Doctoral Supervisors Research Articles

A survey of doctoral supervisors in South Africa

South African universities receive a direct monetary reward for the number of doctoral graduates produced. As a result there has been a steady increase in numbers in recent years (from 977 in 2004 to 1,878 in 2012), with obvious implications for doctoral supervision. Against this background a web-based survey of 331 doctoral supervisors at South African universities was conducted in 2011. The findings are discussed with reference to four themes: the burden of numbers, the nature of the PhD, screening and selection of doctoral candidates, and supervisory styles. The main conclusion is that many doctoral supervisors in South Africa conduct their supervision under less-than-optimal conditions. Increasing student numbers, demands for constant monitoring and accountability, the pressure of throughput rates and efficient completion together with moderate-to-poor quality students, has resulted in a situation where doctoral supervision has become a challenging and highly stressful undertaking.

Love it when you speak foreign: A trans-national perspective on the professional development of doctoral supervisors in South Africa

Being a successful doctoral supervisor and adhering to international requirements and contexts involves important qualities, for example: being knowledgeable in disciplines and understanding different methodologies; being sensitive to cultural diversity; and cultivating interpersonal relationships. As doctoral candidates and their supervisors carry major responsibilities, doctoral quality and success are associated with several challenges. This article explores some of these challenges and suggests that candidates and supervisors might contribute more substantially to new knowledge if international quality measures for theses and 'doctorateness' (or 'doctoralness') are considered. This explorative study reports on descriptive and analytical findings from a project whereby three senior academics from three countries collaborated and acted as facilitators of research and developmental efforts concerning doctoral education and the professional development of doctoral supervisors. Such efforts involved both supervisors and doctoral candidates - the latter whose views are seen as important to shape supervisors' views of their own supervisory practices and standards for the doctorate. The article outlines the processes and feedback from a series of developmental opportunities that were created and provides guidelines as to how trans-national efforts - particularly, but not exclusively, in the context of a developing country - can be used to promote doctoral education and the professional development of doctoral supervisors.

An Exploration of the Scientific Writing Experience of Nonnative English-Speaking Doctoral Supervisors and Students Using a Phenomenographic Approach

Nonnative English-speaking scholars and trainees are increasingly submitting their work to English journals. The study’s aim was to describe their experiences regarding scientific writing in English using a qualitative phenomenographic approach. Two focus groups (5 doctoral supervisors and 13 students) were conducted. Participants were nonnative English-speakers in a Swedish health sciences faculty. Group discussion focused on scientific writing in English, specifically, rewards, challenges, facilitators, and barriers. Participants were asked about their needs for related educational supports. Inductive phenomenographic analysis included extraction of referential (phenomenon as a whole) and structural (phenomenon parts) aspects of the transcription data. Doctoral supervisors and students viewed English scientific writing as challenging but worthwhile. Both groups viewed mastering English scientific writing as necessary but each struggles with the process differently. Supervisors viewed it as a long-term professional responsibility (generating knowledge, networking, and promotion eligibility). Alternatively, doctoral students viewed its importance in the short term (learning publication skills). Both groups acknowledged they would benefit from personalized feedback on writing style/format, but in distinct ways. Nonnative English-speaking doctoral supervisors and students in Sweden may benefit from on-going writing educational supports. Editors/reviewers need to increase awareness of the challenges of international contributors and maximize the formative constructiveness of their reviews.

Supervising doctoral students: variation in purpose and pedagogy

International policy changes that have prioritised increasing growth in the numbers of doctoral students have led to wide-ranging debate about the changing purpose of the doctorate. However, there has been little research aimed at investigating doctoral supervisors’ views of the purpose of the doctorate, despite the significant role supervisors play in enacting any doctoral policy changes. This paper explores the purpose of undertaking a doctorate from the perspective of doctoral supervisors in a research intensive university in the UK, and the pedagogical strategies supervisors described using to achieve these purposes, showing the essentially integrated nature of purpose and pedagogy. The paper argues for the importance, for both doctoral education and supervisor professional development, of making variation in views of doctoral purpose explicit, and argues that the predominant focus on developing skills and abilities in research and supervisor training needs to be complemented by a concomitant focus on purpose and intentions.

