PaR PhDs: A Guideline/Clew to a Successful Outcome for All (Candidates, Examiners, Administrators, Regulators)

Abstract

A decade ago, I undertook (with Stuart Andrews) a small research project into the regulatory frameworks of PaR PhDs in the UK and the experiences of students undertaking them.¹ At that time the findings on the latter aspect particularly made somewhat sorry reading. It became clear that many British HE institutions did not understand — or in some cases acknowledge — PaR, even though they had registered students to undertake PhDs on this basis. Students who had completed their programmes reported that the practice (typically submitted on a DVD) had been totally ignored by the examiners: the viva voce had referred only to the written submission. Some institutions discovered, as noted in Chapter 3, that their regulations required study in accordance with ‘the scientific method’ and thus effectively precluded the submission of creative practice. This chapter speaks directly in the first person to prospective PaR PhD students, though it is hoped that supervisors and regulators will also draw some insights from it.