Article-based thesis or thesis by monograph? Supervisors’ views on the route to completion of doctoral studies

Chris Schachtebeck

doi:10.36096/ijbes.v7i1.672

Authors

Chris Schachtebeck DHET-NRF SARChI in Entrepreneurship Education & Department of Business Management, University of Johannesburg https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9133-2590

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36096/ijbes.v7i1.672

Keywords:

Doctoral supervision, article-based thesis, supervision approach

Abstract

The growth in the use of article-based theses, when compared to the traditional monograph-style thesis raises the question why students, supervisors and academic institutions are pursuing this particular route. This study explores the views of experienced supervisors involved in doctoral studies. The study aims to explore the advantages, disadvantages, caveats and various routes that doctoral students can take in completing their thesis. The study was exploratory in nature, employing a qualitative research design and made use of semi-structured interviews with nine doctoral supervisors from Canada. Data was collected from experienced doctoral supervisors from Canada, selected by means of a snowball sampling approach. Data was analysed by means of thematic content analysis. Findings show that supervisors preferred the sandwich-based thesis approach, as it allowed for more rapid time to completion. In addition, the main benefits for both institution and student included having a larger volume of published research output at the end of the doctoral supervision process, as well as more rapid career advancement owing to development of both research and soft skills. The finds hold value for universities who are considering an article-based thesis as an alternative to the traditional monograph style, as well as universities who have not used this option extensively. Findings also provide an impetus for supervisors and faculties in management education to adopt the article-based thesis approach more widely and rapidly owing to the multitude of benefits it holds.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Baggs, J. G. (2011). The dissertation manuscript option, internet posting, and publication. Research in Nursing & Health, 34(2), 89–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20420 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20420

Deblasio, L. (2021). From PhD thesis to monograph: A reflective account of the process. Amicus Curiae, 2(2), 255-260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14296/ac.v2i2.5257

Dinc, L. (2014). Authorship dispute of a doctoral thesis publication. Nursing Ethics, 21(3), 265-266. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733014531529 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733014531529

Dong, Y. R. (1998). Non-native graduate students’ thesis/dissertation writing in science: Self-reports by students and their advisors from two US institutions. English for Specific Purposes, 17(4), 369-390. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00054-9

Dudley-Evans, T. (1999). The dissertation: A case of neglect? In P. Thompson (Ed.), Issues in EAP Writing Research and Instruction (pp. 28-36). Reading University: CALS.

Evans, S. C., Amaro, C. M., Herbert, R., Blossom, J. B., & Roberts, M. C. (2018). “Are you gonna publish that?” Peer-reviewed publication outcomes of doctoral dissertations in psychology. PloS One, 13(2), e0192219. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192219 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192219

Fridlund, B. (2010). The dissertation book: Should it be a monograph or a compilation thesis? European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 9(1), 144–145. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcnurse.2010.04.003

Gabriel, Y. (2019). The changing character of the management PhD and some reflections on how to arrest its descent to hollow virtuosity in producing meaningless texts. Management, 22(4), 703-710.

Graves, J. M., Postma, J., Katz, J. R., Kehoe, L., Swalling, E., & Barbosa-Leiker, C. (2018). A national survey examining manuscript dissertation formats among nursing PhD programs in the United States. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 50(3), 314-323. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12374

Jowsey, T., Corter, A., & Thompson, A. (2020). Are doctoral theses with articles more popular than monographs? Supervisors and students in biological and health sciences weigh up risks and benefits. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(4), 719-732. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1693517 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1693517

Krumsvik, R. J. (2022). Academic writing in scientific journals versus doctoral theses. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 17(2), 78-94. https://doi.org/10.18261/njdl.17.2.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18261/njdl.17.2.1

Kubota, F. I., Cauchick-Miguel, P. A., Tortorella, G., & Amorim, M. (2021). Paper-based thesis and dissertations: Analysis of fundamental characteristics for achieving a robust structure. Production, 31, e20200100. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6513.20200100 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6513.20200100

Lewis, K. N., Graham, I. D., Boland, L., & Stacey, D. (2021). Writing a compelling integrated discussion: A guide for integrated discussions in article-based theses and dissertations. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 18(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijnes-2020-0057 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ijnes-2020-0057

Mason, S., Frick, L., Castelló, M., Cheng, W., Chong, S. W., Díaz Villalba, L., … Weise, C. (2024). What makes a Thesis by Publication? An international study of policy requirements and restrictions. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2024.2389357 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2024.2389357

Mason, S., & Merga, M. (2018). Integrating publications in the social science doctoral thesis by publication. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(7), 1454–1471. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.149846 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1498461

Maynard, B. R., Vaughn, M. G., Sarteschi, C. M., & Berglund, A. H. (2012). Social work dissertation research: Contributing to scholarly discourse or the file drawer? British Journal of Social Work, 44, 1045–1062. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcs172 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcs172

Paltridge, B. (2002). Thesis and dissertation writing: An examination of published advice and actual practice. English for Specific Purposes, 21(1), 125-143. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00025-9

Radafsha, G. H., Sobhani, A. R., & Sadegh, F. (2010). Survey the attitudes towards thesis writing process among students of Guilan University of Medical Sciences. Journal of Guilan University of Medical Sciences, 19(74), 86-97.

Remenyi, D. (2015). The monograph dissertation versus the papers approach. Alternation, 22(1), 327–335.

Rowland, J. (2017). Practical academic: Delivering a thesis by publication. United States: Practical Academic.

Sammon, D., Nagle, T., McAvoy, J., Heavin, C., Fitzgerald, C., McCarthy, S., … Alhassan, I. (2024). Exploring the PhD supervisor/candidate relationship for a ‘publication-based thesis’: A metaphor-driven approach. Journal of Decision Systems, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2024.2363036 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2024.2363036

Smaldone, A., Heitkemper, E., Jackman, K., Joanne Woo, K., & Kelson, J. (2019). Dissemination of PhD dissertation research by dissertation format: A retrospective cohort study. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 51(5), 599–607. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12504 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12504

Solli, K., & Nygaard, L. P. (2022). The doctorate in pieces: a scoping review of research on the PhD thesis by publication. Higher Education Research & Development, 42(4), 984–999. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2022.2110575 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2022.2110575

Stock, W. A., & Siegfried, J. J. (2013). One essay on dissertation formats in economics. American Economic Review, 103(3), 648–653. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.3.648

Wellington, J., & Sikes, P. (2006). 'A doctorate in a tight compartment': Why do students choose a professional doctorate and what impact does it have on their personal and professional lives? Studies in Higher Education, 31(6), 723-734. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070601004358