‘We are like orphans’: exploring narratives of Lao doctoral alumni educated in Sweden

ABSTRACTIn this article, we explore the narratives of 10 doctoral alumni from Lao People's Democratic Republic (PDR) who underwent graduate training in Sweden. The narratives identify challenges encountered by the alumni but more importantly reveal the agency by which these challenges were overcome. The most important strategy was that of collaborative learning, actively enlisting the help of other doctoral students and supervisors, thus challenging the prevalent discourse about doctoral studies as an individual endeavour. Inspired by post-colonial perspectives, the article reveals juxtapositions between Lao colonial experiences and Swedish ignorance of their ramifications. The article argues that programmes in Sweden should work more actively towards a collaborative and inclusive learning process. This strategy becomes especially important when doctoral endeavours involve participants from both the global south and the global north, and it could be an important step in challenging the hegemonic position of the global north in processes of knowledge production.

New era, new concept, new idea

Daoyu Hu, Professor of Radiology, Doctoral Supervisor, director of the Radiology Department in Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College of HUST, China. Prof. Hu studied in Germany as a visiting professor for 3 years. He has worked on the diagnosis of abdominal radiology and interventional radiology for over 30 years. He is an expert in diagnosing digestive, genitourinary and vascular disease by using various medical imaging methods such as CT, MRI and interventional radiology. He now holds the following responsible positions: Chairman, Radiology Committee, Hubei Medical Association; Vice chairman, Abdominal Committee of Chinese society of Radiology; Member, Chinese Society of Radiology; Editorial board member, Chinese Journal of Radiology; Chief editor, Radiologic Practice.

Mature Students’ Voices on the Ideal and the Reality of Doctoral Supervisors’ Role and Practice

With this paper, the author has one main objective: to collate mature students’ perspectives, gathered through an in-depth focus group, on the ideal competences doctoral supervisor should have, while simultaneously highlighting their own experiences regarding their supervisors’ difficulties. The pertinence of this subject is grounded on two main reasons. On the one hand, a hot reality may be verified in different parts of the globe: mature students engaging in research-based PhDs. On the other hand, small research has been addressing the ideal profile doctoral supervisors should have when supervising mature students, and the difficulties they usually demonstrate.

Progress in research on digestive system oncology

Xianglin Yuan, Professor of Oncology, Doctoral Supervisor, Deputy Director of the Oncology Department and Director of the Digestive System Oncology Department, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College of HUST, China. Yuan discovered that CT/CC genotypes of the TGFbeta1 rs1982073: T869C gene were associated with a low risk of radiation pneumonitis (RP) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with definitive radio(chemo)therapy and thus might serve as a reliable predictor of RP (Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2009; cited over 70 times). He indicated that genetic variations in PI3K-AKT-mTOR could predict brain metastasis in patients with NSCLC (Journal of Clinical Cancer Research, 2014). He also discovered that among the candidate genes involved in the TGF-β pathway, polymorphisms of SMAD3 appeared to be highly predictive of outcome in patients with lung adenocarcinoma after gefitinib treatment, especially in those with epidermal growth factor receptor mutations (Annals of Oncology, 2014). He has published about 30 articles found in the Science Citation Index (SCI) and has managed 3 items of the National Natural Science Foundation of China. He is an expert in radiation therapy and comprehensive therapy for common malignant tumors such as esophageal, gastric, liver, colorectal, and lung cancers. He now holds the following responsible positions: Chairman, Oncology Committee, Wuhan Medical Association; Chairman, Committee of Molecular Marker and Translational Medicine, Hubei Anti-Cancer Association; Vice Chairman, Committee of Radiation Therapy, Hubei Anti-Cancer Association; Member, Executive Committee, Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology; member, Committee of Tumor Marker, Chinese Anti-Cancer Association.

Moral compass framework

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is as follows: locate our moral compass framework (Bowden and Green, 2014) within the moral development literature; demonstrate how the framework can be used to analyse complex system-wide problems; and propose change in doctoral education.Design/methodology/approach– This paper shows the analysis of transcripts of 50 interviews with doctoral students and supervisors. Four scenarios, each a composite derived primarily from the interview data, were analysed using the framework, complemented by reference to the moral development literature.Findings– The structure of the framework and meaning of the constructs’ collective morality, moral advocacy and moral mediation are elaborated and further explained through the analysis of the four scenarios, showing how the framework can contribute to resolution of complex system-wide problems and how they facilitate moral development within a multi-level system. Six proposals for change in the doctoral education system, at the individual, organisational and national levels, are derived from those analyses.Originality/value– The use of our moral compass framework to analyse the four scenarios demonstrates its applicability to real situations and its complementarity with the moral development literature. The paper also shows that the framework is more powerful and of broader impact than the moral development models published to date. The changes proposed for the doctoral education system, based on the moral compass framework and its application to the four scenarios, have the potential to change practice in ways that benefit everyone involved in the system – candidates, supervisors, management and government personnel.

