A (de)formed perception of the pathway to be taken during the PhD. The influence of time in the students’ eyes perception in becoming a researcher.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.711.9361Abstract
The PhD journey is different from all other activities in higher education. It ́s a period of construction of the research and is also a time for integration in the academy, in the field of research, and at the higher education system.
During the enrolment in the PhD, the person's growth and the live experience change the perception that the doctorate has of the PhD and the research journey. The experiences as a doctoral student and as a researcher under construction, who is supervised/oriented/ guided by a supervisor, shape the way of thinking and action regarding the institution and the academy but also influence the way they see and felt the PhD journey and their beliefs. It is argued in this paper that an initial (de)formed perception of the real PhD journey and supervision, may influence the satisfaction of the students with it, and the disappointment impact the option to leave the academy or to continue.
The current paper describes the change in the perception, motives, and of the curriculum quality and adequacy to doctoral personal journeys, during the doctorate. But it also reflects a PhD students’ personal journey and their perceptions concerning the PhD supervisors, host institutions, and the academy.
References
Ӑkerlind, G. & McAlpine, L. (2017). Supervising doctoral students: Variation in purpose and pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education, Routledge 42, 1686-1698.
Abdullah, M. & Evans, T. (2012). The relationships between postgraduate research students ‟psychological attributes and their supervisors‟ supervision training. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 788-793.
Alves, M, Azevedo, N. (2010). Third-Cycle Studies in Educational Sciences: expectations and competences development. European Educational Research Journal, 9, 69-81.
Alves, M., Neves, C., Azevedo, N., Gonçalves, T. (2012). Reconstructing Education? The Case of Master’s and PhD Programmes in Education in a Portuguese Institution. European Educational Research Journal, 11, 520-534.
Baptista, A., Frick, L., Holley, K., Remmikd, M., Tesche, j. & Âkerlind, G. (2015). The doctorate as an original contribution to knowledge: Considering relationships between originality, creativity, and innovation.
Frontline Learning Research Vol.3 No. 3 Special Issue (2015) 55 – 67 ISSN 2295-3159
Baptista, A. & Huet, I. (2012). Making sense of metaphors about doctoral students’ competencies: analysis of supervisors’ voices. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 930-937.
Baptista, A. (2015). Mature students’ voices on the ideal and reality of doctoral supervisors’ role and practice. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1544-1551.
Bastalich, W. (2017). Content and context in knowledge production: a critical review of doctoral supervision literature, Studies in Higher Education, 42, 1145-1157.
Blaj-Ward, L. (2011). Skills versus pedagogy? Doctoral Research training in the UK arts and Humanities. Higher Education Research & Development, 30, 697-708.
Breitenbach, E. (2019). Evaluating a model to increase doctorate program completion rates: A Focus on Social Connectedness and Structure. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14, 217-236. https://doi.org/10.28945/4239
Burt, B. A., Knight, A., & Roberson, J. (2017). Rationalizing experiences of foreign-born and ethnically diverse Black male engineering graduate students: Implications for student affairs practice, policy, and research. Journal of International Students, 7(4), 925-943. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v7i4.182
Castelló, M., Pardo, M., Sala-Bubare, A., & Sune-Soler, N. (2017). Why do students consider dropping out of doctoral degrees? Institutional and personal factors. Higher Education, 74(6), 1053-1068. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0106-9
Chakraverty, D. (2020). PhD student experiences with the impostor phenomenon in STEM. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 15, 159-179. https://doi.org/10.28945/4513.
Clarence, S. (2020). Making visible the affective dimensions of scholarship in postgraduate writing development work. Journal of Praxis in Higher Education, 2, 46-62. 305
Cornér, S., Löfström, E., Pyhälto, K. (2017). The relationships between doctoral students´perceptions of supervision and burnout. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 12, 91-106.
Coutinho, S. (2007). The relationship between goals, metacognition, and academic success. Educate, 7, 39-47.
David, J. (2020). Assessment matters: some issues concerning the supervision and assessment of workbased doctorates. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42, 87-92, Doi:10.1080/14703290500048994.
Davis, D. (2019). Students’ perceptions of supervisory qualities: What do students want? What do they believe they receive? International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14, 431-464. https://doi.org/10.28945/4361
De Clercq, M., Devos, C., Azzi, A., Frenay, M., Klein, O. & Galand, B. (2019). I need somebody to lean on. The effect of peer, relative, and supervisor support on emotions, perceived Progress, and persistence in Different stages of doctoral advancement. Swiss Journal of Psychology. 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1024/1421-0185/a000224
Denis, C., Colet, N. & Lison, C. (2019). Doctoral Supervision in North America: perception and Challenges of Supervisor and supervisee. Higher Education Studies, 9, 30-39.
