Deconstructing the skills training debate in doctoral education

Abstract

The pressure being placed on universities to deliver skills training for the workplace has generated considerable debate. This paper deconstructs the broader employability discourse in which the debate is embedded in order to draw out its formative implications for skills training during candidature. The paper argues against erection of a deficiency model in the context of skills training of higher degree research (HDR) students, and that the employability discourse is essentially reductive. It obscures whole areas of HDR knowledge production, thus skewing skills training towards the perceived needs of science students; the significant contribution made by research education developers to skills training of HDR students; and employer responsibility for workplace skills training. Notions of skills transferability, best practice and embedding are all shown to be problematic in that they lack discriminative power. Finally, the paper demonstrates that HDR students do value skills training at the institutional level despite prevailing uncertainty.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 89 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.