Transformation and Trend of Doctoral Education in China and Poland (1980s – 2010s). A Comparative Study

Abstract

The past 30-strong years has seen remarkable achievements that both Poland and China have made in Doctoral Education along different paths though. Drawing on policy research and extensive data, this paper sets out to examine the transformations of doctor education across the two countries within these intervening years. It is found that the changes in Poland were mainly influenced by the political transitions, its integration with European education system, and particularly the Bologna Process while China’s educational reform was amenable to the national economic policy and the government behavior. As regards the prospect of doctoral education, the two countries have both common grounds and differences. Poland and China will have more diversified structure in doctoral education, pay closer attention to STEM discipline’s developments as well as external and intermediary assessment in quality control. Also, the managements of doctoral programs in two countries will be characterized by further decentralization of government and internationalization of education. In the next few years, however, the scale of China’s doctoral education will remain at the current level or even expand modestly, whereas that of Poland’s doctoral education is likely to shrink due to the population decline.

Full text

Transformation
and Trend of Doctoral Education
in China and Poland (1980s – 2010s).
A Comparative Study
Yong Mei
Hubei University, People’s Republic of China
Key words: doctoral education; comparative study; transformation and trends
DOI: 10.2478/ped21-2018-0008
Abstract
e past 30-strong years has seen remarkable achievements that both Poland and China have made in Doctoral Education
along dierent paths though. Drawing on policy research and extensive data, this paper sets out to examine the transformations
of doctor education across the two countries within these intervening years. It is found that the changes in Poland were mainly
inuenced by the political transitions, its integration with European education system, and particularly the Bologna Process
while China’s educational reform was amenable to the national economic policy and the government behavior. As regards the
prospect of doctoral education, the two countries have both common grounds and dierences. Poland and China will have
more diversied structure in doctoral education, pay closer attention to STEM discipline’s developments as well as external and
intermediary assessment in quality control. Also, the managements of doctoral programs in two countries will be characterized
by further decentralization of government and internationalization of education. In the next few years, however, the scale of
China’s doctoral education will remain at the current level or even expand modestly, whereas that of Poland’s doctoral educa-
tion is likely to shrink due to the population decline.
Introduction
Competition among higher education has been grow-
ing increasingly tense, particularly in the sector of doc-
toral education. Understandably, this eld has become
“a matter of increasing interest and concern” in many
parts of the world (Lee & Green, 1995, p. 2), including
China and Poland.
Distant and dierent as these two countries might
seem, they have one crucial commonality in their
higher education system: both had been heavily im-
pacted by the former Soviet Union. After splitting up
with their former model, the two countries have seen
their higher education on dierent tracks but both have
achieved progress by leaps and bounds. To date, Poland
is the 4th largest higher education system (after UK,
Germany, and France) in the European Union accord-
ing to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education
in Poland, while China ranks the second largest global-
ly. In terms of doctoral education, Poland underwent
21ST CENTURY PEDAGOGY
Transformations of the Education Systems in Europe and in Asia
at the turn of 20th and 21st century
Vol. I, 47–60
© 2018 Yong Mei. is is an open access article licensed under
the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

48 21ST CENTURY PEDAGOGY
a major transformation after the country’s political
transition began in 1989, while China initiated such
programmes only in early 1980s under Deng Xiaoping’s
leadership then. How could their PhD education grow
so robustly within a relatively short period? It merits
due attention to explore what contributes to their com-
mendable progress. Specically, two key aspects are to
be discussed in depth. Firstly, as two emerging powers
of higher education, what are the major transforma-
tions in their doctoral education over the past several
decades? It helps to master the main features of cur-
rent doctoral education in Poland and China. Secondly,
what are their prospects ahead in the eld? Especially
when they spare no eorts to guarantee the “gold stand-
ard” of their doctoral education in the context of mas-
sication of higher education. Against the backdrop, it
is conducive for them to benet from well-established
practice from each other.
Literature review
Comparisons of higher education between China and
Poland have not been abundant but are on the increase.
In Chinese literature, initial research about Poland
was informative and to introduce polish higher educa-
tion, and become gradually more academic. ere are
analysis about Polish engineering education reform
(Chen,1998) , its agricultural education (Huang, 2001)
, its mode of higher education and references to Chinese
colleges and universities (Huang, 2002), the non-public
higher education institutions (Sun & Xia, 2003), the
EFL teaching at Polish higher education institutions
and its implication for China (Che, 2005) , the accredi-
tation system of quality control in polish higher educa-
tion (Pang, 2006), review and development of entrepre-
neurship education (Huang & Ke, 2011; Wang, 2011),
as well as a summary of its new trends and implication
of transformational development after 1989 (Yang,
2015). Among the literature, Fan’s work (2001) was one
of the earliest eorts in comparing the development and
reforms of higher education systems in both countries
and their respective pros and cons. In governing higher
education institutions, Poland was more open and ef-
fective while Chinese higher education institutions had
more contact with market. Wang (2010) has directly
discussed the current state and existing problems in
polish doctoral education, introducing the structure
and programmes of its doctoral study, and pointing out
that quality control and level of internationalization of
doctoral education are two major challenges.
Research on Chinese doctoral education has gained
increasing interest due to its huge size and fast growth,
covering facets such as the its history and review, re-
cruiting strategies, quality and its control (Chen, et al.,
2010 ). Probably out of geographical and ideological
causes, there is little comparison of higher education
between two countries written in English. An indirect
and interesting comparison could be established by two
separate studies: Koscielniak (2014) and Holm, Sam-
malisto & Vuorisalo (2015) addressing the same issue,
i.e., education for sustainable development.
In term of comparison of doctoral education, Wildy,
Peden & Chan (2015) compare the development of
professional doctorate in China, Iceland and Australia.
ey nd that the emergence of professional doctorates
worldwide is having a signicant impact on the status
and structure of traditional research-based PhDs and
on the roles of academics and students in the so-called
knowledge economy. Regarding China and Poland, the
most immediate endeavour is the informative and in-
spiring book e Doctorate Worldwide by Stuart Powell
& Howard Green (2007). eir internationally coor-
dinated research has critically analyzed the provision
of doctoral education worldwide and discusses core
issues for educators, administrators and policy-mak-
ers when planning and delivering doctoral education
programmes. e book has oered a sound and solid
analytical framework with a couple of index for com-
parison between seventeen countries, including ques-
tions such as place of doctoral study, funding issues,
institution types, forms of doctoral study, students and
their programs of study, supervision, examination, and
so on. Despite being relatively marginal, doctoral edu-
cation in both Poland and China have been discussed
and delved with hard data. Presumably, the research
has been initial endeavor to compare and summarise
key aspects of doctoral education of these two countries
in a coherent way. However, due to space limit, Stuart
Powell & Howard Green’s investigation and account
for each country have been limited to 4,000 words,
including China and Poland. Besides, substantial and
substantive changes have occurred to graduate educa-
tion in the past decade in the countries. Against the
backdrop, it is signicant to revisit the issue.
A panorama of higher education systems
in China and Poland
Poland’s traditions of academic education date back
to 1364 when King Casimir the Great established the
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

