A continuum of measures of validity for research in the making fields

With the growth of “making” doctorates in design-related fields comes the need to define how dissertations in these fields achieve doctoral robustness.  This paper first suggests that this new category of doctoral degree is justifiable from a historical point of view.  A brief survey of how the PhD...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: David Wang
Format: Article
Language:Danish
Published: Formakademisk, Oslo 2018-04-01
Series:FORMakademisk
Online Access:https://journals.hioa.no/index.php/formakademisk/article/view/2216
id doaj-ad7bc72581924863b90e97dc06a970ae
record_format Article
spelling doaj-ad7bc72581924863b90e97dc06a970ae2020-11-24T21:10:45ZdanFormakademisk, OsloFORMakademisk1890-95152018-04-0111110.7577/formakademisk.2216A continuum of measures of validity for research in the making fieldsDavid Wang With the growth of “making” doctorates in design-related fields comes the need to define how dissertations in these fields achieve doctoral robustness.  This paper first suggests that this new category of doctoral degree is justifiable from a historical point of view.  A brief survey of how the PhD emerged in the European tradition, and its trajectory through the centuries, reveals there have been previous changes in the areas of study deemed worthy of doctoral distinction.  On this view, we can justify awarding doctorates in the “making” fields, from art to architecture, on historical grounds.  The aspect that has remained constant through the years, however, is that the doctoral degree signifies inclusion in a community of learners and, in turn, doctoral learning has positively impacted human community in general.  Making doctorates should therefore not be so unique and exclusive that they separate themselves from the historic community-building role doctorates have played.  The second part of this paper suggests a way towards this inclusivity.  This paper proposes a “continuum of measures of research validity” to help researchers (and evaluators) in making doctorates anchor their research logic in measures that have roots in scientific method.  The continuum is purposefully broad, beginning with standard measures of scientific research, but stretching those measures all the way to fictive constructions.  Within this broad continuum, dissertations in the making fields can comfortably fall within the scope of doctoral research using expanded definitions for measures of validity. The paper concludes with four recommendations for candidates in the making fields, for the committees that guide them, and for the emerging community of making doctoral research as a whole. https://journals.hioa.no/index.php/formakademisk/article/view/2216
collection DOAJ
language Danish
format Article
sources DOAJ
author David Wang
spellingShingle David Wang
A continuum of measures of validity for research in the making fields
FORMakademisk
author_facet David Wang
author_sort David Wang
title A continuum of measures of validity for research in the making fields
title_short A continuum of measures of validity for research in the making fields
title_full A continuum of measures of validity for research in the making fields
title_fullStr A continuum of measures of validity for research in the making fields
title_full_unstemmed A continuum of measures of validity for research in the making fields
title_sort continuum of measures of validity for research in the making fields
publisher Formakademisk, Oslo
series FORMakademisk
issn 1890-9515
publishDate 2018-04-01
description With the growth of “making” doctorates in design-related fields comes the need to define how dissertations in these fields achieve doctoral robustness.  This paper first suggests that this new category of doctoral degree is justifiable from a historical point of view.  A brief survey of how the PhD emerged in the European tradition, and its trajectory through the centuries, reveals there have been previous changes in the areas of study deemed worthy of doctoral distinction.  On this view, we can justify awarding doctorates in the “making” fields, from art to architecture, on historical grounds.  The aspect that has remained constant through the years, however, is that the doctoral degree signifies inclusion in a community of learners and, in turn, doctoral learning has positively impacted human community in general.  Making doctorates should therefore not be so unique and exclusive that they separate themselves from the historic community-building role doctorates have played.  The second part of this paper suggests a way towards this inclusivity.  This paper proposes a “continuum of measures of research validity” to help researchers (and evaluators) in making doctorates anchor their research logic in measures that have roots in scientific method.  The continuum is purposefully broad, beginning with standard measures of scientific research, but stretching those measures all the way to fictive constructions.  Within this broad continuum, dissertations in the making fields can comfortably fall within the scope of doctoral research using expanded definitions for measures of validity. The paper concludes with four recommendations for candidates in the making fields, for the committees that guide them, and for the emerging community of making doctoral research as a whole.
url https://journals.hioa.no/index.php/formakademisk/article/view/2216
work_keys_str_mv AT davidwang acontinuumofmeasuresofvalidityforresearchinthemakingfields
AT davidwang continuumofmeasuresofvalidityforresearchinthemakingfields
_version_ 1716755355403288576