Unveiling the Essence of ‘Doctorateness’ in Ph.D. Mentorship: Navigating the Humanity amidst Academic Pursuits in Academia

Violet Nabwire *

Department of Learning Design and Technology, School of Education, Open University of Kenya, Konza Technopolish, Kenya.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


The paper explores the tension between humanizing and dehumanizing aspects of doctoral education ("doctorateness") in Ph.D. mentorship programs. It calls for a shift towards a more humane approach that prioritizes integrity, ethics, and the well-rounded development of doctoral candidates. Universities traditionally aim to bridge knowledge gaps and foster ethical research, but a failure to do so can lead to a dehumanized doctoral experience. Scholars emphasize the need for universities to cultivate humane environments that nurture innovative solutions through quality doctoral mentorship. This approach equips graduates with the technical and emotional intelligence needed to tackle global challenges. The true essence of "doctorateness" lies in a humanized process that fosters research, innovation, and capacity building. Quality doctoral graduates embody humanizing attributes and go beyond mere technical proficiency process. However, the current focus on quantity often results in graduates lacking the skills and humanity sought by employers. Universities must address these gaps by developing programs that train postgraduates in a humane environment. The root cause of graduate unemployment lies not in the number of graduates, but in the lack of quality, integrity, and humanizing elements embedded in doctorateness programs. An exploration of "doctorateness" within supervision processes highlights deficiencies in program approval, supervisor allocation, and the lack of robust monitoring mechanisms. The current landscape falls short of ideals that prioritize a humane and transformative doctoral experience. The paper proposes steps to cultivate a more humane doctoral mentorship environment: Integrate humanizing aspects into doctoral program approval, prioritize supervisor consultation for manageable workloads, provide comprehensive training for new supervisors, Implement ongoing monitoring and evaluation throughout the doctoral journey. By adopting these recommendations, universities can foster a doctoral mentorship environment that balances academic rigor with the holistic development of scholars, navigating the humanity inherent in academia.

Keywords: Quality doctorateness, malpractice, misconducts, integrity, ethics, humanizing, dehumanizing, doctorateness

How to Cite

Nabwire, V. (2024). Unveiling the Essence of ‘Doctorateness’ in Ph.D. Mentorship: Navigating the Humanity amidst Academic Pursuits in Academia. Asian Journal of Advanced Research and Reports, 18(5), 170–177. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajarr/2024/v18i5645


Download data is not yet available.


Aftab Dean. New global university ranking with an ethical missio Available:https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20220529092158508. 2022.

Swarts Andrew. Nurturing and inspiring across supervisory styles and practices. McKenna, S.

Abuya Joshua Olang'O, Paul Ongány Obino, Patrick Oduor Owoche. Doctoral Liminality and Responsible Conduct Practices in Doctoral Research; 2022.

Botha Jan. Speech at Graduation Ceremony in Germany, what is a higher degree really for? Bremen International Graduate School of Social Sciences. University of Brement, Germany; 2022.

Sarrico Cláudia S. The expansion of doctoral education and the changing nature and purpose of the doctorate. Higher Education. 2022;84(6): 1299-1315.

Trafford Vernon, Shosh Leshem. Doctorateness as a threshold concept. Innovations in education and teaching international. 2009;46(3):305-316.

CUE .Standards and Guidelines; 2013. Available:https://www.cue.or.ke/index.php?option=com_phocadownload&view=category&id=16:standards-and-guidelines&Itemid=187

Moi University, Postgraduate Rules and Regulations;2019 Available:https://sgs.mu.ac.ke/index.php/k2-categories/graduate-regulations.

Makerere University. Research and Innovations Policy; 2008. Available:http://policies.mak.ac.ug/#research

Creswell John W, David Creswell J. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. Sage publications; 2017.

Wisker Gina. Decolonising the literary doctorate. Decolonizing the Literature Curriculum. Cham: Springer International Publishing. 2022; 189-204.

Mason Shannon, Liezel Frick. Ethical and practical considerations for completing and supervising a prospective PhD by publication. Landscapes and Narratives of PhD by Publication: Demystifying students’ and supervisors’ perspectives. Cham: Springer International Publishing. 2022;31-45.

Clarene-Fincham J, Boughey C, Wels H, van den Heuvel H. Strengthening postgraduate supervision. Stellenbosch: African Sun Media. 2017:229-239.

Fourie-Malherbe, Magda, ed. Post-graduate supervision: Future foci for the knowledge society. African Sun Media; 2016.

Cyranoski David et al. The PhD factory: The world is producing more PhDs than ever before. Is it time to stop. Nature. 2011;472(7343): 276-279.