49
Yong Mei: Transformation and Trend of Doctoral Education...
Cracow Academy, known today as the Jagiellonian
University. Today, the Polish higher education system
is developing dynamically and has ranked the fourth
place in Europe (Ministry of Science and Higher Edu-
cation, 2012). e total student population at over 430
higher education institutions (shortened as HEIs here-
-after) numbers almost 2 million.
Poland conforms to the guidelines from the Bolo-
gna Process in European higher education where the
degree system based on the three-cycle structure has
been successfully implemented. In many literatures,
the history of Polish higher education has a clear de-
marcation line around 1989. After 1989, the expansion
and diversication of higher education have quickened,
with numerous new sorts of colleges and universities es-
tablished in the nation. In 2005, there were 445 HEIs,
and increased to 460 in 2010, but gradually declined
to 434 in 2015. In terms of enrollment, according to
2014 GUS data, the enrollment rate of Polish higher
education is 26.8%. However, after years of a dramatic
increase in demand, Polish higher education enroll-
ment will decline sharply by 2025. GUS data in 2011
indicated that in the past six years the total enrollment
has decreased by 9.7 percent (Joanna Musial, 2014). It
is further supported by the 2015 Demographic Year-
book, where the number of students in total at HEIs
was 1,953,800, and then shrank to 1,841,300 in 2010
and declined to 1,469,400 in 2015.
e Ministry of Science and Higher Education is
the governmental organization in charge of scientic
and higher educational development. HEIs in Poland
are divided into state (public) and private (non-public)
institutions. ere are two main categories of higher
education institutions: university-type and non-univer-
sity institutions. In the university-type HEIs, at least
one unit is authorised to confer the academic degree
of Doctor (PhD), i.e. oers at least one doctoral pro-
gramme.
China has similar categorization in its HIEs but
with dierent naming. ere are public, non-public
colleges and universities (also called Minban or in-
dependent), as well as academic institutions (such as
Academy of Science of China and Academy of Social
Sciences of China).
e Regulations on Academic Degrees of the Peo-
ple’s Republic of China, as one major act on its degree
systems of higher education, was adopted at the 13th
Meeting of the Standing Committee of the Fifth Na-
tional People’s Congress on February 12, 1980 and later
amended at the 11th Session of the Standing Commit-
tee of the Tenth National People’s Congress on August
28, 2004. e Act demonstrates that China also adopts
the three-cycle degree system (Bachelor-Mater-Doctor),
where only authorized HEIs are eligible to confer bach-
elor degree and authorized HEIs and academic institu-
tions can confer master and doctor degrees.
e Ministry of Education (MoE) of China, a gov-
ernment ministry responsible for all aspects of state
education at all levels ranging from primary education
to higher education including doctoral provision. Ac-
cording to the MOE’s annual report in 2014, there are
2,845 HEIS, including public and 722 non-public in-
stitutions, adding another 36 after 2013. Besides, there
are over 25 million students at all Chinese HEIs with
an increase 3.23% year-on-year, creating one of the
largest higher education systems with the gross enrol-
ment rate of higher 37.5%.
Table 1. Higher Education in China and Poland in the
2014/2015 Academic Year
number of
HEIs
Teachers
Non-public
HEIs
Total number
of students
Total number
of graduates
China 2,845 1,53
million 722 25,477
million
6.59
million
Poland 434 96,500 280 Nearly 2
million
0.425
million
Source: Data about China are from the website of MoE of P.R.C.
Data about Poland are from 2015 GUS, Concise Statistical Year-
book of Poland.
Current state of Doctoral education
in China and Poland
Due to historical inuences, both Poland and China
have complicated higher education systems, mainly
containing HEIs and other academic institutions. Al-
though the latter are also involved in doctoral educa-
tion, they are secondary in scope and proportion in
comparison with the former. For instance, according
to Central Statistical Oce, in 2006 Polish HEIS ac-
counted for 92.6% of doctoral students (Krasniewski,
2008). erefore, this paper mainly concentrates on the
doctoral education carried out at HEIs in both coun-
tries.
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

50 21ST CENTURY PEDAGOGY
e table has illustrated the general landscapes of doc-
toral education in two countries. ey share similarities
and also dierences. For instance, both countries have
three-cycle structure of degree system, high comple-
tion rate in doctoral studies and two types of doctoral
programmes. Understandably, they also have major dis-
tinctions. Most typically, Poland has much longer his-
tory in graduate education in China while the latter has
more recent yet robust progress in the eld.
For Poland, after implementing the three-cycle
structure of degree system, the third-cycle studies is
Doctoral degree programmes (normally 3 to 4 years) ac-
cessible for graduates of Master’s degree programme,
leading to a PhD degree, oered by the university type
Items Poland China
Number Details Number Details
Total number of doctoral
students studying
40,575 54.3% are females 312,676 36.9% are females
PhD graduates 5,712 2,976 are females 53,653
Entrants No data 72,634
Number of institutions
oering doctoral
programmes
More than 100 288
Number of dierent
doctoral awards
(e.g. including
professional doctorates)
2 Regular PhD degree
and PhD in the arts
2 Regular PhD degree
and professional
doctorates
History of oering
doctorates in the country
Over 500
years
Since the 15th
century (Jagiellonian
University,Cracow)
Over 30 years e rst cohort
of 18 students awarded
a PhD on 27
May 1983
Proportion of fulltime to
part-time students
5.69:1 40575 is the total
number at HEIs, 6064
students are in part-time
programmes
5.7:1 305833 is the total
number of PhD students
at HEIs; 53651 being in
contractual programs
PhD supervisors No data 7,753 are full professors
at HEIS (GUS, 2015)
13,779 2,074 is female
supervisors
Average time to
completion (in years)
93.5% of students
complete their studies
within 2–4 years
e statistical data show
only the number of years
passing since the date
of the opening of the
doctorate procedure.
(Kwiek, 2006)
3–4 years full-time No ocial data exist but
regulations of most HEIs
specify 3– 4 years for
full-time students
Success rates No data No data available; but
probably the drop-out
rate is small with less
than 10% in public HEIs
(Kwiek, 2006)
No data No ocial data exist
but the real gures are
probably low due to
traditional Chinese
practice of “strict at
entry and relax at exit?”
(Zhuang, 2007)
Typical age range of
doctoral candidates
24–30 e vast majority
of doctoral students
begin doctoral studies
immediately after
graduation at (usually)
age 24 and studies last
(on average) 4–5 years
30 years and below 40.4% according to 2008
data and likely to remain
so because most HEIs
tighten the rate for on-
-the-job students
Graduate school No data 56 All areresearch
universities of 985 Project
Table 2. Doctoral Education in Poland and China in the 2014/2015 Academic Year
Source: Data about China are from the website of MoE of P.R.C.
Data about Poland are from 2015 GUS, Higher Education Institutions and their Finances in 2015.
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

