could then enhance problem solving, inquiry and passion for their subject in their teaching and research practice with their students and how this, in turn, impacted on their future teaching, their own learning and scholarly activity and how best they could be supported to ensure they successfully achieve the award. References: Halse,C. and Malfoy,J. (2010) Retheorizing doctoral supervision as professional work. Studies in Higher Education, 35, 79-92. 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 Sankey, M. and St. Hill, R. (2009) The ethics of designing for multimodality: Empowering non-traditional learners. In U. Demiray and R. C. Sharma (Eds) Ethical practices and Implications in Distance Learning (pp.125-154).Hershey: Information Science Reference. Watts, J.H. (2012) To publish or not to publish before submission? Considerations for Doctoral Students and Supervisors,Creative Education, 3, 1101-1107