ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF SOJOURNS AT FOREIGN UNIVERSITIES IN THE RESEARCH TRAINING PERIOD

Öz

This paper discusses the advantages and disadvantages which a prolonged period at a foreign university, as part of his or her research training, offers the doctoral student. Despite increased interest in student mobility at the postgraduate level, little research on actual experiences of sojourns abroad among doctoral students has been conducted. The study shows that in general benefits far outweigh the problems related to such stays. Help with dissertation work, development of general research qualifications, and personal development are regarded as the most valuable experiences; whilst delays in work on a thesis, poor contact with professors at foreign institutions, and family and social problems seem to be the principal problems. A number of issues seem to be inhibiting the extension of foreign doctoral training among Nordic postgraduates: tensions and dilemmas within the research training programme, lack of time and funding, lack of motivation and internal support, nationally oriented theses, and family obligations. The study concludes that this kind of mobility is one means, albeit an important one, of enhancing the quality of doctoral training and stimulating young scholars’ professional development.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• TRAINING PERIOD,RESEARCH TRAINING PERIOD,FOREIGN UNIVERSITIES

Kaynakça

1. Becher, T., Henkel, M. and Kogan, M. (1994). Graduate Education in Britain. London: Jessica Kingsley.
2. Blume, S. (1995a). Extended Review on the internationalisation of Research Training in the E. U. A Report to DGXII of the European Commission (grant contract Pss* 0891) on behalf of the Department of Science and Technology Dynamics, University of Amsterdam. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.
3. Blume, S. (1995b). 'Problems and prospects of research training in the 1990's', in OECD, Research Training. Present andFuture. Paris: OECD, pp. 9-39.
4. Danish Research Academy (1996). Internationalisering av forskeruddannelse. 229 Ph.D.- studerendes opfattelse af et Icengere-varende udlandsopholâ. Ârhus: Danish Research Academy.
5. Karseth, B. (1997). Internasjonalisering av forskerutdanning i naturvitenskap og teknologı. Oslo: Norwegian Institute for Studies in Research and Higher Education, NIFU skriftserie nr. 26/97.
6. Karseth, B., Kyvik, S. and Remme, J.A. (1998). Utenlandsopphold blant doktorgradsstipendiater. Oslo: Nonvegian Institute for Studies in Research and Higher Education, NIFU skriftserie nr. 6/98.
7. Kyvik, S. and Larsen, I.M. (1994). 'International contact and research performance', Scientometrics 29, 161-172.
8. Kyvik, S. and Smeby, J.C. (1994). 'Teaching and research. The relationship betvveen the supervision of graduate students and faculty research performance', Higher Education 28, 227-239.

9. Kyvik, S. and Larsen, I.M. (1997). 'The exchange of knovvledge. A small country in the intemational research community', Science Communication 18, 238- 264.
10. Kyvik, S. and Tvede, O. (1998). 'The doctorate in the Nordic countries', Comparative Education 34, 9-25.
11. Larsen, I.M. (1992). Norske universitetsforskere - kosmopolitter i forskningen? Oslo: Norvvegian Institute for Studies in Research and Higher Education, Report 11/92.
12. Smeby, J.C. (1999). 'Disciplinary differences in graduate education in Nonvay', Studies in Higher Education 24,
13. Teichler, U. (1996). 'Student mobility in the ffamevvork of Erasmus: Findings of an evaluation study', European Journal of Education 31, 153-180.