Lung cancer: Progress, current status, and controversies

Yuan Chen, Professor of Oncology, Doctoral Supervisor; the Deputy Director of the Oncology Department and the Director of the Thoracic Oncology Department in Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College of HUST, China. Prof. Chen graduated from Tongji Medical University in 1985 and studied in the MD Anderson Cancer Center as a visiting associate professor from August 2002 to August 2003. He has worked in the clinical, teaching, and research fields of oncology for 29 years. He is an expert in tumor diagnosis and treatment, especially in thoracic oncology, and in palliative care and radiation therapy. He has undertaken in-depth studies and, his achievements are as follows: Member of Council, CHINESE ANTI-CANCER ASSOCIATION (CACA); Vice Chairman, Cancer Rehabilitation and Palliative Care Committee, CACA; Chairman, Cancer Rehabilitation and Palliative Care Committee, HUBEI ANTI-CANCER ASSOCIATION; Vice Chairman, Lung Cancer Committee, HUBEI ANTI-CANCER ASSOCIATION; Vice Chairman, Hubei Targeted Therapy Committee; Vice Chairman, Radiation Oncology Committee, WUHAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION; Vice Chairman, Hubei Stereotactic Radiotherapy Committee.

Apprenticeship in Scholarly Publishing: A Student Perspective on Doctoral Supervisors’ Roles

Although a large body of literature has suggested that doctoral supervisors play an important role in their students’ attempts at scholarly publishing, few studies have focused specifically on what roles they play. This study sought to address this gap by zooming in on the various roles a group of Chinese doctoral students found their supervisors playing in their scholarly publishing endeavors. Our analysis revealed four important roles played by the supervisors: ‘prey’ searchers, managers, manuscript correctors and masters. The results showed that the supervisors not only facilitated the doctoral students’ publishing output, but also fostered their apprenticeship in scholarly publishing and the academic community. However, the results also unveiled a general unavailability of sorely-needed detailed and specific guidance on students’ early publishing attempts and some supervisors’ limited ability to correct students’ English manuscripts. These findings underscore the important contributions doctoral supervisors can make to their students’ academic socialization. They also suggest a need for external editorial assistance with doctoral students’ English manuscripts and ample opportunities for their scaffolded initiation into the tacit conventions and practices of scholarly publishing.

“Publish SCI papers or no degree”: practices of Chinese doctoral supervisors in response to the publication pressure on science students

Publishing English papers in journals listed in Science Citation Index (SCI) has become a requirement for degree conferment for doctoral science students at many universities in China. The publication requirement engenders high pressure for doctoral students and their supervisors and shapes the politics of the relationship between the two parties. This is illustrated in the present paper which reports a study conducted at a prestigious university in east China. Focusing on the case of a research group in biochemistry led by an expert writer (the supervisor), the study aimed to find out, from the supervisor's perspective, what revising papers for the students means to him, and what the students learn as a result of their papers being revised. It is shown that the students depend on the supervisor to meet the publication requirement, and the supervisor believes an average student cannot write a publishable paper. The paper discusses the disempowering effect of the publication requirement, and concludes that there is a role for a course on academic English writing, and that the focus on “publishing SCI papers or no degree” should be shifted at the policy level and long-term planning should go into the training of EAP-qualified language professionals.

Language of the doctorate: Doctorateness as a threshold concept in doctoral literacy

In academia, the definition of literacy has evolved from a focus on reading and writing to encompass more inclusive and expansive perspectives. Such perspectives have come from researchers involved in exploring literacy among diverse populations and across traditional divides such as cultural, political and socioeconomic boundaries. Changing definitions of literacy include usage in expressions such as ‘computer literacy’, ‘civic literacy’, ‘health literacy’, ‘cultural literacy’ and others. Recently, new directions in literacy research were foregrounded by critical questions that seek to discover how literacy functions in doctoral studies and within research communities. For instance, what does it mean to be ‘literate’ as a doctoral member of a research culture, within a field of research, within the academic profession and so on? In addition, doctoral candidates often grapple with what may be termed ‘threshold concepts’. Such concepts include the meaning of the doctorate as a qualification, its aims, its narrative and the level of literacy required to succeed with a doctorate. Against this background the article explores firstly how the concept of being literate has been broadened to include literacy for doctoral learning; secondly, it explains why doctorateness remains a threshold concept for many doctoral candidates and supervisors, and thirdly it provides some evidence from at least five years of working with doctoral education and doctoral supervisor development workshops to support an argument for doctoral literacy. Finally, the article provides some implications which emerged from a better understanding of the language and requirements of doctorateness as an essential literacy requirement for doctoral candidates and their supervisors.

