Traditional PhD vs. Contemporary PhD: have we lost our way?

Substantial growth in PhD programs has called into question the quality of candidates being produced (Le Heron, Trafford, Le Heron & Kearns, 2015) and raised concerns surrounding the relevance of the traditional higher degree models which espouse the master-apprentice style of research (Harrison & Grant, 2015). These models are apparently underpinned with the belief that quality supervisors are the key to successful (read: on time) completion (Wisker, 2005) and graduate employability (Sinclair, 2004). Thus today's PhD program has adopted only a limited lens of exposure to research philosophy, preferring a primary focus on graduating on time rather than developing a smorgasbord of career enhancing highways to life-long learning. This research undertook an examination of the contemporary PhD to explore the context and relevance of the doctoral program in terms of its bilities to graduate active high-level researchers with the skills, know-how and an appetite to confidently pursue research postcompletion in either academia or industry. Significantly the utility, including resilience, of a PhD, particularly in its associated research expertise and skills in the both academic and industry contexts, require careful consideration by the higher education industry. Such a perspective is particularly pertinent today considering the diversity of career pathways chosen by doctoral graduates (Barnacle & Dall'Alba, 2011). It is essential to better nderstand the longterm impact of PhD programs on the sustainability of a graduate's research career in any profession, by looking at the variations and contexts in the PhD through multiple sources of evidence (Yin, 2003); including defining what is entailed in a successful PhD program.