New directions for teaching and learning

Publ. comme no 113, spring 2008 de la revue New directions for teaching and learning.Index.Bibliogr. à la fin des texte

Undoing disparities in faculty workloads: A randomized trial experiment.

We conducted a randomized control study to improve equity in how work is taken up, assigned and rewarded in academic departments. We used a four-part intervention targeting routine work practices, department conditions, and the readiness of faculty to intervene to shape more equitable outcomes over an 18-month period. Our goal was to (a) increase the number of routine work practices that department faculty could enact to ensure equity, (b) enhance conditions within the department known to positively enhance equity, and (c) improve the action readiness of department faculty to ensure equity in division of labor. Post intervention faculty in participating departments were more likely than before the intervention to report work practices and conditions that support equity and action readiness in their department, and that teaching and service work in their department is fair. Participating departments were significantly more likely than control departments to report practices and conditions that support equity and greater action readiness to address issues of workload equity in their department. Finally, participating department faculty were more likely than control department faculty to report increased self-advocacy and were more likely than control department faculty to report that the distribution of teaching and service work in their department is fair

Doctoral Supervision with Colleagues

The doctoral supervision of an academic colleague when both are employed in the same university has attracted limited research. In contrast, there is a plethora of research on a range of aspects related to doctoral supervision including processes associated with doctoral supervision, guidance for the doctoral supervisor, and the relationship between the doctoral supervisor and candidate. The completion of a doctorate is a substantial investment by both the candidate and the university and is brought into even sharper focus if the candidate is also an employee at the same university. Though each of the parties is driven by different agendas, they share a common interest in the successful completion of the doctorate. This may place additional pressure on the candidate and supervisor, particularly in relation to their professional credibility and career trajectory. This chapter draws from previous research conducted by the authors’ into this complex relationship and presents a number of recommendations to inform best practice. These recommendations have been drawn from the research participants, literature, and the authors’ experiences as doctoral candidates and doctoral supervisors for colleagues. The first section discusses important issues related to the area of colleague doctoral supervision. The following section identifies a series of recommendations concerning colleague doctoral supervision for the various stakeholders. The final section offers a blueprint for those tasked with formalizing this potential complex relationship