Critical Review: Learning how to develop a research question throughout the PhD process
Critical Review: Learning how to develop a research question throughout the PhD process: training challenges, objectives, and scaffolds drawn from doctoral programs for students and their supervisors.
Introduction
Doctoral education requires methodological clarity and structured research training because these elements enable students to develop research questions which lead to their first scholarly work. The formulation of a research question is widely recognised as a fundamental research skill that shapes the direction, design and outcomes of doctoral research. Doctoral training programs have shifted their focus toward teaching transferable skills which improve job prospects instead of maintaining their research training programs.
Girard et al. (2025) present a framework which doctoral students and their supervisors can use to create research questions during their entire PhD program. The article presents a scaffolded learning model which combines peer learning with supervisory methods and dialogical practices based on two doctoral training programs. The critical review assesses the article through its conceptual value, research approach, analytical framework, and its impact on doctoral education research.
Summary of the Article
The research study intends to create doctoral training programme frameworks which help students develop research questions through organized teaching methods. The authors explain that research question development demands multiple steps of creative thinking and critical evaluation and research method understanding. Original academic research work requires researchers to develop this fundamental research ability.
The research study examines two doctoral training programs which were held throughout a decade by using qualitative case study research that combines literature review with ethnographic observation and participant feedback and document analysis. The academic programs enable doctoral students and their supervisors to engage in multidisciplinary workshops while building peer relationships and participating in group reflection activities.
The study establishes training goals which create learning pathways through various methods which include peer discussions and supervisor support and organized training sessions. The study demonstrates that research question development requires three elements which include dialogical learning and argumentation skills and interdisciplinary collaboration.
Critique
Significance and Contribution to the Field
The article makes a valuable contribution to doctoral education research by focusing on a critical yet underexplored skill: research question development. The authors identify research question formulation as a fundamental doctoral requirement because existing research fails to acknowledge its significance while focusing on research outcomes and professional competencies.
The proposed framework establishes practical guidelines which doctoral training programs must follow to implement effective supervisory methods together with peer learning and self-evaluative practices. The emphasis on dialogical learning and interdisciplinary engagement reflects contemporary trends in doctoral pedagogy and collaborative research training.
The research study presents an extensive conceptual framework which results in a primary educational impact rather than a theoretical contribution. The article does not sufficiently engage with broader theoretical debates on doctoral identity formation, knowledge production or epistemological development. The scholarly impact of this work would have improved if these perspectives had been included.
Methodology and Research Design
The research design demonstrates qualitative depth through its use of long-term case studies, ethnographic observation and participant feedback. The combination of literature review and experiential data provides a rich basis for developing the proposed framework. The ten-year evaluation process which reviewed training programmes multiple times created findings that possessed both credible evidence and relevant educational value.
The research demonstrates its methodological limitations through three separate aspects. The study is based on only two training programmes within a single institutional context, which limits the generalisability of results across diverse doctoral education systems. The authors attempt to present broader conclusions about their research findings, yet the research framework requires institutional and international comparative analysis before its results can be implemented.
The research study lacks structured evaluation methods which would determine how well the training programs succeed. The study includes participant feedback, yet training effect assessments would benefit from using detailed assessment techniques which include both ongoing monitoring and measurement of performance outcomes.
Argumentation and Use of Evidence
The article presents a logically structured argument linking doctoral education challenges with pedagogical interventions. The use of case examples from training programmes effectively illustrates the application of scaffolding techniques and peer-learning strategies.
The argument uses descriptive narrative elements as its main support system which creates problems for its overall flow of reasoning. The framework identifies learning challenges and training objectives yet it fails to establish complete causal links between training interventions and research competence development. The evidence remains primary demonstrative material which lacks scientific validation.
The argument will become stronger when researchers analyse more doctoral skill development studies and doctoral supervision effectiveness studies. The proposed framework would receive more substantial backing through the addition of quantitative evidence or mixed-method evidence.
Ethical Considerations and Omissions
The article demonstrates awareness of the emotional and professional challenges faced by doctoral students, including uncertainty, identity development and supervisory relationships. The research demonstrates how learning environments need to provide both support and opportunities for students to exchange ideas with one another.
The research addresses ethical issues through indirect methods instead of following established ethical research protocols. The discussion covers power dynamics in supervision and training accessibility issues and institutional restrictions on doctoral student independence, but these topics receive insufficient attention. The analysis would benefit from an explicit ethical framework that addresses inclusivity and diversity and the academic working conditions.
Writing Style and Structure
The article presents its content through a structured design that starts with theoretical concepts and proceeds to present its methodology and results and discussion section. The text becomes easier to understand because visual frameworks and organized sections present their content in a more structured way. The figures that show learning obstacles together with training goals help readers understand the framework that we propose.
The academic text presents its most challenging parts through its theoretical analysis which handles both scaffolding theory and doctoral teaching methods. The text would become easier for educational theory newcomers to understand when it includes extra summary statements and better links between theoretical concepts and their real-world effects..
Conclusion
Girard et al. (2025) provide a comprehensive and pedagogically valuable framework for supporting research question development in doctoral education. The study demonstrates that dialogical learning and interdisciplinary interaction together with scaffolded supervision create an essential foundation for students to acquire essential research competencies.
The article presents strong conceptual and practical elements but its research findings remain limited because of its methodological constraints and descriptive nature. Future research should empirically evaluate the effectiveness of such training frameworks across diverse institutional and disciplinary contexts.
The article makes an essential contribution to doctoral education research because it establishes research question development as an essential part of doctoral training while providing effective methods for teaching this difficult learning task.
Reference:
Girard, N., Cardona, A., & Fiorelli, C. (2025). Learning how to develop a research question throughout the PhD process: training challenges, objectives, and scaffolds drawn from doctoral programs for students and their supervisors. Higher Education, 89, 1001–1020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01258-2
Methodology and Research Design