51Yong Mei: Transformation and Trend of Doctoral Education...
schools. e PhD degree is awarded to candidates who
submit and successfully defend a doctoral dissertation
before the thesis committee and pass the doctoral ex-
amination.
Two scientic degrees can be earned in Poland: the
doctorate and the habilitation (the latter coming from
the German academic tradition widely spread in Cen-
tral Europe). In the Polish structure of higher educa-
tion, the habilitation opens the way from being a junior
faculty member to becoming a senior faculty member;
however, full seniority of rank is only achieved with the
award of the scientic title of professor. e habilita-
tion, however, opens the way for an academic to become
a university professor (a university function, without
a scientic title). Background information on numbers,
sex and distribution among disciplines of doctorates is
given and discussed below. In the Polish context, it may
also be useful to combine these data with the data con-
cerning the habilitation. In Poland the doctoral educa-
tion is primarily a gateway to academia that links to the
habilitation, which in turn provides the license to prac-
tice as an academic (Stuart & Howard, 2007, p. 232).
e list of institutions (in the case of HEIs, indi-
vidual faculties) that are entitled to award PhD degrees
in a particular area is determined by a state controlled
body: the Central Commission for Academic Degrees
and Titles. e decisions of this Commission are based
on an evaluation of the research potential of institu-
tions, mainly the number of full-time professors. Cur-
rently more than 100 HEIs include at least one unit en-
titled to award doctoral degrees (among them seven pri-
vate HEIs); these HEIs are members of the Conference
of Rectors of Academic Schools in Poland (CRASP).
It must be emphasised, however, that, in principle, in-
dividual faculties (and not institutions) are primarily
responsible for the development and implementation of
doctoral programmes.
A candidate for the PhD degree should hold a mas-
ter’s degree (in theory it is possible to award the PhD
degree to a person who does not satisfy this require-
ment, but in this case the procedure is extremely com-
plex and, therefore, very rarely practiced). A graduate
from a master’s programme seeking a PhD degree is
faced with the following two basic options. Partly simi-
lar to the case in Germany, the role of doctoral can-
didate has been largely a researcher, who doesn’t have
many courses to attend and are expected to carry out
academic study.
For China, doctoral education has also been re-
garded as the highest form of its education system.
Hence, China has highlighted the standard of doctoral
education in its law. e Article 6 of Regulations on
Academic Degrees in China stipulates that the doctor’s
degree shall be conferred on postgraduates in institu-
tions of higher learning or scientic research institutes
or persons with qualications equivalent to postgradu-
ates on graduation, who have passed examinations in
the required courses for the doctor’s degree and success-
fully defended their dissertations and have attained the
following academic standards:
1) having a rm and comprehensive grasp of basic
theories and profound and systematic specialized
knowledge in the discipline concerned;
2) having the ability to undertake independent
scientic research; and
3) having made creative achievements in science or in
a special technology.
Abstract as those requirements might sound for
PhD students in China, they are demanding for most
students. Unlike their Polish counterparts, PhD stu-
dents in China are largely regarded as students, so they
will attend courses to train their research skills and ca-
pacity which normally last around one year.
As regards governance of doctoral education, PhD
programmes are oered by selected regular HEIs and
research institutes (RIs) subject to strict government ap-
proval procedures (Zhuang, 2007). Practically, gradu-
ate school has played a critical role in the administration
of doctoral programmes. Since October 1984, China
has approved of the rst batch of graduate schools in 22
research universities, and hitherto 58 graduate schools
(56 at HEIs) are established. e MoE’s ocial website
claims that the graduate schools have produced around
67% of PhD graduates for the nation.
Transformations of doctoral education
in China and Poland
e evolution of Chinese doctoral education has been
fundamentally driven by the national economy and
keeping aligned with its economic landscapes while the
transformations in Poland has been largely prompted
by political transition and integration, coupled with de-
mographic alternation.
Stages of doctoral education in Poland
Much research about evolution of Polish higher edu-
cation presents an overall picture rather than on doc-
toral education. It has been already revealed that, like
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

