Applications now open for DHeritage, the Professional Doctorate in Heritage!

Applications are now invited for prospective students to join DHeritage, the world's only Professional Doctorate in Heritage. DHeritage offers an opportunity to reflect on and explore in-depth an issue arising from your professional work in a way that creates an original contribution to the global heritage community.

This broad-based, flexible qualification was developed in association with experts from across the heritage sector and is aimed at professionals who work in, or desire to work in, the heritage field broadly defined, whether in the public or private sectors. It interests those who are employed in tourism, planning, museums, archives, community history, archaeology, social and cultural sustainability and any area of work which engages heritage. DHeritage appeals to practitioners who want to reflect on and contribute to the latest thinking in what is a dynamic and ever-changing sector crucial to many economies and to local and national identities.

DHeritage is part of the School of Humanities and draws on expertise from across the University

Students follow the programme as part of a cohort, supported by a series of regular bespoke training workshops, generic research training and supervision shaped to their particular needs from across the disciplines of History, Education, Digital Humanities, Creative Writing, Creative Arts, Law, Business, and Tourism, and beyond. The programme integrates scholarship on a range of interdisciplinary themes, including professional ethics, sustainability, cultural memory and heritage policy. Students select their topic and training according to individual needs and interests, and current developments in the field. On admission, successful candidates are allocated a Principal and one or two Co-Supervisors based on the research area they have set out in their research proposal and at interview.

DHeritage is offered part-time only, as typically our students work full- or part-time in the heritage sector. The degree usually takes 6 years to complete, but it is possible to complete it in 4-6 years depending on successfully passing the phased assessments. The programme is available through a campus registration or as a distance-learning route - in either case campus-based workshops are supported with online equivalent workshops using Canvas Studynet, our web-based managed learning environment. Fees for part-time home and EU students were £2,300 per annum in 2018/19 (different rates apply for overseas distance-learning students).

Senior Visiting Fellow Judy Faraday with Dean of Humanities Prof Anne Murphy and DHeritage student Helen Casey

You can find about more about DHeritage on our website https://www.herts.ac.uk/courses/doctorate-in-heritage or via the University's world class Heritage Hub (or by clicking the DHeritage tag on this blog).

Apply by sending a completed application form (available here), research proposal and supporting documents (qualifications, certificates etc.) via our Doctoral College doctoralcollegeadmissions@herts.ac.uk by 10th May 2019. A guide sheet to help you prepare a research proposal is available from Prof Dr Grace Lees-Maffei, Professor of Design History and Programme Director for DHeritage. If you have any questions about the programme or want to discuss it further, please contact Prof Lees-Maffei or the Doctoral College. We look forward to hearing from you!

The De Havilland Aircraft Company is an important part of the University's Heritage

Questions arising from 'Art as Research'

On 25^th June, Alana Jelinek led a workshop on the theme of art practice as research, supported with an award from Skill Up! The University of Hertfordshire’s Researcher-Led Researcher Development scheme, hosted by the University’s Researcher Development Working Group. Here are a few questions that arose from the day…

What is the difference between impact and dissemination? Catherine Tackley noted that applications for AHRC funding often make the mistake of conflating impact with dissemination or public engagement. Researchers sometimes force artificial opportunities for dissemination or engagement under the false assumption that this will improve their impact. She recommends focusing on who will benefit from the proposed research, and how they will benefit directly from the research, rather than how the research findings might be disseminated.

Tackley suggested that it was useful to think about the negative impact of a failure to fund the project. What would be lost if the research could not take place? Who would lose out if the funding was not awarded?


How dangerous is “scope creep”? Alessio Malizia warned of the dangers of mission creep, and discussed some of ways in which research scope can be narrowed. He observed that researchers, particularly at doctoral level, often start with a research question that is too large for one person to answer (or that becomes too large after the research has started). What should we do, he asks, when a research problem exceeds our individual capacities?

While “scope creep” can be problematic, for all the many reasons that Malizia identified (too broad a field of practice, too much source material to handle, etc.), is it always problematic? Scope creep can sometimes be useful, even essential, as the direction of research does need to be informed by constant reflection and re-evaluation of the research questions. In particular, Malizia touched on problems that were too big for an individual researcher, but perhaps this may sometimes be resolved not by narrowing the scope, but rather, expanding the research team. There are different ways of finding a balance between rigor and ambition, and ambitions may not need to be compromised if we find ways of extending our capacity.


Must the value of art be authenticated by academic institutions? At the end of the day Stelarc joined us to present an overview of his part works and discuss some of the themes that have underpinned his practice. He suggested that “research is the way that institutions try to authenticate practice”, but that this is problematic. Art practice and research are “two different ways of elevating the world”, and perhaps they do not always need to be combined.