A peer-driven community-based supervisory model: development from an evaluation of an ethics workshop for doctoral students undertaking research with children

Differing doctoral supervision models currently exist. Three key conceptual supervisory models relevant to doctoral students from within the healthcare professions were identified from a literature review: the ‘functional pre-modern’ model, the ‘team’ model and the ‘community group’ model. However, whilst these models exist, for the most part, supervision remains embedded within home academic institutions. Method and material: (1) An extensive review of the literature was undertaken, drawing on: Australian Education Index, British Education Index, the British Humanities Index, the British Nursing Index, EBSCOHOST EJS and Google™ Scholar; (2) an outcome-oriented evaluation of a workshop delivered to seven current or prospective doctoral candidates from within the health care professions and researching with children and/or young people, concerning the conduct of ethical research was undertaken Results: Five key categories related to ‘best things about the day’ were identified from a four-item, anonymous questionnaire appraising the day. These concerned: round table discussions, plenary seminars, workshop organisation, value of experiential learning and future workshop opportunities. From these themes an ‘innovative’ peer-driven, community based model of doctoral supervision was developed that is extrinsic to and complements the supervision provided in students’ home academic institutions. Conclusions: The innovative supervisory model developed through an outcome-oriented evaluation of a workshop for doctoral candidates has particular relevance for doctoral students who are healthcare professionals generally and nurses in particular, especially those studying in highly specialised areas where there may be a dearth of subject specific supervisors

Supervision of Maori doctoral students: A descriptive report

This report follows up a previous paper that outlined the goals and plans of a research project that focused on both theoretical and cultural questions regarding the supervisory process for Māori doctoral students (McKinley, Grant, Middleton, Irwin, & Williams, 2007). The major goal of the project is to enhance understanding of the teaching and learning process of supervision for students and supervisors, particularly around issues of culture that arise in research methodologies and practices. This paper reports on the completed project by providing further operational background, design features, the nature of the student and supervisor samples and a summary of interview findings. The results show that there are indeed distinctive issues arising within the supervision of Māori doctoral students. Some of these are to do with both pleasures and challenges found in the supervision relationship, while others relate to the kinds of projects the students undertake. Many projects for example, push at the disciplinary boundaries of Western knowledge and are often rooted in a political desire to enhance the everyday lives of Māori. Yet others are connected to identity formation processes that concern many Māori during their years as doctoral students. A central message for supervisors from this work is that the supervision of Māori doctoral students may require unfamiliar forms of engagement but that these are likely to be deeply rewarding in many different ways

Doctoral Supervisor: Coach, Mentor or Master? Developing an Alternative Paradigm for Doctoral Supervision

This working paper is the second in a series of working papers presenting the on-going findings from a longitudinal research project grounded in exploring the experience of doctoral supervision and developing practice. In the first paper and phase one of this research study, Cook, Nichol and Loon (2014) explored the existing context for doctoral supervision and, drawing from literature on the problematic nature of doctoral supervision and coaching and mentoring, considered the value of drawing on coaching and mentoring models in formulating alternative paradigms for doctoral supervision. This paper reports the findings of phase one, a mixed methods study of experiences of doctoral supervision with supervisors and students in one UK university business school, from which the Collaborative Action Doctoral Supervision conceptual model emerged. The paper also introduces phase two, a collaborative action research study with doctoral supervisors and students who are applying, reflecting on and developing further this doctoral supervision model. We are aiming to answer the question of whether the use of coaching and mentoring in doctoral supervision enables the transfer and sustainability of learning from the doctoral supervision session to outside the experience and improves the quality. Is the doctoral supervisor coach, mentor or master? Key words Doctoral supervision, coaching, mentoring, collaborative action research

Colleague supervision – “ignored and undervalued”? The views of students and supervisors in a new university