Durette, B., Fournier, M., & Lafon, M. (2016). The core competencies of PhDs. Studies in Higher Education, 41(8), 1355-1370. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.968540
Evans, T. M., Bira, L., Gastelum, J. B., Weiss, L. T., & Vanderford, N. L. (2018). Evidence for a mental health crisis in graduate education. Nature Biotechnology, 36(3), 282. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4089.
Figueiredo, C., Huet, I. & Pinheiro, M. (2012). Construction of scientific knowledge and meaning: perceptions of Portuguese doctoral students. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 755-
Fillery-Travis, A. & Robinson, L. (2018). Making Familiar strange – a research pedagogy for practice. Studies in Higher Fillery-Travis, A., Maguire, K., Pizzolatti, N., Robinson, L., Lowley, A., Stel, N., & Lee, A. (2017). Insights from practice: A handbook for supervisors of modern doctorate candidates. Super Prof Doc.
Gardner, S. (2007). I heard it through the grapevine. Doctoral student socialization in chemistry and history. Higher
Gardner, S. (2008). Fitting the model of graduated school: a quantitative study of socialization in doctorate education. Innovations in Higher Education, 33, 125-138.
Gardner, S. (2008a). “What’s too much and what’s too little?” The process of becoming an independent research in doctoral education. The Journal of Higher Education, 79, 326-350.
Gardner, S. (2009). Student and faculty attributions of attrition in high and low-completing doctoral programs in the United States. High Educ, 58, 97-112.
Gardner, S. (2010). Faculty perspectives on doctoral student socialization in five disciplines. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 5, 39-53.
Golde, C. (1998). Beginning graduate school: explaining first-year doctoral attrition. New directions for higher
Golde, C. (2007). Signature Pedagogies in Doctoral Education: Are They Adaptable for the Preparation of Education Researchers? Educational Researcher, 36, 344–351. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X07308301
Helfer, F., & Drew, S. (2019). Students’ perceptions of doctoral supervision: A study in an engineering program in Australia. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14, 499-524. https://doi.org/10.28945/4368 306
Coutinho, I. R. (2020 A (De)Formed Perception Of The Pathway To Be Taken During The P. hD. The Influence Of Time In The Students’ Eyes Perception In
Hermita, M. & Thamrin, W. (2015). Metacognition toward academic self-efficacy among Indonesian private university scholarship students. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 171, 1075-1080.
Holbrook, A., Shaw, K., Scevak, J., Bourke, S., Cantwell, R., & Budd, J. (2014). PhD candidate expectations: Exploring mismatch with experience. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 9, 329-346.
Hum, G. (2015). Workplace during the science doctorate: What influences research learning experiences and outcomes? Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52, 29-40.
Humphrey, R., Marshall, N. & Leonardo, L. (2012). The impact of research training and research codes of practice on submission of doctoral degrees: an exploratory cohort study. Higher Education Quarterly, 66, 47-64.
Hunter, K. & Devine, K. (2016). Doctoral students´ emotional exhaustion and intentions to leave academia. International Journal of doctoral studies, 11, 35-61.
Jones, M. (2013). Issues in doctoral studies-Forty years of journal discussion: Where have we been and where are we going? In Proceedings of the Informing Science and Information Technology Education Conference (pp. 83-104). Informing Science Institute. https://doi.org/10.28945/1859
Kamler, B. (2008). Rethinking doctoral publication practices: writing from and beyond the thesis. Studies in Higher
Kleijn, R., Mainhard, T., Meijer, P., Pilot, A. & Brekelmans, M. (2012). Master’s Thesis supervision: relations between perceptions of the supervisor-student relationship, final grade, perceived supervisor contribution to learning and student satisfaction. Studies in Higher Education, 37, 925-939.
Kumar, V. & Stracke, E. (2007). An analysis of written feedback on a PhD thesis. Teaching in Higher Education, 12, 461-470.
Maguire, M., & Delahunt, B. (2017). Doing a thematic analysis: A practical, step-by-step guide for learning and teaching scholars. All Ireland Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 9(3), 3351-3365.
