Learning Connection
A quality research education is dependent upon:
The University of South Australia’s Code of Good Practice: Supervising Research Candidates 1 encourages supervisors to foster their candidates’ involvement in a collaborative and scholarly research culture. Yet candidates’ responses to evaluation surveys over a number of years have shown that while they are satisfied with the quality of their supervision, they are considerably less satisfied with the extent to which they are integrated into research cultures . The University-wide Research Education Support Activities Program has been designed to help address this issue, offering workshops, information sessions and writers groups to support research candidates through the various stages of their research experience. However, this program alone cannot introduce candidates to academic and disciplinary research cultures. University-wide programs need to complemented by seminar programs offered within Schools and Research Centres and Institutes and as well as initiatives taken by individual supervisors to integrate candidates into academic practices and networks that have relevance for candidates’ research and their anticipated post-doctoral work.
The purpose of this guide is to suggest some practical ways in which supervisors and other research educators can support candidates’ integration into a research culture.
Integrating candidates into the life of a research group is a critical factor in postgraduate student success (Holdaway, 1997) but candidates vary in the ease with which they assume ‘researcher’ identities.
People enrol in higher degrees for different reasons. Some continue on to postgraduate education immediately after the completion of a first degree. Others return to postgraduate study after some years in the workplace, seeking to enhance their career prospects and professional development opportunities. Others may be contemplating, or preparing for, a career or life change.
Research degree candidates will therefore differ substantially in their familiarity with the culture of academic institutions generally and with research cultures in particular. Some may come from countries where the higher education experience is quite different from what it is in Australia and western developed nations generally. Candidates may also come with different levels and kinds of workplace experience in private industry or commerce, or in other educational systems or professions. Others will be academics with extensive work experience within higher education institutions and limited employment experience outside of the university. Individuals will therefore differ in the ease with which they develop a sense of belonging in a research culture.
International research has documented the extent to which certain groups of candidates may find academic research cultures alienating. Many international candidates have difficulty accessing traditional western research cultures (Cryer & Okorocha, 1999; Deem & Brehony 2000; Denicolo & Pope, 1999) as do women (Johnson, Lee & Green, 2000; Wright & Cochrane, 2000), especially those from working class and non-dominant ethnic groups (Ellis, 2001; Heinrich, 2000; Read, Archer & Leathwood, 2003). Part time and off campus candidates frequently experience feelings of intellectual isolation (Deem & Brehony 2000; Evans & Pearson, 1999) and practitioner researchers can be often marginalised by perceived tensions between their professional and practical knowledge and the traditional values of the academy (Bills, 2004). Opportunities for actively involving candidates in research cultures will need to be purposefully planned with the needs of diverse groups in mind.
Delamont, Atkinson and Parry (2000 p.63) describe doctoral research as ‘academic socialization’ and argue that the process of becoming a researcher requires learning a certain amount of ‘indeterminate’ knowledge which is most readily acquired working alongside experienced practitioners in the field or in the laboratory. On the other hand, Johnson, Lee & Green (Johnson, Lee & Green, 2000 p. 145) argue that the qualities required to become an independent scholar and researcher constitute a ‘set of capacities’ that can be ‘taught’. In an increasingly competitive environment driven by principles of economic rationalism and quality assurance (Evans, 2000) a balance will need to be struck between supporting candidates to complete their degree on time and providing opportunities for them to be immersed in stimulating research cultures that will enable them to develop and/or transfer their skills into a range of research-related roles in professions, industry and commerce (Clark, 1997, DETYA 1999, Mann et al., 1994). In doing so, it is useful to keep in mind the slightly different views of Delamont et al (2000) and Johnson et al (2000), as well as the very real pressure now on candidates to complete on time.
Completing a research degree has outcomes beyond the development of specific research skills and knowledge. It should result in the development of professional researchers with the capacity to create and apply knowledge in a range of contexts for social, economic, cultural and personal benefit. A set of Research Degree Graduate Qualities describe desirable outcomes of doctoral education in the University of South Australia. To develop these qualities, candidates need access to a strong and supportive research culture that offers them opportunities to be immersed in the discourses and practices that have come to count in academic cultures, to build networks and to share their research with academic colleagues and with peers in professional practice, industry and commerce. The remainder of this guide chronicles some ways to do this.
