What is the Professional Doctorate?
While the first professional doctorate type programme was established as far back as 1894 as an EdD in the University of Toronto,[5] it is since the 1990s that there has been significant diversification in UK doctorates leading to such awards as Doctor of Engineering, Doctor of Business Administration, Doctor of Education, etc. The professional doctorate ‘has grown out of recognition of the need, and demand, for professionals to study part-time alongside their job, and to base their project within their workplace’.[6]
There is a different professional doctorate structure compared to the traditional PhD which usually requires a single 80,000 word thesis to be assessed. The professional doctorate, and its close companion the practice based doctorate, usually have a small number of stages that are assessed, at least provisionally, through the duration of the study, with a smaller final thesis. So, a coherent portfolio equivalent to 80,000 words is examined rather than one thesis.
Apart from the outcomes, a further difference is that the DProf usually has a greater level of taught components in the areas of research methodology and so can be undertaken more easily by a cohort. Additionally, it is ‘normally located within the candidate’s profession’[7]with employment in the discipline normally a requirement and one potential outcome is that ‘the candidate’s research may result directly in organisational or policy-related change’.[8]
So what is still wrong with the PhD?
The issue is, I think, linked to abstract knowledge and reflection on practice. The two are not necessarily in opposition, but are also not necessarily good partners. As Smith comments, ‘There has been some critique and questioning of the PhD as a suitable preparation for the transferable wider skills required in the contemporary workplace’.[9] I am a modest part of that critique. The general problem is that the humanities PhD is somewhat focused on abstract knowledge without the need for practical outcomes. In itself, that is not a problem. However, when it seeks to engage with the practice of Christian mission or ministry, it does become problematic. A PhD is a good vehicle for historical missiological research, or to understand mission from a particular theological, denominational or Biblical perspective. However, this in itself does not necessarily impact the personal practice of mission, nor inform future and wider practice and policy. In many subject areas this is not a significant issue. Within missiology, which I personally define as ‘reflection on the practice of Christian mission’, there is a disconnect.