52 21ST CENTURY PEDAGOGY
other sectors of its education system, Polish doctoral
education has been acutely impacted by the adjustment
during the Political transformation (Kwiek, 2013) and
the transformation alongside with its alignment with
Bologna Project (Krasniewski, 2008). Although not ex-
plicitly concerning doctoral education, in his analysis,
Kwiek (2013) reveals that higher education in Poland
has witnessed a process from system expansion to sys-
Table 3. Stages of Polish doctoral education from 1980s to 2010s
Source: from Education and Training, Graduates by eld of education[DB/OL].
http://stats.oecd.org/ 2015-01-21.
Stage Period Feature Causes Description
1. During 1980s unied and Slow Tight and bureaucratic
control of the government
on higher education
(Musial, 2014)
Polish higher education lacked autonomy and was not
inclined to encourage expansion; the number of students
was strictly controlled, including the number of doctoral
programmes.
2. From 1989 to
2005
Expanding and
diversifying
Mainly as the result
of political transition
in late 1980s
During 1989–2005, Polish higher education have
undergone a process of deinstitutionazation and
privatization, with new and private HEIs cropping up.
Since 1990 the total number of doctoral students has
increased by a factor of 12: from less than 2,700
in the academic year 1990–1991 to almost 33,000
in the academic year 2005–2006.
3. From 2006 to
now
Keeping steady
even shrinking
with declining
schooling
population;
From unstructured
model to
structured one;
From
Decisive Integration
with EU: Alignment
with Bologna Process
and conforming with
EU’S requirements such
as the Bergen
Communique’
After 2005, the regulations in organizing doctoral studies
have shifted from e Act on Scientic Titles and Degrees
to e Act on Higher Education; e status of PhD
students shifting from scientic apprentice to multi-skilled
knowledge worker; Since 2006, Polish higher education
was downsizing due to declining population. In 2007
there were 6,072 PhD graduates but shrank sharply
to 3,590 in 2012.
tem contraction within the past 3 decades. e doctor-
al education is likely to undergo same transformation.
Yang (2015) then proposes that there are three stages
for polish high education. Based on Kwiek’s insight-
ful research and other scholars’ analyses, the paper pro-
poses that over the past three decades, Polish doctoral
education has witnessed three major stages, detailed in
the table 3.
Stages of doctoral education in China
e scenario in China looks rather distinct. e pre-
dominant drive is out of economic consideration but
pushed by government, which was initiated in the na-
tional policy of “Reforming and Opening-up to Out-
side World” in late 1970s. As Yang (2012) points out,
in line with China’s massive leap in higher education,
doctoral education has been strongly, and arguably
strategically pushed by the Chinese government. Need-
less to say, other factors also contribute to the transfor-
mation in doctoral education, just as Ma’s study (2007)
analyzes, graduate education in China is closely related
to the country’s scientic policy and education reforms.
In a sense, the evolution of doctoral education is typical
of state-controlled as well as government-led reforms.
After a slow growth during 1980s and 1990s, doc-
toral education in China has witnessed a leap around
2000. Within four decades, its scale has become one
of the largest globally. Regarding the stages of Chinese
doctoral education, there have been dierent evalua-
tions, from perspective of the expansion of doctoral ed-
ucation (Guo, 2009), or from the history of authoriza-
tion of doctoral programmes (Lin, 2009; Song & Mei,
2009). As state-controlled higher education system, the
changes in the authorization of doctoral programmes
are convincing indicators of evaluation in the eld.
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

53Yong Mei: Transformation and Trend of Doctoral Education...
Stages Period Feature Causes Descriptions
1.
Initial
establishment:
From 1981 to
1989 Covering
the 1st–3rd rounds
of authorizations
Slow and tightly stated-
-controlled
Lacking talents and motivated
by gradual marketization after
implementing the policy of
“Reforming and Opening-up to
Outside World”
implement high standard
and strict requirement
of graduate education,
guarantee its quality,
fairness and scientic
development
2.
Consolidation
& adjustment:
From 1990 to
1999; Covering
the 4th–7th rounds
of authorizations
Quick expansion 1. e demand for high-level labour
force is acute while HEIs are far from
meeting the demand;
2. e national policy to establish
world-class universities has been
implemented, Such as 211 Project
and 985 Project.
Consolidate the foundation
of current graduate
education, increase a small
number of master and
doctoral programmes;
During 1992–1998, the
annual rate of doctoral
students studying on
campus is 20.6%
3.
Active & rapid
development:
From 2000
to 2005;
Covering the
8th–9th rounds of
authorizations
Accelerated
development
Hit by the 1990s Asian Financial
Crisis, the government decided to
stimulate economy by expanding the
scale of higher education, including
doctoral education.
Promote active
development, deepen
reforms, adhere to high
standard and fairness;
e number of PhD
students has skyrocketed
from 218,000 to over 1
million in 2006, with
annual rate of 24.48%
4.
Optimization
& improvement:
From 2006 to
today; Since the
10th round of
authorization to
today
Closely monitored and
quality-centred
1. e negative impact of Great Leap
in higher education during the 1990s
has emerged, with sharp criticism on
lowering quality of higher education.
2. As integral part of building
“World-class Universities”, the
quality of doctoral education has
been stressed.
Adhere to high standard,
optimize the structure,
improve the quality; e
scale of doctoral graduates
has increased by 25.93%,
from 55955 in 2006 to
70462 in 2013.
Table 4. Stages of authorization of doctoral programmes in China
Year Graduates Entrants Enrolment
1998 7535 13041 39343
1999 8749 17724 47649
2000 9409 22292 59837
2001 11065 28663 76840
2002 12849 34003 43315
2003 16401 43315 122381
2004 20607 47502 148561
2005 24035 48824 172052
2006 31653 50078 188052
Year Graduates Entrants Enrolment
2007 36270 51916 201129
2008 38111 53595 214963
2009 42903 55472 224119
2010 43214 57392 236328
2011 44464 58882 248027
2012 48138 64118 268801
2013 49405 65785 281959
2014 52290 70713 305833
Table 5. Number of doctoral Students at Regular HEIs in China
Source: from statistics of MoE of China (1998–2014).
e transformations over the past decades can also be
evidenced by the changes in number of doctoral stu-
dents (Table 5) and auditing and authorization of doc-
toral education (Table 6).
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