To successfully complete a research degree, candidates need opportunities to:
The establishment of a reading group is one way candidates can develop these skills. This is particularly important in qualitative research, where researchers can draw on diverse research practices and theoretical perspectives to deal with a particular research problem. However, it is just as important in laboratory-based research and in scientific fieldwork, and in research where quantitative methods are employed, because all candidates need to be able to locate their own research in relation to what has gone before and identify its potential to contribute to the field. It is becoming increasingly important for candidates working in cross-disciplinary contexts, who are often unfamiliar with the assumptions and practices of other disciplines.
Participating in a reading group also encourages candidates to engage in accepted forms of western style academic argument and critique, practices which are culturally-based and frequently so taken for granted by supervisors that candidates are too often left to learn them by osmosis (Parry and Hayden, 1994). However as Deem and Brehony (2000) warn, international candidates can find such groups intimidating because of language difficulties and different culturally-based conceptions of knowledge and learning. Group facilitators should be prepared to model supportive conversation strategies and also be explicit about the role of critique in intellectual discussion.
Peers provide much needed personal support for candidates. Study for a higher degree by research can be a very isolating experience, especially for external and part time candidates and for those researching in humanities and social science disciplines. In laboratory-based research contexts, candidates are less likely to be working in isolation and more likely to be working alongside postdoctoral fellows and early career researchers as well as senior researchers and supervisors. However, even in these situations, it is sometimes necessary to encourage the formation of informal networks to help candidates share their experiences and anxieties. For candidates whose first language is not English, such groups also provide opportunities to practise spoken English.
While relationships usually form naturally as candidates get to know each other, it is also the case that some will have difficulty making such links. In particular, this is often the experience of international candidates. In an interesting study of the doctoral experiences of social science candidates in the UK Deem and Brehony (2000) found that International candidates tended to have difficulty developing a sense of belonging to the student peer culture, although they appreciated, and were more likely to take advantage of, research training courses. The aim is that candidates will form their own support networks but this process can be assisted by providing effective induction programs, instituting ‘buddy’ and mentor systems and organising some regular ongoing social activities for staff and candidates. Inviting other research candidates to be critical friends or mentors is also a way of addressing the isolation felt by external and off shore candidates. The role of Divisional and School research project officers and administrative assistants should not be underestimated here. They are often the linchpin of effective support for candidates as they ensure they are included on information and discussion lists, encourage them to attend parts of the RESA program and invite them to academic activities.
Writing review groups provide a forum for the exchange of ideas and information, as well as feedback to candidates on their writing. Candidates have the opportunity to engage in argument and critical scrutiny of their own and others’ work. This is an essential aspect of academic socialisation, for it helps candidates think in critical and scholarly ways. It is particularly important for candidates whose previous academic experiences have led them to expect that they should be deferential to their teachers and not engage in academic debate with them (Phillips and Pugh, 1987; Ryan and Zuber-Skerritt, 1999). While it can be argued such descriptions of candidates promote simplistic cultural stereo-types, it is generally acknowledged that all postgraduate and research candidates are to some degree required to become more independent and self-directed in their learning in comparison with undergraduate study and that some find this transition difficult (Phillips and Pugh, 1987). All academics rely on peer review to improve the quality of their writing and to critique their scholarship and any processes of peer review, such as for refereed conference presentations and journal articles, provide a good training ground for candidates. It is therefore good practice to provide candidates with ‘safe’ avenues to test their ideas and their writing before introducing them to wider and more formal scrutiny in seminar and conference presentations. Often it is useful for supervisors to establish a writing review group with initial input from other academic staff, gradually encouraging candidates to assume control of the group’s agenda and review procedures.
Inviting candidates to attend, and ultimately to present, at school or research group seminars achieves four main purposes.
‘Seminar’ is a generic term and discipline specific versions of seminar programs occur across the university. For example, the South Australian School of Art has a program of studio critiques in which studio candidates present artefacts related to their research. Other schools and research centres have visiting scholars and writers/thinkers/artists in residence who present a series of lectures or seminars.