Colleague supervision is increasingly used in UK modern (post-92) universities to support the progress of academic staff to doctoral qualifications. Denicolo (2004) argues that it is a ‘role relationship that has been largely ignored or undervalued by administration’ (p. 693) and colleague students and supervisors ‘felt more vulnerable’ than other students/supervisors (p. 706). This small-scale research amongst students and staff in a colleague supervision relationship at a single UK modern university tests Denicolo’s (2004) propositions and those of Deuchar (2008) on supervision styles. It found that students did not feel ‘vulnerable’ but considered there were significant benefits from colleague supervision. They, and some supervisors, were also very supportive of group supervision methods that, alongside conventional individual supervision, gave strong support to the progress of colleague students to timely completion of their doctoral studies. As many UK modern universities are attempting to build research capacity through doctoral research training, the use of group supervision alongside colleague supervisors may offer benefits in a time when supervisory capacity has been stretched

‘Doctoring’ our own: Confessions of a Māori doctoral supervisor

There is very little literature, empirically based or otherwise, on the supervision of Māori doctoral students (Fitzgerald, 2005; Pope, 2008; Kidman, 2007; Smith, 2007). There is even less relating to Māori supervisors working with Māori doctoral students (Kidinan, 2007), let alone Māori supervisors working with non- Māori students. While the relatively large corpus of literature on doctoral supervision may be of some assistance to Māori supervisors, there is also a dearth of studies that focus on the pedagogical aspects. Research undertaken by Elizabeth McKinley and her co-researchers (McKinley, Grant, Middleton, Irwin & Williams, 2009) will now help to fill the literature gap on the teaching and learning process of supervision as it pertains to Māori

More to producing a thesis

Quality doctoral thesis begins with effective supervision. Universiti Putra Malaysia Faculty of Modern Languages and Communications senior Lecturer Dr Vijay Kumar Mallan believes research into doctoral education helps effectual doctoral supervision

Improving doctoral support through group supervision: analysing face-to-face and technology-mediated strategies for nurturing and sustaining scholarship

The challenges of the doctoral journey can create social and academic isolation. Student support is normally facilitated through the supervisory team and research training programmes. There is little empirical evidence on the role group supervision and peer learning can play in nurturing and sustaining doctoral scholarship. This article explores group supervision processes, analysing student experiences of face-to-face (FtF) and technology-mediated (Tm) strategies in a professional doctorate programme, to address the question of what factors in group supervision help or hinder scholarship. Findings illustrate how group supervision can nurture mutual and sustained support and how Tm encounters can add value, affording location-independent interactions to facilitate participation, and reduce isolation. Key dimensions of a pedagogical support framework for doctoral supervision will be identified, which give priority to nurturing relationship development and sustaining connectedness through group supervision. This form of nourished scholarship can support and sustain the doctoral journey and improve completion rates

A typology of research training in university-industry collaboration: The case of life sciences in Finland

This paper examines the educational implications of research collaboration between university and industry for the research training of doctoral students. It is concerned with the issues of how research training is constructed in such collaborations and what might be the effects of collaboration on doctoral students' learning. The study adopts a knowledge perspective. Three different dispositions of knowledge are identified: 'expert', 'utilitarian' and 'commercialized'. Doctoral students' experiences were examined in relation to two aspects of research training - industrial involvement in supervision and academic freedom - in university-industry collaboration in the field of life sciences. Thirty-five in-depth interviews were carried out at BioCity Turku in Finland with 16 doctoral students, 14 of their supervisors and 5 PhD graduates. Four major types of PhD research collaboration were discovered, characterized as 'Financial', 'Interactive', 'Kangaroo' and 'Appendant'. The significance of each type is discussed in relation to different knowledge dispositions. Drawing on the research findings, suggestions are offered for constructing successful research training programmes through university-industry collaboration

Becoming Psychotherapists: Experiences of Novice Trainees in a Beginning Graduate Class

The authors investigated the experiences related to becoming psychotherapists for 5 counseling psychology doctoral trainees in their first prepracticum course. Qualitative analyses of weekly journals indicated that trainees discussed challenges related to becoming psychotherapists (e.g., being self-critical, having troubling reactions to clients, learning to use helping skills), gains made during the semester related to becoming psychotherapists (e.g., using helping skills more effectively, becoming less self-critical, being able to connect with clients), as well as experiences in supervision and activities that helped them cope with their anxieties. Results are discussed in 5 broad areas: feelings about self in role of psychotherapist, awareness of reactions to clients, learning and using helping skills, reactions to supervision, and experiences that fostered growth. Implications for training and research are provided