Doctoral education in Educational Sciences in Italy has moved from an elite, pre-PhD apprenticeship model to a quality-assured third cycle integrated in the European Higher Education Area. While earlier forms of advanced study existed, the modern dottorato di ricerca—informed by nineteenth-century German and French models and, subsequently, by the UK and US—was institutionalized in Italy only in 1980, with the creation of a national degree and standardized admission and training (Cappa, 2009; Di Maio & Gaeta, 2021). Subsequent reforms progressively tied doctoral provision to accreditation, external evaluation and alignment with European quality assurance standards (Alfano et al., 2021). In Educational Sciences, doctoral programmes evolved from single-chair traditions to structured, multi-curricular schools. The Bologna Process consolidated the doctorate as the “third cycle” and incentivized internationalization and quality assurance logics (Donina et al., 2015). Recent instruments within the Next Generation EU programme and the new cross-institutional National Doctorates re-steered doctorates toward strategic, networked consortia, foregrounding digital transition, public-sector impact where applicable, and faculty development. This, however, may even have exhaberated the challenging occupational outcomes (Passaretta et al., 2018; Carriero et al., 2024; ISTAT, 2018) and academic career opportunities of PhD graduates. This paper highlights the development and actors of doctoral education in educational sciences in making and re-making of doctoral education in Italy. Main actors in Italy shaping doctoral education in educational sciences are MUR (national ministry of university and research), ANVUR (quality assurance/accreditation), CRUI (rectors’ conference), universities providing doctoral education, and the disciplinary associations in Educational Sciences (SIPED, SIRD, SIPES, SIPEGES). The paper shows how, across decades, reforms reflect shifting rationalities, especially in relation to 1. Disciplinary-humanistic reproduction through academic apprenticeship; 2. Massification, Europeanization and comparability; 3. Quality assurance, evaluative state and New Public Management; 4. Innovation, employability and competitiveness; and 5. Open science, equity and inclusion.

Alfano, V., Gaeta, G. L., Pinto, M., Rotondo, F., & Vecchione, G. (2021). Ph.D. courses in Italy after the Gelmini reform. MPRA Paper No. 108144. Cappa, C. (2009). Il dottorato in Italia: Una storia recente. Rivista Scuola IaD, 1, 66–94. http://rivista.scuolaiad.it/wp-content/uploads/pdf/numero1/il-dottorato-in-italia-una-storia-recente.pdf Carriero, R., Coda Zabetta, M., Geuna, A., & Tomatis, F. (2024). Investigating PhDs’ early career occupational outcomes in Italy: Individual motivations, role of supervisor and gender differences. Higher Education, 87, 1375–1392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01068-y Di Maio, A., & Gaeta, G. L. (Eds.). (2021). La trasformazione del dottorato di ricerca: Orientamenti europei, riforme nazionali e misure regionali di supporto. FrancoAngeli. Istituto Nazionale di Statistica (ISTAT). (2018). L’inserimento professionale dei dottori di ricerca. https://www.istat.it/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Report-Dottori-di-ricerca-26nov2018.pdf Passaretta, G., Trivellato, P., & Triventi, M. (2018). Between academia and labour market: The occupational outcomes of PhD graduates in a period of academic reforms and economic crisis. Higher Education, 76, 997–1023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0288-4 Donina, D., Meoli, M., & Paleari, S. (2015). Higher education reform in Italy: Tightening regulation instead of steering at a distance. Higher Education Policy, 28(2), 215–234. https://doi.org/10.1057/hep.2014.6