Chinese universities urged to review PhD ‘repetition’

Chinese universities should review their PhD course options to remove duplication with master’s programmes, a study suggests.

Survey results covering 8,064 enrolled PhD students from 48 institutions in China indicated nearly one in five (17.4 per cent) participants found a “fair or large amount” of overlap between their current programme and previous master’s. Nearly 60 per cent of surveyed students were “fairly or very satisfied” with their course arrangement.

“For students on successive master-doctor programmes,” one student responded to an open-ended question, “exempts should be allowed for students who have studied relevant courses before to avoid wasting time.”

The study drew data from the Annual Report of Chinese Postgraduate Education, conducted by the Institute of Higher Education at East China Normal University (ECNU), which shows that around half of surveyed students anticipated PhD programmes that included research methodology training and the ability to apply their learning to practice.

The analysis also showed that student satisfaction was influenced by several variables. In general, students of humanities and social sciences were more satisfied with their curriculum arrangement than students of engineering and physics sciences. Students with internal motivation were more satisfied than those with external motivation. Compared to students who studied for eight to 12 hours per day, students who studied for more than 12 hours every day were less satisfied with their course.

Bao Zhimei, author of the study and a PhD student at the Institute of Higher Education at ECNU, told Times Higher Education that this “could be affected by sampling” – the majority of responses were from physical sciences and engineering – as well as “the nature of different subjects”.

The research concluded that institutions should encourage students to take part in designing and evaluating doctoral programmes, optimise curriculum structure by considering institutional and subject differences, and closely monitor and manage the width and depth of professional skills in their teaching and research.

“The most challenging part would be engaging students in programme design and development, which involves students’ willingness and raises some critical questions, such as how they can participate, whether it is effective and how to apply their opinions into the real world,” Ms Bao said.

“And when they express diversified voices, it is a question of ensuring an inclusive balance to meet their needs.”

karen.liu@timeshighereducation.com