An assessment of the quality of doctoral qualifications offered by 28 universities has highlighted serious concerns over dropout rates and the time students take to complete the degree.
A number of other “significant concerns” were flagged in the recently released doctoral degrees report commissioned by the Council on Higher Education (CHE) after a request by the National Research Foundation (NRF).
The PhDs offered by 23 public universities and five private institutions were measured against a national qualification standard approved in November 2018.
The institutions completed and submitted self-evaluation reports during 2020 to the CHE, which established a review panel for each institution to consider its submission. A team of senior academics then used this data to compile the national report.
More than 4,500 participants, including senior management and leaders of doctoral studies, were interviewed.
The 76-page report says the number of students who complete their doctoral studies in two years, the shortest possible time for a PhD course, is “extremely small”.
Delays in completing doctorates could cause frustration on the part of the supervisor, “who may lose interest in the student and subtly withdraw from providing appropriate guidance and supervision”.
“It can also cause ‘hot’ research topics to go stale. What was current and topical five years before may no longer be novel in the eyes of the supervisor, or the examiner, to the potential detriment of the student.”
Among the “significant concerns” expressed by the writing team were:
- A general lack of awareness and understanding of doctoral graduate attributes among students, academics and institutional support staff
- At some institutions, there is little or no monitoring to formally track the progress of a doctoral student
- The absence in many institutions of a formally established and well-functioning higher degrees committee
- The admission of underprepared students into doctoral programmes
“It is a concern that academics in several universities indicated that students are admitted to doctoral programmes who are underprepared. The result can be poor-quality work, long completion times, and/or high dropout rates.”
The writing team says while the majority of higher education institutions offer PhDs that meet the standard, there are “a number” that do not.
The report also lists 30 “striking” examples of good practice by institutions, which were likely “to enhance” the quality of the PhD.
Academics, including Prof Johan Muller of the University of Cape Town, who was a member of the group that developed the standard for the doctorate, have welcomed the report.
He said the standard was created because there was “some growing disquiet among the institutions, employers and the public at large that all doctorates produced in SA institutions are not of equivalent standard and quality”.
“It will be unfortunate if a cursory reading of the report produces a view that all universities are in some sort of crisis. This is not the case as we have some world-class institutions.”
He said some universities routinely employ external examiners from top universities internationally. “But there are also supervisors who have never seen doctorates from candidates outside their own institution, so they haven’t been benchmarking themselves internationally or even nationally. Unevenness unfortunately persists.”
It is a concern that academics in several universities indicated that students are admitted to doctoral programmes who are underprepared.
Prof Johann Mouton of Stellenbosch University said most of the top research universities devote “an inordinate amount of effort in supporting their doctoral candidates through training and mentoring initiatives”.
But some students are “woefully underprepared” for postgraduate studies.
Prof Washington Dudu of North West University said the dropout rate was concerning as the country might fail to achieve the National Planning Commission’s target of producing 5,000 doctoral graduates a year by 2030.
“However, for me there must be quality PhD graduates as well, not just quantity.”
Prof Labby Ramrathan of the University of KwaZulu-Natal said the areas of significant concern in the report would assist institutions “to develop robust systems and processes, including supervision capacities, to maintain the integrity of this pinnacle qualification”.
He said students who are slow to complete their doctoral studies “create blockages for new intakes of doctoral candidates”.
Prof Patrick Mafora of the University of the Free State said the report pointed to limitations in internal quality assurance processes and, “by extension, the quality of the doctoral outputs of affected institutions”.
He said student dropouts were a loss to science and a waste of resources.
“Dropping out at that level is often a traumatic experience from which some students seldom recover.”
Prof Shervani Pillay of Nelson Mandela University said it was critical that a doctoral student’s journey was monitored so challenges could be identified early and support provided.
Prof Ramodungoane Tabane of Unisa said the report enabled an institution “to evaluate and replan its quality assurance measures”.
“The report is most definitely welcomed as it exposes some of the weaknesses in the system of producing quality doctoral students.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.