UKCGE International Annual Conference, Dublin 2014

Institutional Strategies: Developing Research Supervisors of

Doctoral Candidates in a Cohort-based Structured Programme

Professor Tony Fell,

University of Bradford, UK<a.f.fell@bradford.ac.uk>

Developing Research Supervisors

• Context• Principles of Research Supervisor development• Phases of Doctoral Research & Supervisory

Styles• The Learning Contract & Managing Expectations • Structure & Content• Programme Delivery• Key issues: Completion and the Viva• Future Perspectives

Context – 1

• Structured Doctorates fulfil needs in STEM areas and Arts – Design – Architecture – Theatre – Music – …

• Significant growth in UK & Ireland: Basis of national schemes for doctoral funding

Doctoral Training Partnerships, Structured PhD Programmes

Facilitate development of high quality skills Embed personal and interactive skills for

the world of workCohort-structure encourages team-work skills Strengthen the independent researcherConsistent with Life-long Learning agenda

Context – 2

• Drivers for Research Supervisor developmentNeed to ensure consistency of student experience

throughout doctoral research journey Increasing expectations of doctoral candidates

PRES surveys

Expectation for Internal Supervisors to adopt / develop best supervisory practice – with updates on institutional processes Applies to External Supervisors and Specialist Advisors

Recommended in National Codes of Practice QAA, Irish Universities Association

Impact of national QAA Audit processes …

Developing Research Supervisors

Principles of Research Supervisor Development

Principles of Research Supervisor Development

• Dedicated programmes at Faculty/subject domain level

• ‘Generic’ programmes for all scholastic domains across Institution

• Mixture of both – with materials (eg Case Studies) focused on specific subject areas

• Essential pre-requisite: Top Management seen to give strong support for formalised supervisor training

Principles of Research Supervisor Development

• Generic programme facilitates inter-disciplinary learning

• Programme structured to cover doctoral journey in sequence from recruitment to the Viva voce

• Key materials selected to ensure minimum of formal presentations

• Case Studies focus discussion in small groups*

• Create maximum opportunity for Supervisors to share experiences

• Encourage Supervisors to develop their OWN model of research supervision from the materials discussed

*Group membership should be balanced to represent all areas

Developing Research Supervisors

Phases of Doctoral Research

& Supervisory Styles

Phases of Doctoral Research

• Doctoral research training can be considered to fall into 4 Phases:

Phase 1: Getting started– The Initial Phase

Phase 2: Moving forward – The Productive Phase

Phase 3: Writing-up & submission

Phase 4: Preparation for “Surviving the Viva”

Supervisory Styles

• Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Model* is based on a combination of ‘supportive’ and ‘directive’ behaviour

• The model suggests that supervisory style should be progressively adapted and individualised for the needs of each student throughout all 4 phases of the programme

• Each research phase maps onto the 4 quadrants of the Blanchard model

*Blanchard & Hersey (1986)

- Directing- Phase 1

1

2

4

3

SUPP

ORT

IVE

BEH

AVIO

UR

DIRECTIVE BEHAVIOUR

High

HighLow

Supervisory Styles – Directive / Supportive behaviour during a typical Doctorate

[A.F. Fell, 2011; adapted from Blanchard & Hersey,1986]

- Directing- Phase 1

-Mentoring-Phases 1&2

1

2

4

3

SUPP

ORT

IVE

BEH

AVIO

UR

DIRECTIVE BEHAVIOUR

High

HighLow

Supervisory Styles – Directive / Supportive behaviour during a typical Doctorate

[A.F. Fell, 2011; adapted from Blanchard & Hersey,1986]

- Directing- Phase 1

-Mentoring-Phases 1&2

- Coaching- Phase 2

1

2

4

3

SUPP

ORT

IVE

BEH

AVIO

UR

DIRECTIVE BEHAVIOUR

High

HighLow

Supervisory Styles – Directive / Supportive behaviour during a typical Doctorate

[A.F. Fell, 2011; adapted from Blanchard & Hersey,1986]