54 21ST CENTURY PEDAGOGY
Table 6. Auditing and authorization of doctoral education in China
1st
audit
ing
2nd
audit
ing
3rd
audit
ing
4th
audit
ing
5th
audit
ing
6th
audit
ing
7th
audit
ing
8th
audit
ing
9th
audit
ing
10th
audit
ing
11th
audit
ing
Year for auditing
& authorization 1981 1983 1986 1990 1993 1996 1998 2000 2003 2006 2011
Number of
doctoral
programmes
812 1151 1830 2107 2398 2604 1827 1397 2273 2878 1004
Institutions
with doctoral
programmes
151 196 238 248 271 277 323 312 342 361 288
Prospects in doctoral education
in these two countries
Given the glorious achievements both countries have
made, they are confronted with huge challenges in
many regards, such as optimizing recruiting strategy,
diversifying of doctoral programs, bettering nancing
policies, and above all, intensifying quality control of
doctoral education.
For instance, Andrzej Krasniewski (2008) analyzes
the problems and challenges during the transformation
of doctoral training in Poland, and demonstrates how
these challenges have been dealt with in the Faculty
of Electronics and Information Technology, Warsaw
University of Technology, where a four-year doctoral
programme, combining coursework and individual re-
search work, was introduced.
After years of a dramatic increase in demand, Polish
higher education enrollment will decline sharply by
2025. From 2006 to 2011, the total enrollment has de-
creased by 9.7 percent (GUS, 2011). is trend is con-
sistent with ndings presented by Levy (2012a) on the
decline of private higher education globally (Joanna,
2014).
Despite some similar challenges, China has its par-
ticular tough tasks to handle. Within 4 decades, its
scale of doctoral education has expanded to be one of
the largest globally. In line with China’s massive leap in
higher education, doctoral education has been strongly,
and arguably strategically pushed by the Chinese gov-
ernment (Yang, 2012). is is supported by Dr. Ma’s
study (2007) which reveals that the graduate educa-
tion in China is closely related to the country’s scien-
tic policy and education reforms. “Chinese graduate
education is still in its developing stage, and it faces
many challenges” (p. 12). To summarize, the core is-
sue of doctoral education is that the conict between
its size and quality has been deteriorating. Generally,
while PhD student recruiting strategies and academic
performance of universities are more ecient and ef-
fective, the nancing imbalance and commercialization
of doctoral education are increasingly pronounced. It is
imperative to increase enrollment of graduate education
and improve its quality, especially in students’ capac-
ity of conducting scientic research. To this end, the
trends in two countries might occur in the following
elds.
e scale of doctoral education in China will
maintain steady or increase slightly while that in
Poland will stabilize even downsize.
Due to demographic shrinking, Polish doctoral ed-
ucation will have slight increase and even shrink gradu-
ally while for China, its scale will maintain steady or an
increase of reasonable proportion.
In Poland, the total population is 38,484,000( as of
the end of 31.12.2014), and the schooling population
for higher education is declining, as the following table
indicates. As a result, the scale of doctoral education is
inevitably impacted, as the number of its doctoral grad-
uates has accorded with the general trend of the total
population, increasing from 4,400 in 2001 to 6,072 in
2007, and then dropping sharply to 3,590 in 2012. Ta-
ble 8 has demonstrated the volatility of student number
in key years during the three stages. To maintain its size
and international competiveness, Poland will enrich its
source of potential students; in particular, giving more
access to on-the-job students or international students.
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

55Yong Mei: Transformation and Trend of Doctoral Education...
Table 7. Polish population by age group from 2000 to 2014
2000 2005 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
16–10 2,044,
878
1,707,
865
1,585,
513
1,519,
230
1,453,
477
1,386,
651
1,326
621
1,268
824
1,222,
838
19–21 1,919,
542
1,944,
457
1,698,
015
1,665,
521
1,630,
551
1,581,
467
1,518
562
1,448
754
1,381,
483
Table 8. Number of Polish doctoral students during 1980s–
–2010s
Stage Academic year Number of students
Stage 1 Before 1990 No data
Stage 2 1990–1991 2,695
1995–1996 10,482
2000–2001 25,622
2005–2006 32,725
Stage 3 2007–2008 33,040
2014–2015 40,575
Considering that China is staying in the later phase of
massication of higher education and knowledge econ-
omy is still maturing, there exists a lasting appetite for
highly-educated labour force. erefore, the huge size
of its doctoral education is likely to continue but with
a more reasonable increase rate.
However, one distinction between the two countries
is meriting attention. Unlike Poland which allures on-
-the-job PhD applicants, there is an obvious trend in
China to slash the scale of on-the-job doctoral students
from early 2010s, especially at top research universities.
For instance, 4 universities such as Zhejiang University
and Xiamen University don’t enroll on-the-job PhD
students while universities like Xi’an Jiaotong Univer-
sity Renmin University of China has set limits on its
proportion of such students, normally 15% of the to-
tal enrollment. Peking University and Beijing normal
university have dierent requirements for such type of
students, including designated regions, length of stay
on campus and etc. (Shao & Yu, 2015). e causes for
the reduction of on-the-job doctoral students are two-
fold. Firstly, the completion rate of such students is low
compared with regular PhD students. Secondly, it is to
avoid corruption in the recruiting procedure.
e structure of doctoral education in the two
countries will be diversifying and disciplines of
STEM will be more highlighted.
In terms of structure of doctoral education, new
types of doctoral programmes have appeared and disci-
plines of STEM will be more highlighted.
Source: from Education in the school year 2014–2015, GUS of Poland.
As “knowledge economy” has been the dominant
feature in the 21st century, the knowledge production
and knowledge management have gradually shifted
from Knowledge Mode 1 to Knowledge Mode 2, in-
itiated by Gibbons et al (1994). In Mode 1, the way
of producing knowledge is characterised by the New-
tonian three phase ideal. Simplistically, basic science
precedes applied science, which leads to technological
development. And the knowledge producing institu-
tions are universities, government research depart-
ments and laboratories, corporate laboratories, etc. In
contrast, “Mode 2” involves a wider and dierent set of
practitioners, concentrating on more specic and local-
ised problems. Solving practical problems has been the
main goal which requires the integration of dierent
skills and knowledge – it is transdisciplinary.
Table 9. A summary of the distinctive attributes of each
Knowledge Mode
Attribute Mode 1 Mode 2
Problems set/
solved
By academic
community
In context of
application
Motivation Increased
understanding
Practical goal –
useful
Nature of
knowledge
Disciplinary Trans-disciplinary
Homogeneity Heterogeneity
Hierarchical/stable Hierarchical/
transient
Quality
control
More socially
accountable/reexive
Inuenced by the changing modes, the structure of
doctoral education worldwide has changed correspond-
ingly, including both China and Poland.
Following the international trend, China has estab-
lished a new type of doctoral programmes, specically
professional doctorate. Hitherto there have been ve
sorts of professional doctorate programmes (Doctor of
Science in Engineering, Doctor of Medicine, Doctor of
Veterinary Medicine, Doctor of Stomatological Medi-
cine and Doctor of Education). In 2009, the China’s
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

