New development: Are our doctoral programmes doing what we think they are?

Anne Lee

Public Money & Management, 2013, vol. 33, issue 2, 119-122

Abstract: While there is general agreement that the doctoral process is about the creation of original knowledge, there is less clarity about other objectives. In an age of austerity the potential conflict between longand short-term aims becomes more acute, as well as the conflict between larger scale objectives (such as sustainability, economic and intellectual development), quality assurance procedures and ethical requirements. These conflicts are explored through a review of some initiatives followed in Australia, England, Estonia, Germany, Norway, Sweden, the USA and Wales.

Date: 2013
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09540962.2013.763423 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:pubmmg:v:33:y:2013:i:2:p:119-122

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RPMM20

DOI: 10.1080/09540962.2013.763423

Access Statistics for this article

Public Money & Management is currently edited by Michaela Lavender

More articles in Public Money & Management from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().