- Directing- Phase 1

-Mentoring-Phases 1&2

- Coaching- Phase 2

- Delegating- Phases 3&4

1

2

4

3

SUPP

ORT

IVE

BEH

AVIO

UR

DIRECTIVE BEHAVIOUR

High

HighLow

Supervisory Styles – Directive / Supportive behaviour during a typical Doctorate

[A.F. Fell, 2011; adapted from Blanchard & Hersey,1986]

Supervisory Styles

• Every supervisor has their own preferred style

• An effective supervisor adapts their style interactively for each individual student – Depending on:

the student’s situation & needstheir innate ability their stage of academic development

Taking care to maintain equity among other research students

Supervisory Styles

• The Blanchard model clarifies the changing relationship between research candidate and supervisor over timeFor talented researchers the supervisory style

quickly moves to quadrants 3 & 4 coaching-delegatingWhereas … for some candidates the supervisory

style remains in quadrants 1 & 2 strongly directive

• Issues arising in multidisciplinary teams across HEIs or DTCs should be identified and discussed in mixed groups

• Bottom line: No supervisory style is always right – “One size doesn’t fit all ”

Developing Research Supervisors

The Learning Contract

& Managing Expectations

The Learning Contract & Managing Expectations – 1

• Make the ‘Psychological Contract’ explicit• Initial meeting with supervisory team is key• Assess candidate’s aspirations/motivation for research • Identify the expectations Supervisors have of the

candidate – and the student’s of the Supervisors• Clarify arrangements for meetings: – when, how often & where

• Explore student’s needs as learners eg for overseas candidates – EFL

• Clarify formal review processes & requirements

The Learning Contract & Managing Expectations – 2A

• Clarify training / modular requirements for cohort Induction at 3 levels

Cohort Group Institution

Access to relevant Generic & Transferable Skills mapped onto RDF Planner*

Interactive development activities for Cohort

* Researcher Development Framework – Vitae

The Learning Contract & Managing Expectations – 2B

• Outline the intended research programmeBig picture – locate project in wider programmeDevelop initial plans jointly (eg literature

background) Identify milestones and research objectives –

short/medium term

• Key: Support engagement and ownership of research programme by student

• Revisit the Learning Contract periodically – Where possible/appropriate discuss student’s

experience of supervision

The Learning Contract & Managing Expectations – 3

• Strategic use of Questionnaire* for clarifying the roles, responsibilities and expectations – of the student and of the supervisor

– Small groups assess the relative responsibility of Supervisors and Students across 12 categories on a scale of 1 – 5

– Outcomes are compared and discussed in plenary session

* Ingrid Moses, 1985, Higher Education Research and

Development Society of Australasia.

Adapted by Margaret Kiley and Kate Cadman, 1997, Centre for Learning & Teaching, University of Technology,

Sydney

Developing Research Supervisors

Structure & Content

Structure & Content

• Overview PPt presentations on key stages & issues in supervision

• Small group discussions on a range of issues drawing on experience of participants

• Development and discussion of Case Studies illustrating best practice in research supervision at key stages – including role play scenarios

• General principle: Design the programme with emphasis on discussion of key issues among participants – with minimum of formal lecture presentations

Structure & Content *Typical Case Studies – 1

• Mismatch of expectations Conflicting advice: Jack & Jill / Ali (Y1) Arrogance & the 7-day week syndrome:

Hamish & Anita (Y1)

• Neglect – “Itinerant Professor syndrome” Stella & Amy (Y1)

• Neglect – ineffective supervision by Work-based supervisor Percival & Danny (Y2/3)

• Conflict of Interest Huw & Jane (Y3)

* Developed at University of Bradford and HEIs in UK, Ireland and mainland Europe over the past 15 years

Structure & Content *Typical Case Studies – 2

• Financial pressures Jack & Jon / Freddie (Y3)