56 21ST CENTURY PEDAGOGY
State Council Academic Degrees Committee has ap-
proved 15 programmes of Doctor of Education. Cur-
rently Poland has regular PhD programmes and doctor
in arts. In foreseeable future, more types of professional
doctorate will be introduced, such as the establishment
of Doctor by project in some western countries (Wang,
2012).
Discipline
philosophy
economics
law
education
literature
history
Basic
science
engineering
agriculture
Medical
science
management
1995 Number
percentage
57
1.4
184
4.4
98
2.4
52
1.3
103
2.5
74
1.8
1222
29.4
1565
37.7
141
3.4
655
15.8
0
0
1996 Number
percentage
78
1.4
221
4
140
2.5
42
0.8
133
2.4
116
2.1
1505
27.3
2151
39
227
4.1
898
16.3
0
0
1997 Number
percentage
93
1.4
302
4.5
202
3
65
1
191
2.9
144
2.2
1734
26.1
2572
38.6
273
4.1
1086
16.3
0
0
1998 Number
percentage
113
1.3
444
5.3
241
2.9
109
1.3
239
2.8
190
2.3
2218
26.5
3210
38.3
397
4.7
1222
14.5
0
0
1999 Number
percentage
148
1.6
507
5.4
284
3
145
1.5
343
3.6
198
2.1
2129
22.6
3723
39.6
351
3.7
1267
13.4
306
3.3
2000 Number
percentage
195
1.7
512
4.6
321
2.9
142
1.3
384
3.4
255
2.3
2280
20.5
4413
39.8
415
3.7
1775
16
397
3.6
2001 Number
percentage
214
1.6
608
4.5
441
3.3
185
1.4
486
3.6
267
2
3504
26.2
4602
34.4
517
3.8
2092
15.7
470
3.5
2002 Number
percentage
260
1.8
849
5.9
606
4.2
197
1.4
637
4.4
308
2.1
2772
19.4
4912
34.4
618
4.3
2392
16.7
738
5.1
2003 Number
percentage
322
1.8
1028
5.6
608
3.7
268
1.5
819
4.5
429
2.4
3529
19.5
6167
34
721
4
3099
17.1
1039
5.7
2004 Number
percentage
365
1.6
1254
5.6
913
4.1
344
1.5
987
4.4
465
2.1
4264
19.1
7781
34.9
867
3.9
3650
16.4
1375
6.1
2005 Number
percentage
436
1.6
1494
5.4
1118
4
416
1.5
1148
4.1
524
1.9
5331
19.5
9674
35.2
1083
3.9
4488
16.3
1727
6.2
2006 Number
percentage
515
1.5
2007
6
1610
4.8
530
1.6
1535
4.6
554
1.7
6754
20.4
10724
32.2
1331
4
5509
16.5
2162
6.5
2007 Number
percentage
549
1.4
2084
5.4
1826
4.7
720
1.9
1858
4.8
722
1.9
8348
21.5
14025
36
1776
4.6
3966
10.2
3013
7.7
2008 Number
percentage
557
1.3
2240
5.4
1934
4.7
719
1.7
1999
4.8
775
1.9
9499
22.7
14790
35.7
1833
4.4
3861
9.3
3232
7.8
Table 10. Percentage of doctoral graduates in dierent disciplines from 1995–2008
Source: from General Development of Doctoral Education in China, 2011.
In terms of the structure of doctoral education, both
countries will stress disciplines of STEM and devote
more fund and resources for their development. As
Table 10 demonstrates, doctoral students in the eld
of STEMs have increased steadily from 1995 to 2008,
which corresponds with international trends during the
time.
A similar scenario happens to Poland as well. e fol-
lowing table (Table 11), though not complete, demon-
strates the percentage of Polish Doctoral Graduates in
Table 11. Percentage of Polish Doctoral Graduates in Dierent Disciplines in 2009
Dierent Disciplines in 2009. Obviously, a vast ma-
jority of postgraduates are distributed in STEM disci-
plines.
country Natural
sciences engineering Medical
sciences
Agricultural
Sciences
Social
sciences humanities others
Poland 26.6 20.1 11.0 7.7 17.8 16.8 ---
Source: OECD/UNESCO Institute for statistics/Eurostat Careers of doctorate Holders (CDH) project[DB/OL]. http://www.oecd.
org/2015-01-19.
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

57Yong Mei: Transformation and Trend of Doctoral Education...
Governance of doctoral education is decentral-
izing. In terms of the authority for institutions to de-
liver doctoral programmes, as Zhuang (2007) reveals
that two groups of countries coexist. those in which
the structure of higher education gives autonomy to in-
stitutions to oer a full portfolio of awards and those
in which higher education is more closely controlled
and managed by the state. e former group is typied
by those countries that have followed a British model
of higher education in which all institutions of higher
education1 are able to award doctorates. In Australia
for example, as the population of universities has in-
creased, those newly-designated have been granted re-
search degree awarding powers.
At the other end of a continuum are countries in
which the research degree awarding powers are to vary-
ing degrees far from automatic. Here universities them-
selves are not semi-autonomous organizations, includ-
ing those in Japan, Poland and China. For example,
universities have to apply for authorization to run pro-
grammes and make research degree awards – in these
countries such authorization becomes a matter of con-
trolled status and inevitably creates a stratied system.
Table 12. Decentralization of degree-conferring autonomy in China
Doctoral degree-
-conferring entities
rights in selecting PhD
supervisors
Doctoral degree-
-conferring rights
in 2rd-tier disciplines
Doctoral degree-
-conferring rights
in 1st-tier disciplines
China State Council’s
Academic Degrees
Committee
Oered the power for
auditing & approving
since 1981
Oered the power for
auditing & approving
since 1981
Oered the power for
auditing & approving
since 1981
Oered the power for
auditing & approving
since 1996
Academic Degrees
Committee at
provincial level
Oered the
power for recommendat
ion since 2005
--- --- Oered the power for
1st round auditing since
2010
Degree-conferring
HEIs
--- Oered the power for
self-auditing experiment
since 1985
--- Oered the power for
self-auditing Since 2005
State of degree-
-conferring
No loosening,
State-Controlled
Decentralized to degree-
-conferring entities
Decentralized to degree-
-conferring entities
Decentralized to degree-
-conferring entities
Article 8 of Regulations on Academic Degrees in
China stipulates that “the bachelor’s degree shall be
conferred by those institutions of higher learning au-
thorized by the State Council. e master’s and doc-
tor’s degrees shall be conferred by those institutions
of higher learning and scientic research institutes au-
thorized by the State Council. A list of institutions of
higher learning and scientic research institutes that
may confer academic degrees (hereinafter referred to
as “degree-conferring entities”) and the disciplines in
which academic degrees may be conferred shall be sub-
mitted to the State Council by its Academic Degrees
Committee for approval and promulgation.
Over the past decades, however, both China and
Poland have loosened control over their doctoral edu-
cation. For instance, on Nov. 25, 2015, China’s State
Council Academic Degrees Committee has stipulated
that from 2016, HEIs are given more autonomy to
manage their postgraduate programmes, particularly
to adjust and optimize their master and doctoral pro-
grammes more timely and exibly.
In the interview with Chinese Global Times on Oct. 5,
2015, the Deputy-Minister of Science and Higher Edu-
cation, Ms. Daria Lipinska Nalecz comments that the
year 2011 is a turning point in reformation of higher
education, when Polish HEIs have been oered more
autonomy (Global Times, 2015). Since 2011 the Minis-
try of science and higher education will not decide the
teaching standard and requirement for each discipline.
e HEIs are able to design their teaching plans, adjust
the structure of their disciplines in accordance with the
market.
Quality of doctoral education will be more stressed
and its control will be intensied.
e maintenance of high quality of doctoral education
has been the top priority
for both countries. Poland has internal and exter-
nal quality assurance system in its higher education. As
Chmielecka (2009) point out, there are two principal
accreditation schemes in Poland. SAC which was es-
tablished in 2002 (e State Accreditation Commit-
tee, or Panstwowa Komisja Akredytacyjna – PKA) is
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

