A comparison of best practices for doctoral training in Europe and North America

• Published in: FEBS open bio 2017-10, Vol.7 (10), p.1444-1452
• Main Authors: Barnett, Joey V., Harris, Robert A., Mulvany, Michael J.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: assessment; best practices; Biomedical research; Career development planning; Core curriculum; Education; Graduate studies; Health sciences; international doctoral training; Medicin och hälsovetenskap; mentoring; PhD training; Professionals; Questionnaires; Researchers; Students; Training
• ISSN: 2211-5463; 2211-5463
• DOI: 10.1002/2211-5463.12305

The PhD degree was established in Berlin 200 years ago and has since spread across the whole world. While there is general agreement that the degree is awarded in recognition of successfully completed research training, there have been significant differences in the way doctoral training programs have developed in particular countries. There is, however, a clear global tendency to follow the programs currently used either in the United States or in Europe. To determine more clearly how US and European PhD programs are both similar and different, we have used a validated questionnaire to analyze biomedical PhD programs in four representative institutions at Vanderbilt University, University of Manitoba, Karolinska Institutet, and Graz Medical University. The analysis is based on 63 detailed questions concerning the research environment, outcomes, admission criteria, content of programs, mentoring (or supervising), the PhD thesis, assessment of the thesis, and PhD school structure. The results reveal that while there is considerable overlap in the aims and content of PhD programs, there are also considerable differences regarding the structure of PhD programs, mentoring and assessment of PhD theses. These differences are analyzed in detail in order to provide a foundation for discussion of their relative advantages and disadvantages, with a view to providing a platform for discussion of best practices. The results will be of importance in the continued development of global discussion about development of doctoral training. We compared US and European PhD programs at four representative institutions (Vanderbilt University, University of Manitoba, Karolinska Institutet, and Graz Medical University) using the validated Organization for PhD Education in Biomedicine and Health Sciences in the European System questionnaire to assess key aspects of training provided. Substantial overlap in aims and content of PhD programs was identified in the areas of supervision, thesis contents, and transferrable skills but also considerable differences regarding the structure of PhD programs, mentoring (supervising), and assessment of PhD theses.