the European Council of Doctoral Candidates and Junior Researchers

1. the European Council of Doctoral Candidates and Junior Researchers EUA Convention Workgroup 4: “Doctoral Programmes for Europe” Glasgow, April1st 2005 Strong Doctorates for Europe Renzo Rubele Past President of Eurodoc

2. Building a paneuropean represention eurodoc is the federation of the national associations of PhD candidates and junior researchers in Europe Members (21) Other countries represented at eurodoc 2005

3. eurodoc and the EUA  Acknowledgement of the work done by EUA since Graz/Berlin – Doctoral Programmes project, Maastricht Conference, “Bologna Seminar” in Salzburg … our contributions will be summarized in this presentation 0. Doctorates – training through research in the European Knowledge Area 1. Supervision and training 2. International dimension 3. “Status” of the doctoral candidates 4. Professional future of doctors

4. The doctorate as the 3rd cycle of HE Evidence  Everywhere in Europe candidates must defend a thesis in front of a committee, appointed by Universities About 500,000doctoral candidates in Europe are supervised and (possibly) trained towards the degree Problems  National and local traditions prevail – regulations may vary a lot even among departments and disciplines  To what extent might it be useful to introduce common structures? The ECTS credit system? The Diploma Supplement? Codes of practice? Qualification frameworks?

5. The doctorate as a professional experience Evidence  The successful candidates should demonstrate ability to produce original research – clear from the beginning In various forms there can be given teaching duties, demonstration activities, additional research projects … Problems  Lack of recognition, especially by employers outside the academic environment (acute in some countries)  Social rights, contractual dynamics  Attractiveness of a researcher’s career

6. Supervision and Training Little opportunity to speak against the problems Completion rates, time needed vs. allocated Role of the supervisor(s), management of the research project, assessment. Evaluation of the supervision Quantity and quality of training: induction, development of disciplinary competences and of general professional and transferable skills  Institutions to put in place specific codes of practice

7. Charter for Supervision and Training of Early Stage Researchers Supervision arrangements Review Methods Confidential and Structured Feedback Mechanisms Complimentary Training www.eurodoc.net/workgroups/supervision/Eurodocsuptrain.pdf  Input to the European Charter for Researchers

8. Creating an international dimension  Doctoral programmes should provide a mobility experience to candidates, according to the existing possibilities • JointDegree Programmes • “co-tutelle” arrangements • periods of research abroad • international collaborations of the research group • European label? Who can release the rules? Individual choices for a degree abroad  Bologna Process and Lisbon convention should make life easier

9. Reported obstacles to mobility  Family-related issues  Financial issues  Loss of reintegration prospects in the country of origin  Bureaucratic/Administrative obstacles  Language problems  Social and Cultural problems  Lack of information  Difficult transfer of social benefits  Lack of international networking  Opposition by the supervisor

10. "status" of the doctoral candidate « Are doctoral candidates fee-paying students who provide an important part of the income of the institution but can also demand a certain amount of services and support for their money, or junior research and teaching staff who are fundamentally involved in the research output and teaching provision of their institution and should therefore be paid for their contribution? » B.M. Kehm in the “comparative analysis” of the UNESCO-CEPES book “Doctoral Studies and Qualifications in Europe and the United States: Status and Prospects”

11. United Kingdom Ph.D. candidates:  are all students enrolled in a graduate programme  are tipically funded with grants by external bodies (not by the University itself)  satisfied because of:  academic freedom enjoyed  consumer’s rights Claim:  supervisor-student relationship is not that of an employer-worker, and in (most of) continental Europe this [supervision] sounds like a feudal relationship

12. Norway Ph.D. candidates:  are all workers with regular employement contracts, and related rights (and duties)  are not students, do not need any registration to take courses Enrolment in a doctoral programme:  by signing a “Ph.D. contract” where supervisors, etc. are specified  Work contract and Ph.D. contract are 2 separate things, also in time Worried about a “student-oriented” Bologna Process

13. Professionalfuture of doctors  Achieving a doctorate: strongpersonal commitment, and investment in the knowledge society  Many young people are doing a Ph.D. for the sake of research, and would like to continue along the same way, but …  Employability is a concern, especially in some countries  Consider the various environments: academic, industrial, disciplinary, geographical, contract type … Attractiveness of researchers’ careers …

14. Researchers’ careers in Europe The key: raising the professional profile  Which identity for a researcher? Necessity to strenghten recognition in an open European market  What are duties and rights? Address the mixing of researching, administrating research and communicating the results of research  Welcoming the European Charter for Researchers and the Code of conduct for the recruitment of researchers  Instrument to promote discussion at national and institutional level

15. Annual Conference next: Bologna 2006 eurodoc Contact: board@eurodoc.net