Supervisory Practices and the Profile of the Ideal Supervisor from the PhD Student’s Perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.1111.17927Keywords:
Doctoral supervision, supervisory practices, supervisor profile, DoctoratesAbstract
Implementing qualification frameworks in response to the Bologna process during the latter part of the 20th century prompted considerable change regarding Higher Education. Such alterations brought up apprehensions concerning the acquisition of competencies following each cycle of studies, as well as the means employed to oversee and assess teaching and learning procedures. The NOVA University of Lisbon (UNL) has recently researched Doctoral Education, focusing on supervisory practices. Since 2018, surveys regarding doctoral supervision have been conducted across multiple schools at UNL. This research report presents an overview of the national numbers regarding doctoral education enrollment, and the results of a study conducted at four schools within the UNL: the National School of Public Health (ENSP), Technological Institute of Chemistry and Biochemistry (ITQB), NOVA Medical School | FCM NOVA, and NOVA School of Science and Technology | FCT NOVA. The study presents data regarding part-time PhD students' and full-time PhD students' views of the supervisor rule and focuses on examining the characteristics of an ideal supervisor and the supervision practices experienced by doctoral students throughout their PhD programs. The findings suggested that supervision practices were slightly different considering the type of attendance, the enrolment year (during all doctoral research projects), and the schools' culture and field (Health or Science and Technology). Furthermore, the supervisor's role (mentor or coach) was similar within the school field, but the “ideal” supervisor varied depending on the school attendance type.
References
Ali. A. & Kohun, F. (2007). Dealing with social isolation to minimize doctoral attrition four-stage framework. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 2, 33-49.
Åkerlind, G., & McAlpine, L. (2017). Supervising doctoral students: variation in purpose and pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education, 42(9), 1686–1698. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1118031
Barnes, B. J., & Austin, A. E. (2009). The role of doctoral advisors: A look at advising from the advisor’s perspective. Innovative Higher Education, 33, 297-315
Brew, A., & Peseta, T. (2004). Changing postgraduate supervision practice: a programme to encourage learning through reflection and feedback. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1470329032000172685
Boehe, D. M. (2014). Supervisory styles: a contingency framework. Studies in Higher Education, 41(3), 399–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.927853 1
Boud, D., & Lee, A. (2005). ‘Peer learning’ as pedagogic discourse for research education . Studies in Higher Education, 30(5), 501–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500249138
Cullen, D., Pearson, M., Saha, L. J., & Spear, R. H. (1994). Establishing effective PhD supervision. Canberra: AGPS.
Delany, D. (2009) A Review of the Literature on Effective PhD Supervision, Dublin: Trinity College Dublin.
Delamont, S., Atkinson, P. & Parry, O. (1997). Supervising Ph.D. A guide to success. London: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Duke, D. & Denicolo, M. (2017). What supervisors and universities can do to enhance doctoral student experience (and how they can help themselves). FEMS Microbiology Letters, 364.
Fastuca, L., Wainerman, C. (2015). "La dirección de tesis de doctorado : ¿una práctica pedagógica?" [en línea]. En Perfiles educativos, 37(148), 156-171. Disponible en: https://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/handle/123456789/8740
Fillery-Travis, A. & Robinson, L. (2018). Making Familiar Strange – a research pedagogy for practice. Studies in Higher Education, 43, 841-853.
Frick, M. H., & Glosoff, H. L. (2014). Becoming a Supervisor: Qualitative Findings on Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Doctoral Student Supervisors-in-Training. The Professional counsellor, 4, 35-48. https://doi.org/10.15241/mhr.4.1.35
Gatfield, T. (2005). An Investigation into Ph.D. supervisory management styles: development of a dynamic conceptual model and its managerial implications. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27, 311-
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. (2010). Faculty perspectives on doctoral student socialization in five disciplines. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 5, 39-53.
Halse, C., & Malfroy, J. (2009). Retheorizing doctoral supervision as professional work. Studies in Higher Education, 35(1), 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070902906798
Hasrati, M. (2005). Legitimate peripheral participation and supervising PhD students. Studies in Higher Education, 30, 557-570.
Huet, I., & Casanova, D. (2022). Exploring the professional development of doctoral supervisors through workplace learning: A literature review. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(3), 774–788. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.1877629.
Horta, H & Santos, J. (2016). The Impact of Publishing during PhD Studies on Career Research Publication, Visibility, and Collaborations. Res High Educ, 57, 28–50. 298
Ribau, I. (2024). Supervisory Practices and the Profile of the Ideal Supervisor from the PhD Student’s Perspective. Advances in Social Sciences
Jones, M. (2013). Issues in Doctoral Studies - Forty Years of Journal Discussion: Where have we been and where are we going? International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 8, 83-104.
Karmler, B. & Thompson, P. (2004). Driven to abstraction: doctoral supervision and writing pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education, 9, 195-209.
Latona, K. & Browne, M. (2001). Factors associated with completion of research higher degrees. Higher Education Series. Canberra: Higher Education Division, Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
Lee S. & Roth, W-M. (2003). Becoming and Belonging: Learning Qualitative Research through Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Forum: Qualitative Social Research Sozialforschung, 4, art.35.