Masek, A. (2020). A Review of Effective Doctoral Supervision: What Is It and How Can We Achieve It? Universal Journal of Educational Research 8(6):2493-2500.DOI: 10.13189/ujer.2020.080633
Medeiros, K., Watts, L. & Mumford, M. (2017). Thinking inside the box: Educating leaders to manage constraints. Handbook of Research on Creative Problem-Solving Skill Development in Higher Education. (Chp.2, 25-50). Published in the United States of America by IGI Global.
Orellana, M., Darder, A., Pérez, A. & Salinas, J. (2016). Improving doctoral success by matching PhD students’ with supervisors. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11, 87-103.
Overall, N., Deane, K. & Peterson, E. (2011). Promoting doctoral students’ research self-efficacy: combining academic guidance with autonomy support. Higher Education Research & Development, 30, 791-805.
Park, C. (2005) New Variant PhD: The changing nature of the doctorate in the UK. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27, 189–207.
Pyhältö, K., Toom, A., Stubb, J. & Lonka, K. (2012). Challenges of becoming a scholar: a study of doctoral students´ problems and well-being. International Scholarly Research Network, 2012, 1-12.
Pyhältö, K., Vekkaila, J. & Keskinen, J. (2012). Exploring the fit between doctoral students’ and supervisors’ perceptions of resource and challenges vis-à-vis the doctoral journey. International Journal of doctoral studies, 7, 395-412.
Rahmati, Z. (2015). The study of academic burnout in students with a high and low level of self-efficacy. Procedia –Social and Behavioral Sciences, 171, 49-55.
Ribau, I. & Alves, M (2017). Doctoral supervision at NOVA LISBON UNIVERSITY: an exploratory study. The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences. http://dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2017.10.51
Ribau, I. & Alves, M. (2018). Doctoral supervision at NOVA Lisbon University: an overview. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6, 2530 – 2542 DOI: 10.13189/ujer.2018.061118. 307
Ribau, I. (2018). Why should I enrol in a PhD? Students’ perceptions about the reasons to be in a doctorate. Livro de capítulos do 6th International Congress of Educational Sciences and Development (Setúbal, Portugal), 21-23 junho, 2018. https://www.congresoeducacion.es/edu_web6/LIBRO_RESUMENES.pdf Ribau, I. (2019). Listening and feeling doctoral students’ perceptions of their doctoral supervision. The PhD students’ point of view. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 6 (12), 206-223. DoI:10.14738/assrj.612.7573.
Ribau, I. (2020). Doctoral Supervisors and PhD Students’ Perceptions about the Supervision Process in a Young European University. Universal Journal of Educational Research. Vol 8 (1), 36-46. DOI: 10.13189/ujer.2020.080105
Ribau, I. (2020). The drop effect at the doctoral supervision sea surface. Observing the waves with supervisors’ lens. Universal Journal of Educational Research. Vol 8 (4), 1579-1595.
Shibayama, S, & Kobayashi, Y. (2017). Impact of PhD training: a comprehensive analysis based on a
Japanese national doctoral survey. Scientometrics (2017) 113:387–415. DOI 10.1007/s11192-017-2479-7
Stracke, E. & Kumar, V. (2010). Feedback and self-regulated learning: insights from supervisors´ and PhD examiners´ reports. Reflective Practice, 11, 19-32.
Sverdlik, A., Hall, N. C., McAlpine, L., & Hubbard, K. (2018). The PhD experience: A review of the factors influencing doctoral students’ completion, achievement, and well-being. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 361-388. https://doi.org/10.28945/4113
van Rooij, Els & Fokkens-Bruinsma, Marjon & Jansen, Ellen P.W.A.. (2019). Factors that influence PhD candidates' success: the importance of PhD project characteristics. Studies in Continuing Education. 10.1080/0158037X.2019.1652158.
Vekkaila, J., Pyhältö, K. & Lonka, K. (2013). Focusing on doctoral students’ experiences of engagement in thesis work. Frontline Learning Research, 2, 12-34.
Woolderink, M., Putnik, K., van der Boom, H., & Klabbers, G. (2015). The voice of PhD candidates and PhD supervisors. A qualitative exploratory study amongst PhD candidates and supervisors to evaluate the relational aspects of PhD supervision in the Netherlands. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 10, 217-235.
Yarwood-Ross L. & Haigh C. (2014). As others see us: what PhD students say about supervisors. Nurse Researcher, 22, 1, 38-43.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Isabel Ribau Coutinho
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