58 21ST CENTURY PEDAGOGY
the national scheme (state-owned) while CR ASP (the
Conference of Rectors of Academic committee) is typi-
cal of the academic schemes, specically the CRASP
Accreditation Committee which was formed in 2001.
ough academic accreditation schemes are gaining
more weight in monitoring the quality of Polish doctoral
education, or quite a long period, national accreditation
scheme will still be the predominant force. As a pow-
erful national accreditation scheme, the PKA applies
a uniform mechanism of education quality assessment
to all higher education institutions/elds of study and
to monitor compliance with the requirements for in-
stitutions oering higher education. e requirements
are centrally-adopted standards equally applicable to all
elds of study. erefore, PKA is a typical accredita-
tion serving to conrm the accountability of a higher
education institution/faculty oering higher education
degree programmes. Chmielecka (2009) comments,
“is accreditation has consequences of administrative
nature and may lead to the elimination of a programme
or closing down of a higher education institution”
(p. 152). In recent years, in conformance with require-
ments of the European Research Area, Poland has been
involved in a series of conferences on doctoral educa-
tion, many of which has emphised the urgency of qual-
ity in the eld. For instance, on 17–18 June 2010, there
was a Bologna Seminar on Doctoral Studies in the Eu-
ropean Higher Education Area in Warsaw.
Likewise, China has also taken stringent measures
to maintain the quality of its doctoral programmes. Ba-
sically, it has gradually shifted from the “Entry-centered
quality control mechanism”, which exerts strict control
in selecting PhD students and authorization of doc-
toral programmes, to “Process-centered quality control
mechanism” (Guo, 2009), which oversees the quality
of doctoral education from the beginning to the end.
What’s more, the task for overseeing doctoral education
will not be government-dominated, but government-
-led and accreditation agency-implemented.
In 2011, e Academic Degrees Committee of the
State Council amended the 1997 Classication of In-
structional Programs. In 2013, e Academic Degrees
Committee of the State Council and the Ministry of
Education jointly issues Basic Requirements of Doctors
and Masters in First-tier Disciplines. To scrutinize the
quality of doctoral education, China will implement
large-scale examination in Doctor Degree Conferring
Institutions every 4–5 years. ose HEIs which fail to
pass the examination will have serious consequences,
either being asked to improve their programmes within
given time (normally 2 years), or having their authori-
zation of doctoral prorgrammes revoked completely.
For instance, on 25th of March, 2016, the China’s State
Council Academic Degrees Committee has revoked 4
Doctor Degree authorizations at four research universi-
ties, i.e., those four universities lost their qualication
for enrolling PhD students in the disciplines.
To avoid the weakness of selecting students mainly
via examination, some Chinese universities including
Peking University and Xiamen University have tried
“Application-Audit” mechanism in PhD enrollment
from 2014. And new mechanisms in assessment and
elimination of postgraduates have also been introduced
and implemented. If doctoral students fail to pass mid-
term assessment, they will be refused to continue their
candidateship.
Internationalization of doctoral education will
deepen in both countries.
Internationalization of doctoral education has been
trendy over the past decade. Internationalization of
doctoral education involves myriad facets, such as in-
ternationalization of students, teachers, teaching con-
tent and even teaching materials. Above all, it signies
the internationalization of students.
In a sense, Poland stands in a better position than
China mainly due to two major reasons. Firstly, it has
been a constant goal for EU to promote integration in
many aspects (especially in education and economy)
among its member countries, as evidenced by the es-
tablishment of European Research Area and Euro-
pean Higher Education Area. Specically, “Socrates/
Erasmus Programmes” are the two most well-known
schemes to promote the mobility and exchange of doc-
toral students. Secondly, to minimize the negative ef-
fect of its downsizing schooling population and main-
tain its edge in higher education, Poland is taking two
major measures, to giving more access to adult students
to its doctoral programmes, in particular, on-the-job
students, and to attract more international students.
For many years China has been one of the major
exporters of highly-skilled talents into other countries,
thus witnessing a severe “brain drain”. In this sense, it is
seeing a decit of Internationalization of doctoral edu-
cation. Encouragingly, the tide is turning slowly. Sta-
tistics also show foreign graduate students in Chinese
universities are on the increase (as was shown in Table
13), though most of them are in language programs
and humanities, and come mainly from neighboring
countries or African countries.
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

