The issues discussed were primarily related to the many changes to doctoral research happening as a result of a variety of pressures: the emphasis on completion rates, the Research Assessment Exercise, and the changed funding of research. What emerged was a series of contradictions: between the PhD as a contribution to knowledge and the PhD as a training degree; between the tightening of completion rates and the Teaching Assistantships which increased teaching duties for the research student; between the need to appoint young staff to improve the age profile and the need to improve performance in the Research Assessment Exercise by appointing staff with publications as well as PhDs.
The renewal of the profession was an area of general concern, because of the age profile (a substantial proportion of academic staff reaching retirement over the next 10 to 15 years) and because of the changing curriculum. The dominance of the 'golden triangle' of Cambridge, London and Oxford in the numbers of postgraduates was reflected in the tendency for research to remain within the canonical syllabus, with the result that demand for qualified staff in new areas of the curriculum far outstripped supply. That particular subjects could become wildly fashionable or a time had a similar distorting effect. It was possible that a degree of strategic intervention in research funding, privileging areas of particular need, or sustaining the subject balance across a discipline, could be usefully introduced.
The nature of PhD study was considered from various perspectives. The pressure on completion rates which had started initially with the Social Sciences was now generalised. The emphasis on deadlines and the consequent redefinition of the PhD as a training degree was considered to have been beneficial in many ways. It had also necessarily affected the size and scope of the thesis; word-count had gone down to reflect the time available. Some had argued that quality had actually gone up. Others felt the PhD could no longer meet the criterion of 'original contribution to knowledge'. In some universities this criteria was no longer operational, though others had maintained it. Social Sciences had incorporated a training year within the three years' research, operating a 1 + 2 model. The Humanities was now working to a 1 + 3, with direct entry by final year undergraduates to PhD programmes becoming quite rare for British Academy-funded students. The British Academy had not however followed the ESCR in laying down training guidelines for research accreditation. It looked rather at the outcomes of previous work, to evaluate how well prepared students were for the doctoral programme they proposed to pursue. It was noted that in some cases the reduction of research-type work or special topics in final year was itself making research training more necessary.
The use of university-funded research studentships or teaching assistantships was also discussed. While proliferating on all sides, and providing a welcome increase in the numbers of postgraduates, they needed to be monitored to ensure teaching duties did not impede research and submission rates. The presence of research postgraduate representatives on Staff/Student committees was considered very important.
Finally, the group considered the possible development of regional centres for research, an issue which seems to be appearing on several agendas due to the pressures towards selectivity in research funding. The development of regional networks based on good library provision could be beneficial in countering the isolation of individual research students. Participation in such a network might well in future determine whether funding for research places was made available.
The group formulated two questions for the panel:
1. Does the panel share our concern at the effect on the quality of doctoral research of the current emphasis on training and completion rates?
2. What can we do about the incompatible pressures on departments, who need both to ensure that all staff have substantial publications and to appoint young people in their twenties?