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

PERFORMANCE FOLLOWING: TRACKING A PERFORMANCE WITHOUT A SCORE

EPSRC Doctoral Training Award; EPSRC Leadership Fellowshi

A participative research for learning methodology on education doctoral training programmes

Purpose – This paper aims to outline a participative approach to researching education doctoral students’ trajectories that functions both as a form of training in research methodology and as a means of reflection on the doctoral trajectory and what doctoral students have brought to the doctoral process through their experience. Design/methodology/approach – Ten participants formed dyads and acted as both researchers and subjects of research, using narrative accounts and interviews. The collaborative approach aimed to allow “hands-on” experience of the selected methods, as well as full engagement in negotiating each stage of the project. Findings – Project group meetings and the data generated by participants provided a rich source of learning about methodological issues in education research, in addition to the personal understandings emerging from such a project. Originality/value – This project reports an approach to “hands-on” learning of methodological and ethical issues within doctoral development programmes that could be adapted for use on similar programmes. It suggests an alternative to the more common forms of doctoral training (such asexposition, discussion, reading, or simulation) that is of real value to doctoral students in that it enables deep reflection on the journeys that have brought students to doctoral study, whilst at the same time providing a rich resource for methodological learning.</p

Exploring doctoral students’ expectations of work-based skills training

Purpose - Doctoral students are expected to undertake work-based skills training within their doctoral studies in areas such as problem solving, leadership and team working. This study explores student expectations of doctoral training within a UK Higher Education context. Design - The data for the study was gathered via two focus groups conducted among doctoral students from different faculties in a post-92 UK University. Participants were selected using a snowball sampling approach. Findings - The findings suggest that the expectations of doctoral students are contingent upon their year of study, study mode, perceived fit between training goals and available training, peer recommendations, Word-of-Mouth (WoM) and the scholarly support they received from their supervisors. Practical Implications - The study suggests a better understanding of students’ segmentation can help Higher Education Institutions deliver training that meets the expectations of doctoral students in a way that result in zero or a positive disconfirmation. Originality/Value – This paper develops and deepens the understanding of the doctoral students’ expectations of work-based skills training and highlights the need for universities to adapt their doctoral training according to the expectations of different student segments

Making sense of doctoral training reforms in the social sciences:

Educational reforms are increasingly driven by political and economic forces beyond the university. In this paper I describe how the policy initiatives of the United Kingdom’s Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) have steadily reshaped the length, content and structure of doctoral education in the social sciences. This history of the Council’s willingness to respond to national and international policy concerns about the doctorate dates back to the early years of the Thatcher Government in the 1980s. As well as redefining the doctoral student experience, this interventionist policy environment potentially challenges the institutional autonomy of academics and others involved in educational development. In this article I explore the implications of this for doctoral training provision, and for the meaning of educational development itself. I end by pointing to the possibilities for policy ‘activism’ in responding to these changes

Rapid Field-Cycling MRI using Fast Spin-Echo

The author acknowledges funding from the EPSRC through the Centre for Doctoral Training in Integrated Magnetic Resonance.Non peer reviewedPublisher PD

Warp-speed adaptation to novel hosts after 300 generations of enforced dietary specialisation in the seed beetle Callosobruchus maculatus (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Bruchinae)

Thank you to Paul Eady for providing C. maculatus to initiate our laboratory population and advice on rearing them. The study was funded by the University of Aberdeen core teaching funds (honours project budget to TP), and by a doctoral training grant to AL from the BBSRC-EastBio doctoral training partnershipPeer reviewedPublisher PD

Developing researchers in the arts and humanities: lessons from a pilot programme to develop discipline-specific research skills

Although increasing emphasis is placed on the provision of research training for doctoral students, much of the support currently available is generic in nature, rather than tailored to the student’s particular field(s) of study. In this paper, I briefly review UK graduate education for arts and humanities research students, and some of the ways in which the distinctive demands of their discipline(s) shape the research student experience and hence their development needs. I describe the design and delivery of a pilot programme of discipline-specific research skills development, co-ordinated by the Subject Centre for Philosophical and Religious Studies, which aims to address such needs; and I evaluate its success. I conclude with some recommendations for future practice; in particular, I argue that doctoral training provision is more effective when it involves a subject-specific approach in which practising academics from the discipline(s) play a significant role – both in terms of fostering an improved level of student engagement with the programme, and of delivering training and development opportunities which are tailored to the student’s particular context and needs

Micro-feedback skills workshop impacts perceptions and practices of doctoral faculty

Background: Doctoral supervision is a distinct form of supervision with clearly defined responsibilities. One of these is the delivery of effective face-to-face feedback to allow supervisees to improve upon their performances. Unfortunately, doctoral supervisors, especially of health sciences, are often not trained in supervisory skills and therefore practice mostly on a trial and error basis. Lack of understanding of the feedback process leads to incongruence in how supervisors and supervisees perceive feedback. However, standardized training practices like microteaching can allow supervisors to acquire effective feedback practices. In this study we employed a schematic approach of microteaching, that is micro-feedback, in a workshop to develop feedback skills of doctoral supervisors, and assessed the overall effectiveness of this training using the Kirkpatrick evaluation framework.Methodology: This was a Quasi-experimental study with a repeated measures and a two-group separate sample pre-post test design. A micro-feedback skills workshop was organized to enhance feedback skills of doctoral supervisors using microteaching technique. The first two levels of the Kirkpatrick evaluation model were used to determine the workshop's effectiveness. An informal Objective Structured Teaching Exercise (OSTE) was used to assess feedback skills of the supervisors, both before and after the workshop. A questionnaire was developed to compare pre-and post-workshop perceptions of the supervisors (n = 17) and their corresponding supervisees (n = 34) regarding the ongoing feedback practice.Results: Despite the hectic schedule, most doctoral supervisors (17 of 24, 71%) were willing to undertake faculty development training. Participants indicated a high level of satisfaction with the workshop. A learning gain of 56% was observed on pre-post OSTE scores. Prior to the workshop, perceptions of how supervisees should be given the feedback differed significantly between supervisors and supervisees with an effect size difference of r = 0.30. After the workshop there was a negligible difference in perceptions between supervisors and supervisees (r = .001). Interestingly, supervisors shifted their perceptions more toward those that were originally held by the supervisees.Conclusions: These findings suggest that well-designed and properly assessed structured programs such as micro-feedback workshops can improve how doctoral supervisors provide feedback to their supervisees and align supervisors' perceptions of that feedback with those of their supervisees.</p