59Yong Mei: Transformation and Trend of Doctoral Education...
Chmielecka E. (2009). National external quality assurance system
in Poland and implementation of the European standards and
guidelines. In Kohoutek J. (ed). Implementation of standards and
guidelines for quality assurance in higher education of Central and
East – European countries – Agenda ahead. Bucharest.
Fan Y. (2001). Comparison and reference between Poland China in
higher education. Research on education Tsinghua University, (3),
131–135.
Gibbons M. et al. (1994). e New Production of Knowledge. Lon-
don: SAGE.
Global Times. It is envious to obser ve the erce competition among
top universities in China – an interview with Deputy-Minister of
Science and Higher Education. [2015-10-05]. http://news.sina.
com.cn/o/2015-10-09/doc-ifxiqtqy 0581635.s html.
Guo J.R. (2009). Expansion of doctoral education, qua lity distribu-
tion and quality assurance of doctorate in Chinese Universities.
A perspective of the institutionalism. Peking Education Review,
(4), 21–47.
Holm T., Sammalisto, K., Vuorisalo, T. (2015). Education for sustain-
able development and quality assurance in universities in China
and the Nordic countries: a comparative study. Journal of Cleaner
Production, (107), 529–537.
Huang C.X . (2001). e current state and reforms of Polish agricul-
tural education. Higher Ag ricultural Education, (8), 93–95.
Huang C.Z. (2002). e mode of polish higher education and refer-
ences to China. Hubei Social Sciences, (10), 54 –55.
Huang X.B., Ke Z .Y. (2011). e entrepreneurship education of Pol-
ish higher education institutions and references to China. Higher
Education Exploration, (4), 66–69.
Kraśniewski A. (2008). Transformation of doctoral training in Po-
land. Higher Education in Europe, 33(1), 125–138.
Kwiek M. (2013). From System Expansion to System Contraction:
Access to Higher Education in Poland. Comparative Education
Review, 7(3), 553–576.
Kościelniak C. (2014). A consideration of the changing focus on the
sustainable development in higher education in Poland. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 62(11), 114–119.
Lee A., Green B. (1995). Introduction: Postgraduate Studies/Post-
graduate Pedagogy?. Australian Universities’ Review, 38(2), 2–4.
Ministry of Science and Higher Education. 2012. http://www.nauka .
gov.pl/en/higher-education/
MOE of People’s Republic of China. [2015-05-21] http://moe.gov.cn/
srcsite/A03/moe_634/201505/t20150521_189479.htm l.
Musial J. (2014). Polish higher education – intersectoral distinctive-
ness. European Education, 46(3), 55–74.
OECD. Education and Training, Share of foreign-born among doc-
toral and tertiary-level graduates in OECD countries. [DB/OL].
[2015-01-22]. http://stats.oecd.org/.
Table 13. Number of international students for PhD degree from 2009–2013 in China
Academic year Total number of full-
-time international
students
Number of Doctoral
candidates
Percentage of PhD
students against total
number
Year-on-year Rate of
increase of PhD students
2013 14.7890 9.774 6.6 17.72%
2012 133.509 8.303 6.2 19.93%
2011 118.837 6.823 5.7 18.83%
2010 107.432 5.826 5.4 22.62%
2009 93.450 4.751 5.1 21.57%
Source: from Annual report on China’s Graduate Education Quality 2014 by Research Center for Graduate Education of Beijing University
of Technology, 2015.
Conclusion
is paper, based on policy analysis and abundant data,
has compared the transformations and trends of doctor-
al education in China and Poland from 1980s to 2010s.
Findings show that the political transitions in late 1980s,
its integration with European education system in early
2000s, and particularly joining the Bologna Process are
the driving force for its transformation in the sector,
while the national economic policy and the government
behavior provoke the changes for China.
In the next few years, probably China’s doctoral ed-
ucation will remain at the current level or even expand
modestly, while that of Poland is likely to shrink due
to the population decline. What’s more, Poland and
China are expected to further diversify their structure
in doctoral education. As a result, professional doc-
torate will grow quickly. Besides, they will pay closer
attention to STEM discipline in response to chang-
ing modes of knowledge production. To improve the
quality, both countries will introduce more intermedi-
ary accreditation agency, slackening the once-tightened
management mechanism, and promote the level of in-
ternationalization.
* * *
In this paper, China refers to the mainland China, so the data
about Hong Kong, Taiwan and Macao are not included.
References
Cai X.J., Fan W. (2011). General development of doctoral education in
China. Beijing.
Chen H.J, et al. (2010). Quality of PhD: conception, evaluation and
trend. Beijing.
Che S.F. (2005). EFL teaching at Polish higher education institutions
and its implication for China. Teaching and Education, (11), 60–62.
Chen X. (1998). e engineering education reform in Poland. Re-
search on Education Tsinghua University, (2), 132–135, 147.
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM

60 21ST CENTURY PEDAGOGY
Wildy H., Peden S., Chan, K. (2015). e rise of professional doctor-
ates: case studies of the Doctorate in Education in China, Iceland
and Australia. Studies in Higher Education, 40(5), 761–774.
Yang X.F. (2015). New trends and implication of transformational
development of Polish higher education. Comparative education
review, (9), 61–66.
B i od a t a :
Yong MEI has been an EFL teacher at Hubei University
in Wuhan, P.R.C. of China. He is also PhD candidate in
Higher Education Management at Huazhong University of
Science and Technology in Wuhan. His research interest is
higher education management and teacher development.
Email: Forrest. Yong. Mei@outlook.com
OECD/UNESCO Institute for statistics/Eurostat Careers of doctorate
Holders (CDH) project [DB/OL]. http://www.oecd.org/2015-
01-1.
Pang L. (2006). e review on accreditation system of qua lity control
in Polish higher education, (3), 146–149.
Piotr W.J., Marek K. (2007). Doctoral education in Poland. In: Stuart
P., Howard G., (eds). e Doctorate Worldwide. Berkshire.
Research Center for Graduate Education of Beijing University of
Technology. (2015). Annual report on China’s graduate education
quality 2014. Beijing.
Shao K.Q., Yu W.H. (2013). Problems in and suggestions for current
enrolment system for doctoral students. Journal of graduate edu-
cation, (5), 58–62.
Sun X.B., Xia J. (2003). e non-public higher education institutions
in Poland. Comparative education review, (6), 82–85.
Wang D.F. (2012). e evaluation of quality of doctora l education:
Challenges and implications. Deg ree and Postgraduate Education,
(2), 14–19.
Brought to you by | ReadCube/Labtiva
Authenticated
Download Date | 4/21/18 3:14 PM