Flip Schutte, Emetia Swart
Abstract
Originality is the hallmark of doctoral research, often achieved through the development of novel frameworks or models. Despite their frequent interchangeability in academic discourse, frameworks and models serve distinct purposes within doctoral theses, with frameworks offering structured approaches for organising concepts and guiding implementation. This article investigates the criteria that define a framework as a legitimate and original contribution in doctoral research. Using a two-phase methodology, the study first conducts a semi-systematic literature review to clarify conceptual distinctions and identify essential attributes of frameworks within the context of doctoral education. Based on a rigorous screening of peer-reviewed sources, the review reveals that frameworks must demonstrate originality, conceptual clarity, methodological rigour, and practical utility to be recognised as significant doctoral contributions. In the second phase, qualitative insights are gathered through a virtual roundtable with experienced doctoral supervisors and scholars, further refining the criteria and highlighting the challenges candidates face in framework development. The synthesis of literature and expert perspectives culminates in a proposed rubric for evaluating frameworks in doctoral theses, offering clear guidelines for both candidates and examiners. The study concludes that well-developed frameworks, grounded in theory and validated through scholarly engagement, represent a substantial and enduring contribution to knowledge. These findings inform doctoral supervision and examination practices, emphasising the importance of conceptual rigour and reflective practice in the creation of frameworks as scholarly contributions.