The benefits of attending and presenting at conferences are the same as those outlined above. However, depending on the nature of the conference and its level, the experience can have unexpected undesirable effects. National conference audiences may be more critical than participants in local conferences. They may also be less tolerant of speakers who go over time, who use poor quality overheads or power point presentations, or who lack good presentation skills.
Some candidates will need to develop both their work and their presentation skills before delivering a paper at a large conference. Besides gaining valuable initial experience through school seminars and conferences, there are other ways of building up to a full workshop or paper presentation at a large conference. Candidates could
Unfortunately, attendance at interstate conferences is often beyond the financial means of full time candidates and difficult to organise for part time candidates who combine full time work with study. To overcome these difficulties, supervisors need to:
In science and business disciplines, candidates are encouraged to co-publish journal papers with their supervisors or other researchers and publication during candidature is quite common. In the humanities and social sciences, papers are more likely to be sole-authored and in the past, at least at this University, candidates in those disciplines are less likely to publish during candidature. However, with the introduction of Research Degree Graduate Qualities at the University, candidates are now required to at least show they are working systematically towards completing an article for publication. Writing a research paper has many benefits for candidates. It helps them present preliminary findings and get their work out in the public and academic arena. It forces them to argue the case for their use of particular theoretical frameworks and methods. It also helps writers organise their ideas. Frequently, an argument only takes shape as it is written. A paper published in a refereed journal and included as a chapter in a thesis (or acknowledged as the basis for a chapter) will be likely to impress examiners, since it has already been reviewed by experts.
Some writers argue that spending considerable time writing a paper that may not eventually form part of a thesis can impede a candidate’s progress. As Brown (1994) argues, the six months (minimum) that it takes for a paper to be written and accepted is ‘a big slice’ out of the time allowed for a PhD if the paper does not contribute substantially to a chapter. Supervisors need to guide candidates carefully and help them manage their time effectively. Co-authoring a paper with a candidate is one way supervisors can mentor candidates in their publishing attempts and simultaneously limit the amount of time they spend writing a paper. Writing papers for professional journals is particularly rewarding for candidates who enter a research degree with substantial experience in industry or the professions, as it maintains their profile and networks in the workplace and contributes to the writing of the ‘so-what’ of a thesis; that is, the part of the thesis which describes the broader relevance and application of the research outcomes.
Postgraduate candidates who take on part time academic employment are making an individual choice influenced by a combination of personal and work factors. If the work is closely related to a student’s research it can make a useful contribution to their progress, but if it is in a different area and requires significant reading, preparation or marking, it may affect their progress. It is also important to remember that if a student is in receipt of an Australian or University postgraduate award, or is an International student on a Home Country Government scholarship, there will be conditions governing part time work. In some cases no part time work is allowed and in other instances there is a limit placed on how much part time work a student may accept.
However, there are significant advantages attached to taking up academic work within the university if candidates believe they can manage their time effectively. Such work can range from undergraduate teaching, tutoring and marking, to research assistance or research collaboration, analysis or writing within a project. It can provide opportunities for candidates to:
In the increasingly performance driven environment of research education, the University is under pressure to maintain the quality of the research education experience for candidates and simultaneously encourage timely completions. While one-to-one supervision remains the core of effective research training, it should be supplemented and stimulated by other research education opportunities within the department (Grant, 2003). As opportunities to pursue an academic career become more competitive, and as numbers of International and mid-career candidates come with very different prior experiences of academic cultures, it is more important than ever to make sure opportunities are available for candidates to become immersed in academic research cultures.
Bills, D. (2004). Supervisors’ conceptions of research and the implications for supervisor development. International Journal for Academic Development, 9 (1), 85-98.
Brown, R. (1994). The 'big picture' about managing writing. In O Zuber-Skerrit & Y Ryan (Eds.), Quality in Postgraduate Education. London: Kogan Page.