Lee, A. & Kamler, B. (2008). Bringing pedagogy to doctoral publishing. Teaching in Higher education, 13, 511-
Lee, A. (2008). How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision. Studies in Higher Education, 33, 267-281.
Lee, A. (2009). Developments in postgraduate education and their implications for research supervision. National Academic Third Annual Conference (NAIRTL).
Lee, A. (2018) How can we develop supervisors for the modern doctorate? Studies in Higher Education, 43:5, 878-890, DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2018.1438116.
Lindsay, S. (2015). What works for doctoral students in completing their thesis? Teaching in Higher Education,
Loganbill, C. & Hardly, E. (1983). Developing training programs for clinical supervisors. The Clinical Supervisor,
Malfroy, J., & Yates, L. (2003). Knowledge in action: doctoral programmes forging new identities. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 25(2), 119–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080032000122606
Mainhard, T., van der Rijst, R., van Tartwijk, J. & Wubbels. (2009). A model for the supervisor–doctoral student relationship. Higher Education, 58, 359-373.
Manathunga, C. (2007). Supervision as Mentoring: The Role of Power and Boundary Crossing. Studies in Continuing Education. 29. 10.1080/01580370701424650.
Mason, A. & Hickman. (2017). Students supporting students on the PhD journey: An evaluation of the mentoring scheme for international doctoral students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International.
Maxwell, T. W., & Smyth, R. (2011). Higher degree research supervision: from practice toward theory. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(2), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.509762
Murray, R. (2011). How to write a Thesis. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill and Open University Press.
Nakabugo, M. G & Ssebunga Masembe, C. (2004). Supervisor-Supervisee relationship: a rose without thorns? Maicibi, A. and Kahwa, Y (Eds) Graduate studies at Makerere University: a book of readings.
Overall, N., Deane, K., & Peterson, E. (2011). Promoting doctoral students' research self-efficacy: Combining academic guidance with autonomy support. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(6), 791–805. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.535508
Pearson, M. (2012). Building bridges: higher degree student retention and counselling’s support. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 34, 187-199. 299
Pearson, M., & Brew, A. (2002). Research Training and Supervision Development. Studies in Higher Education, 27(2), 135–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070220119986c
Pickering, C. & Byrne, J. (2014). The benefits of publishing systematic quantitative literature reviews for PhD candidates and other early career researchers. Higher Education Research and Development. 33: 534-548.
Pyhältö, K., Vekkaila, J., & Keskinen, J. (2015). Fit matters in the supervisory relationship: doctoral students and supervisors perceptions about the supervisory activities. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52(1), 4–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2014.981836
Ribau, I. & Alves, M. G. (2017). Doctoral supervision at Nova Lisbon University: an exploratory study. The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences. 482
Ribau, I. & Alves, M. G. (2018). Doctoral supervision at NOVA Lisbon University: an overview. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6, 2530 – 2542.
Sidhu, G.K., Kaur, S., Fook, C.Y., & Yunus, F.W. (2014). Postgraduate Supervision: Comparing Student Perspectives from Malaysia and the United Kingdom. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 123, 151-159.
Sze, D. (2007). Effective student-centred PhD supervision from a social constructivist viewpoint. Development Program for research higher education degree supervision. Institute of Teaching and Learning, the University of Sydney. Retirado em 18 de Janeiro de 2019, https://www.researchgate.net/...postgraduate_supervision...effectiv.
Taylor, S. (2014) Towards a Framework for the Professional Development of Doctoral Supervisors. SDF Digest: A Practitioner Journal for HE Staff Development, 2, 74-87.
Taylor, S. (2016) Benchmarking Supervisor Development. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Developments in Doctoral Education and Training. 31st March, 2015, University of Oxford. UK Council for Graduate Education. Available on-line at file:///C:/Users/Stan/Downloads/UKCGE-nd%20ICDDET%20Book%20final.pdf Accessed 4 th january 2024.
Taylor, S. (2018). Eligibility to supervise. A study of UK institutions. UK Council for Graduate Education (UKCGE).
Van de Schoot, R., Yerkes, M. Mouw, J. & Sonneveld, H. (2013). What took them so long? Explaining PhD delays among doctoral candidates. PLOS ONE, 8, e68839.
Vehviläinen., S & Löfström, E. (2016): ‘I wish I had a crystal ball’:discourses and potentials for developing academic supervising, Studies in Higher Education, 41 (3), 508-524. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.942272
Virtanen, V. & Pyhältö, K. (2012). What engages doctoral students in Biosciences in doctoral studies? Psychology,
Wegener, C. & Tanggaard, L. (2013). Supervisor and student co-writing: An apprenticeship perspective. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 14, Art. 14.
Welligton, J. (2010). More than a matter of cognition: an exploration of affective writing problems of postgraduate students and their possible solutions. Teaching in Higher education, 15, 135-150.
Wolff, L. (2012). Learning through writing: reconceptualizing the research supervision process. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 22, 229-237.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Isabel Ribau
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
