Written by Sarah Patrick (Coventry University)
Since the early 1990s, when a decree from the French Ministry of Higher Education and Research created the legal basis for international co-tutelles, it has been possible for a doctoral candidate to develop a single thesis under the co-supervision of researchers from two different universities, for which they receive two awards.
The original aim of this type of doctoral programme was to establish collaboration between two cross border universities and promote the international mobility of doctoral candidates.
Since the early 1990s internationalisation in higher education has become a highly competitive field. International collaborations provide a key metric in assessment of universities and have become increasingly important for institutions competing for the top spots in global league tables.
In Bourdieu’s terms, international collaboration models such as the dual award PhD, build capital for institutions by providing an illustration of their ability to operate globally. As a result, a model, which originally began as an organic, bottom-up approach between two co-supervisors, has been institutionalised to provide a tool for collaboration at doctoral level.
The national and institutional benefits are evident, for Governments and Universities in both the global north and global south, but the value of having two awarding universities has not yet been explored from the doctoral student perspective.
The geopolitical contextis changing, and international mobility as a universal good as part of doctoral studies is being questioned. Bourdieu’s concept of capital can be used to explore the ways in which this type of programme may be equipping doctoral students with the skills to thrive, but also to explore the ways in which these programmes may be reinforcing inequalities in doctoral education.
For students, the opportunity to develop an international identity as a doctoral researcher provides valuable capital in a professional environment where the ability to collaborate across borders is still prized. The presence of two universities enables the researcher to access expertise, equipment and networks across two different research settings.
The skillset, resilience and required disposition, or in Bourdieu’s terms ‘habitus’, to pursue this type of global PhD and gain this academic capital, is also immense, especially in an increasingly hostile geopolitical context.
The dual award requires considerable prior cultural capital (eg language, international mobility, inter-cultural experience) to navigate the programme and benefit from the doctoral socialisation opportunities it offers. Students on these programmes have to bring with them the ability to move between countries, work across time zones and cultures, manage complex relationships with two sets of supervisors and engage with doctoral communities in two different settings. It cannot be assumed that a doubling of settings automatically brings about capital gains. Indeed there is some evidence that a doubling of academic identities can create barriers to development such as high workload limiting socialisation, and a lack of sense of belonging leading to feelings of isolation.
Dual award doctoral candidates typically have some prior social capital, such as already being part of their supervisor’s networks or having already experienced international education at undergraduate or masters level. However, due to the high workload as well as the administrative burden of enrolment at two institutions plus international travel arrangements, there is not always the opportunity within the timeframe of the programme to build additional social capital through meaningful engagement with doctoral communities across two different settings.
Given that the opportunity to acknowledge the dual award is not yet readily available in key academic settings such as academic journal submission and conference presentation, the symbolic capital (prestige, honour, reputation) of completing a PhD via dual award may not be easily realised.
Whilst many of these international dual award PhD programmes are funded through studentships offered either at a Governmental level or institutional level, there are additional costs to this type of programme. For example, studentships do not cover dependents, making the costs prohibitive for those who might not be able to cover the travel and living costs of re-locating their family; studentships also typically do not cover multiple international journeys which may deter those students who cannot afford the costs of regular international travel.
When there is a disparity between the required capitals to thrive in the field, there is the potential for what Bourdieu termed symbolic violence, whereby some students are excluded from the opportunity or may have to face significant economic or emotional burdens to cope with the requirements of the international dual award PhD programme. This can result in significant wellbeing issues for the student, which is a potential area for future study.
For practitioners, looking at this challenge through a Bourdieusian lens enables us to consider some key areas of practice such as providing dedicated support and a sense of community for the dual award cohorts, ensuring equitable admissions criteria, offering flexibility and support for the international mobility element of the programme, providing reasonable funding beyond the minimum to allow for hidden costs, monitor the wellbeing of dual award students especially during points of transition and engagement with external agents (eg immigration processes) and ensure appropriate support is in place
While dual-award programmes promise an enriched, multi-disciplinary professional identity, this blog post seeks to bring to light some of the prior forms of capital required in order to access these programmes and considers some ways that practitioners in this field might mitigate against designing programmes which reproduce inequalities in doctoral education.
*This post is informed by empirical data from solicited audio diaries, collected as part of a pilot study from three participants on three different international dual award PhD programmes at a UK university with partner institutions in Denmark, Indonesia and Australia.
Author Bio
Sarah Patrick has worked in international higher education for 25 years. Based in the UK, her professional experience centres around international student recruitment and international research partnership development. Her scholarly interest lies in the application of Bourdieu’s theory of field, habitus and capital to doctoral education. Her doctoral thesis explores the experience of students on international dual award PhD programmes.