Clark, D.J. (1997). The Postindustrial PhD: Selection or Reincarnation?: Meeting the demands of R&D leadership in a rapidly changing social and business environment Available online at: http://online.anu.edu.au/graduate/papers/gs97_1_clark.html (Accessed 9th September, 2000).
Cryer, P., & Okorocha, E. (1999). Avoiding potential pitfalls in the supervision of NESB students. In Y. Ryan & O. Zuber-Skerrit (Eds.), Supervising postgraduates from non-English speaking backgrounds. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and The Open University Press 110-118.
Deem, R. & Brehony, K. J. (2000) Doctoral Students' Access to Research Cultures - are some more unequal than others? Studies in Higher Education, 25 (2), 149-165.
Delamont, S., Atkinson, P. & Parry, O. (1997). Supervising the PhD: A guide to success. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Delamont, S., Atkinson, P. & Parry, O. (2000). The Doctoral Experience: Success and Failure in Graduate School. London: Falmer Press.
Denicolo, P., & Pope, M. (1999). Supervision and the overseas student. In Y. Ryan & O. Zuber-Skerrit (Eds.), Supervising postgraduates from non-English speaking backgrounds Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and The Open University Press 63-74.
Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (1999). Knowledge and Innovation: A policy statement and on research and research training. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
Ellis, E. (2001). The impact of race and gender on graduate school socialization, satisfaction with doctoral study, and commitment to degree completion. The Western Journal of Black Studies. 25 (1) 30-45.
Evans, T. (2000). Meeting What Ends: Challenges to Doctoral Education in Australia'. In Kiley, M. & Mullins, G. (Eds.) Quality in Postgraduate Research: Making Ends Meet. Proceedings of the 2000 Quality in Postgraduate Research Conference. Adelaide. April 13-14. Adelaide: The Advisory Centre for University Education, The University of Adelaide, 59-67.
Evans, T., & Pearson, M. (1999). Off-campus doctoral research and study in Australia: emerging issues and practices. In A. Holbrook & S. Johnston (Eds.), Supervision of postgraduate research in education (pp. 185-206). Coldstream, Vic: Australian Association for Research in Education.
Grant, B. (2003). Mapping the pleasures and risks of supervision. Discourse: studies in the cultural politics of education, 24 (2), 175-190.
Heinrich, K. (2000). The passionate scholar: a mid-life, woman doctoral student's quest for voice. Qualitative Studies in Education, 13 (1), 63-83.
Holbrook, A. & Johnston, S. (1999). The many facets of research supervision. In Holbrook, A. & Johnston, S. (Eds.) Supervision of Postgraduate Research in Education. Review of Australian Research in Education No. 5 Coldstream, Vic: Australian Association for Research in Education.
Holdaway, E. (1997) Quality issues in postgraduate education. In Burgess, R. G. (Ed.) Beyond the first degree: Graduate education, lifelong learning and careers. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
Johnson, L., Lee, A., & Green, B. (2000). The PhD and the autonomous self: gender, rationality and postgraduate pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education, 25 (2), 135-147.
Mann, L., Mayer, E., Hutton, G. & Cupper, L. (1994). Developing Leaders in R & D: Challenges and Opportunities for Australian Industry and Higher Education. Melbourne: Business/Higher Education Round Table Ltd.
Parry, S. and Hayden, M. (1994). Supervising Higher Degree Research Candidates: An Investigation of Practices across a Range of Academic Departments. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Phillips, E. M. & Pugh, D. S. (1987). How to get a PhD: A handbook for candidates and their supervisors, Buckingham:Open University Press.
Read, B., Archer, L., & Leathwood, C. (2003). Challenging cultures? Student conceptions of 'belonging' and 'isolation' at a post-1992 university. Studies in Higher Education, 28 (3), 261-277.
Ryan, Y. & Zuber-Skerritt, O. (Eds.) (1999) Supervising Postgraduates from Non-English Speaking Backgrounds., Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and The Open University Press.
Wright, T & Cochrane, R (2000). Factors influencing successful submission of PhD theses’, Studies in Higher Education. 25 (2)181-197.
1 Code of Good Practice: Supervising Research Candidates http://www.unisa.edu.au/policies/codes/goodprac/supvising.asp
