What makes a good PhD thesis? Norms of science as reflected in written assessments of PhD theses

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

What makes a good PhD thesis? Norms of science as reflected in written assessments of PhD theses. / Kobayashi, Sofie; Emmeche, Claus.

In: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 48, No. 8, 2023, p. 1310-1324.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Kobayashi, S & Emmeche, C 2023, 'What makes a good PhD thesis? Norms of science as reflected in written assessments of PhD theses', Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 48, no. 8, pp. 1310-1324. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2200917

APA

Kobayashi, S., & Emmeche, C. (2023). What makes a good PhD thesis? Norms of science as reflected in written assessments of PhD theses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(8), 1310-1324. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2200917

Vancouver

Kobayashi S, Emmeche C. What makes a good PhD thesis? Norms of science as reflected in written assessments of PhD theses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2023;48(8):1310-1324. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2200917

Author

Kobayashi, Sofie ; Emmeche, Claus. / What makes a good PhD thesis? Norms of science as reflected in written assessments of PhD theses. In: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2023 ; Vol. 48, No. 8. pp. 1310-1324.

Bibtex

@article{756593f3651a49cdaee1a2854fb2a8ee,
title = "What makes a good PhD thesis? Norms of science as reflected in written assessments of PhD theses",
abstract = "This study looks at assessment of PhD theses from two perspectives: criteria in use in assessment reports at a science faculty and norms of science. Fifty assessment reports were analysed inductively, resulting in thirteen categories that examiners consider when assessing a thesis. These categories were compared with norms of science as described in the sociology of science. The study shows a high congruence between the two perspectives, but also new categories worthy of further discussion and research. Relevance of the thesis research and quality by proxy (that publication is an indicator of quality) stand out very clearly in this study compared with earlier assessment research. These two categories are both relatively new categories in assessment research and indicate that the classical norms of science are changing with an increasing influence of post-academic norms in academia.",
keywords = "Faculty of Science, research evaluation, Doctoral education, PhD dissertations, assessment criteria, Faculty of Social Sciences, sociology of science, norms of science, evaluation culture",
author = "Sofie Kobayashi and Claus Emmeche",
year = "2023",
doi = "10.1080/02602938.2023.2200917",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
pages = "1310--1324",
journal = "Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education",
issn = "0260-2938",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "8",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - What makes a good PhD thesis? Norms of science as reflected in written assessments of PhD theses

AU - Kobayashi, Sofie

AU - Emmeche, Claus

PY - 2023

Y1 - 2023

N2 - This study looks at assessment of PhD theses from two perspectives: criteria in use in assessment reports at a science faculty and norms of science. Fifty assessment reports were analysed inductively, resulting in thirteen categories that examiners consider when assessing a thesis. These categories were compared with norms of science as described in the sociology of science. The study shows a high congruence between the two perspectives, but also new categories worthy of further discussion and research. Relevance of the thesis research and quality by proxy (that publication is an indicator of quality) stand out very clearly in this study compared with earlier assessment research. These two categories are both relatively new categories in assessment research and indicate that the classical norms of science are changing with an increasing influence of post-academic norms in academia.

AB - This study looks at assessment of PhD theses from two perspectives: criteria in use in assessment reports at a science faculty and norms of science. Fifty assessment reports were analysed inductively, resulting in thirteen categories that examiners consider when assessing a thesis. These categories were compared with norms of science as described in the sociology of science. The study shows a high congruence between the two perspectives, but also new categories worthy of further discussion and research. Relevance of the thesis research and quality by proxy (that publication is an indicator of quality) stand out very clearly in this study compared with earlier assessment research. These two categories are both relatively new categories in assessment research and indicate that the classical norms of science are changing with an increasing influence of post-academic norms in academia.

KW - Faculty of Science

KW - research evaluation

KW - Doctoral education

KW - PhD dissertations

KW - assessment criteria

KW - Faculty of Social Sciences

KW - sociology of science

KW - norms of science

KW - evaluation culture

U2 - 10.1080/02602938.2023.2200917

DO - 10.1080/02602938.2023.2200917

M3 - Journal article

VL - 48

SP - 1310

EP - 1324

JO - Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education

JF - Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education

SN - 0260-2938

IS - 8

ER -

ID: 344492797