The purpose of this paper is to analyze research on doctoral education as a way to capture the intellectual and social organizing of educational disciplines in interaction with teacher education and teacher professionalization.

Doctoral education is regarded as a nexus in the formation and evolution of scientific disciplines (Kuhn, 1962) and professionalization. It joins together tradition and renewal of epistemic foundations with the development of competences and capacities to act within academic contexts as well as within a wider range of professional practices (Elmgren et al., 2016). In short, doctoral education can be seen as a mirror of the social and intellectual organization of a discipline (Whitley, 2000).

Previous international research has pointed to ongoing systemic transformations within doctoral education in general based on globalized political and societal demands, including expansion, effectivization, and internationalization (e.g., Shin et al, 2018; Yudkewitz, Altbach & de Wit, 2020). Research on disciplinary formation in general point to historically and contextually shaped variations in intellectual fields between countries (Whitley, 2000). Similar patterns have been identified within educational sciences (Hofstetter & Schneuwly, 2002; Whitty & Furlong, 2017), With reference to Kuhn (1962), Keiner (2019) argued that ‘rigor’, ‘discipline’ and the ‘systematic’ could be seen as standardizing and homogenizing forces as well as forces of diversification and fragmentation. Thus, ‘education science’ can hide a range of national differences when translated into English (Gross, Hofbauer & Keiner (2022). However, research on the role of doctoral education as a paradigmatic nexus, central in disciplinary formation seems to be more limited.

Furthermore, teacher educations and their connections with higher education institutions differ across the European countries (Whitty & Furlong, 2017).

Thus, doctoral educations are also differently constructed. For instance, it can be a research doctorate, it can be professional doctorate specifically aimed to satisfy the needs of teachers and professional groups outside the higher education institutions, and it can be a so-called joint doctorate (e.g., within the Erasmus Mundus Programme) (Kehm, 2020).

Given this, doctoral education in the formation of educational sciences and how this is interplaying with the professional education of teachers is the object of study in this research review. In order to deal with this we turn to bibliometric resources and analyses (Garfield, 1979) in order to identify research fronts and intellectual traditions at work in this field of research.

We put forwards the following questions:

-        How is teacher education dealt with in research on doctoral education in educational science(s) and research?

-        What research interests and intellectual traditions are at work in research om doctoral education and teacher education?

-        Are there different ways to position educational research to teacher education over time and place?

To answer these questions, we turn to the resources of Web of Science with its possibilities and limits. As an analytical tool to identify networks and nodes of research we use VOSviewer (van Eck & Waltman, 2012),

We identified more than two thousand publications dealing with research on doctoral education where relation to different professionalization matters were identified. However, matters of paradigmatic aspects were infrequent. Our search identified a small number (n=56) that were combining doctoral education and teacher education. A closer analysis of these articles showed different research interests and intellectual traditions. These preliminary findings is presented and discussed in terms of an interplay between the Academy, the Teaching Profession, and Policymaking.

The study is based on bibliometric resources and different ways of relating publications to each other (Garfield, 1979). Data sources were obtained by Web of Science. At the WoS there were (Jan 15, 2024) identified 278 703 publications categorised as educational research presented in 946 sources such as scientific journals. Research on doctoral education was identified by the search string "doctoral educ*" OR "doctoral train*" and resulted in 2059 hits. Out of these 502 had “profession*” as a topic and “paradigm*” in 17 cases. Research on doctoral education combined with teacher education as topics were identified by the search "doctoral educ*" OR "doctoral train*" (Topic) AND “teach* educ*”. This resulted in 56 publications. Data from WoS were transformed into text-files and further analysed in VOSViewer where links between publications are in focus for cluster analysis to explore how the publications are organized by and organising educational research in nets and nodes. Intellectual traditions are identified by co-citation of different references and research fronts by bibliographic coupling between publications. How the research is organized over space is analysed by clustering intellectual traditions and research fronts over countries and regions.

We identified a set of 2009 research publications, mostly recent and mostly Anglo-Saxon, having doctoral education as a topic. Out of these a limited number (N=181) were combined with an interest in profession as a topic and rather few in matters of scientific paradigms (n=17). Preliminary analyses presented a research field where matters of supervision, academic writing, and student identity and stress were frequent research foci. The studies were related to ongoing transformations such as higher academic demands, or to curricular content, or to changes in doctoral education programmes. A theme identified in this research is the tension between academic and practice-based research. These studies did not address paradigmatic aspects, but tensions identified can be seen as a trace of ‘academic drift’ away from “normal science”. Different research networks were identified – organizing and organized by research links. Here we could note networks with an interest in teacher professionalization – mostly based on an interest in improving teacher education. There seems to be – so far – little of research based on an interest in disciplinary formation and teacher professionalization.

B-M., Lindblad, S. & Wärvik, G-B. (2022). Restructuring doctoral education in Sweden. In M-L. Österlind, P. Denicolo, & B-M. Apelgren (Eds.). Doctoral education as if people matter - critical issues for the future. Brill Publishers. Elmgren, M., Forsberg, E., Lindberg-Sand, Å., & Sonesson, A. (2016). The formation of doctoral education. Report. Lund University, Uppsala University. Keiner, E. (2019). ’Rigour’, ’discipline’ and the ’systemic’: The cultural construction of educational identities? European Educational Research Journal. https://doi-org.ezproxy.ub.gu.se/10.1177/1474904118824935 . Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Princeton University Press: Chicago and London. Garfield, Eugene (1979). Citation indexing. Wiley Gross, B., Hofbauer, S., & Keiner, E. (2022). The “Science of Education”–Different Terms, Concepts, Cultures and Epistemologies? A Contribution to a Social Epistemology. SPES: Rivista di Politica, Educazione e Storia, 15(16), 19-37. Hofstetter, R., & Schneuwly, B. (2002). Institutionalisation of educational sciences and the dynamics of their development. European Educational Research Journal, 1(1), 3-26. Nerad, M. (2014). Developing “fit for purpose” research doctoral graduates. In M. Nerad & B Evans. (Eds.). Globalization and Its Impacts on the Quality of PhD Education. Forces and Forms in Doctoral Education Worldwide. Springer. pp. 111-127. Shin, J.C., Kehm,B.M. and Jones, G.A. (Eds.). ( 2018). Doctoral Education for the Knowledge Society. Convergence or Divergence in National Approaches. Cham: Springer International Publishing Teichler, U. (2014). Doctoral education and training. A view across countries and disciplines. In. M. de Ibarrola & L.W. Anderson (Eds.). The nurturing of new educational researchers. Sense Publishers. Trowler, P. (2014). Depicting and researching disciplines, Strong and moderate essentialist approaches, Studies in Higher Education, 39 (10), pp. 1720-1731. van Eck, Nees Jan, & Waltman, Ludo (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538 Wittrock, B., Wagner,P. and Whitley, R. (1991). Discourses on society the shaping of the social science disciplines. New York: Springer.