• Plagiarism Inadvertent: Pietro & Li (Y3) Non-inadvertent: Mary & Bernardo (Y4) Non-inadvertent: Nic & Jenny (Post-Doc)

• Problematic PhD Exam Prof Charles & Dr Eva / Steve (Y3) Prof Rotblatt (External) & Dr Roberto (Internal) / Rebecca (Y3)

* Developed at University of Bradford and HEIs in UK, Ireland and mainland Europe over the past 15 years

Developing Research Supervisors

Programme Delivery

Programme Delivery – 1A

• Structured doctoral training programmes vary between HEIs across UK and within Ireland:– Balance of generic & transferable skills in

programmes– Mode & flexibility of delivery to cohort in a DTC

Role of Supervisory Team in delivering research skills

Role of specialist trainers ECTS credit rating of modules &

transferability between programmes / centres– Inclusion of related mini-project – or not– Continuation of training elements into 2nd, 3rd etc

years– Mode and impact of modular assessment on PhD

outcomes

Programme Delivery – 1B

• Impact of training on research outcomes– Quantum of research output– Efficiency/effectiveness of Researcher– Relevance for employability – EU Transcript for

PhD

Programme Delivery – 2

• The IUA scheme (2012) for training supervisors recommends: – 4 linked Workshops covering the 4 ‘Lifecycles’ or

phases of a typical PhD– supplemented by discussion covering institutional

issues & current issues in supervision• Supervision Lifecycle – 1: Initial Phase• Supervision Lifecycle – 2: Moving forward• Supervision Lifecycle – 3: Progress to completion• Supervision Lifecycle – 4: Demystifying the Viva• The scheme has been successfully adopted by

Universities in Ireland and Institutes of Technology.

Example Workshop 3: Supervision Lifecycle – 3

Progress to completion

• Supervision Lifecycle – 3: Progress to completion– Closure – managing project completion – Developing effective writing skills– Facilitating timely completion of Thesis– Selection of External (and Internal) Examiners– Preparing for the PhD Viva

ExampleWorkshop 4: Supervision Lifecycle – 4

Demystifying the Viva – and beyond . . .

• Purpose, Process, Preparation 10 Strategies for Survival Mock or Practice Viva

• Case Studies: Typical Viva scenarios and outcomes.• . . . And beyond … – Life Post-Viva – Preparing for a Post-Doc Career & Publication– Relationships

• Moving on to Supervision – In the academic context – and in Industry

Developing Research Supervisors

Key issues

Thesis Completion and Examination

• Best practice for successful completion– Models of supervisorial support for thesis writing – Develop Generic Thesis Planner

• Clarify Thesis submission process• Clarify selection of Examiners and Viva process

– ‘Balanced’ team – experience, independence, expertise– Roles of External / Internal Examiners & Chair of Board

• Clarify the Viva voce process– Value of Practice or ‘Mock’ Viva – Independent pre-Viva Reports (required in UK)– The Viva – How long … ?– Outcomes – joint Report / independent Reports & Approval– Approval of Thesis corrections

Generic Thesis Planner – 1

Generic Thesis Planner – 2

Future Perspectives

• Trend (in UK) towards academics studying part-time for academic HE teaching qualification – including module on Research Supervision – PGC(HE)

• Emerging practice (in UK) for Institutional or external accreditation of Supervisors

• Institutional policies required on:– Retraining/refresher programmes – inc. “Backwoodsmen” – How to extend / develop PGRS / ESR / Post-Doc skills– Management of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)

• Increasing trend for PGRS appeals & complaints: – ‘Age of litigation’ >> UK “Office of Independent Adjudicator”

• Need for transparency / comparability in doctoral training across and between HEIs

Developing Research Supervisors

• Context• Principles of Research Supervisor development• Phases of Doctoral Research & Supervisory

Styles• The Learning Contract & Managing Expectations • Structure & Content• Programme Delivery• Key issues: Completion and the Viva• Future Perspectives