Digital Curation and Doctoral Research

This article considers digital curation in doctoral study and the role of the doctoral supervisor and institution in facilitating students’ acquisition of digital curation skills, including some of the potentially problematic expectations of the supervisory relationship with regards to digital curation. Research took the form of an analysis of the current digital curation training landscape, focussing on doctoral study and supervision. This was followed by a survey (n=116) investigating attitudes towards importance, expertise, and responsibilities regarding digital curation. This research confirms that digital curation is considered to be very important within doctoral study but that doctoral supervisors and particularly students consider themselves to be largely unskilled at curation tasks. It provides a detailed picture of curation activity within doctoral study and identifies the areas of most concern. A detailed analysis demonstrates that most of the responsibility for curation is thought to lie with students and that institutions are perceived to have very low responsibility and that individuals tend to over-assign responsibility to themselves. Finally, the research identifies which types of support system for curation are most used and makes suggestions for ways in which students, supervisors, institutions, and others can effectively and efficiently address problematic areas and improve digital curation within doctoral study.

Learning to supervise: four journeys

This article explores the experiences of four early career academics as they begin to undertake doctoral supervision. Each supervisor focused on one of their supervisees and drew and described a Journey Plot depicting the high and low points of their supervisory experience with their student. Two questions were addressed by the research: (1) How do early career academics experience doctoral supervision? (2) What challenges do early career academics face as they learn to supervise? Analysis of the data confirmed new supervisory experiences as variable, personalised, and emotional and further identified them as marked by agency and resilience, with time an important factor in supervisor development. Three common areas of challenge were noted: unrealised supervisory expectations, student-supervisor relationships, and commitment. Navigating these challenges was key to these individuals developing their expertise as doctoral supervisors.

Basil Edwards: A Scholar, a Mentor and a Friend 1930-2014

With the passing of Professor AB Edwards, South Africa lost a great legal scholar. I lost a mentor and a friend.I first met Professor Edwards (as I continued to call him after his retirement) in 1984 when I was appointed as a research assistant in the then Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Legal Philosophy. One of my first tasks was to assist in checking references for his work on Paulus Voet, which would later be published as The Selective Paulus Voet (Fundamina Editio Specialis, University of South Africa, 2007). During that time, I translated chapters from his PhD Thesis (University of Cape Town, 1984) from English into Afrikaans - a daunting task for a young research assistant, but giving me my first glimpse of the great scholar that he was. Two years later, I became a permanent member of the Department with Professor Edwards as its Head, and sometime later he became my doctoral supervisor. All in all, I had known him for thirty odd years, yet when I was approached to write this obituary, I realised at once how much and how little I knew about him.

A Day in the Life of Vimala Nair

A Day in the Life of Vimala Nair

A moral compass framework for resolution of wicked problems in doctoral education and supervision

Purpose– The purpose of the paper is to design and explain a moral compass framework that informs decision-making by those engaged in shaping the doctoral education and supervision environment.Design/methodology/approach– The research involved analysis of transcripts of 50 interviews with a range of doctoral students and supervisors. The framework was derived from the integration of the transcript analysis with a range of theoretical constructs: Rittel and Webber’s (1973) “wicked” problems; Bowden’s (2004) capability for the unknown future; Baillieet al.’s (2013) threshold capability development; liminality (Meyer and Land 2006); mindfulness (Langer and Moldoveanu, 2000; Green and Bowden, 2012); as well as our interpretation of moral compass and collective morality.Findings– Although applicable to a wide range of contexts, with broader, potentially universal implications for professional life, the framework is explained using the doctoral education system as example, and supervisor and candidate experiences as illustration. It relates individual decision-making to notions of collective morality and moral development within a multi-level system, through moral advocacy and moral mediation, activities identified as necessary at all levels of the doctoral system.Originality/value– Our framework demonstrates the need for developing awareness of the multi-factorial nature of the wicked problems that arise in doctoral education and the requirement to address such problems across all levels – individual, organisational and national. We identified the central importance of a new construct – collective morality and the way that moral advocacy and moral mediation can contribute to resolution of such wicked problems in doctoral education and supervision.

The supervised as the supervisor

Purpose – The relationship between doctoral students and their supervisors impacts on degree completion rates; faculty research performance; and postgraduate satisfaction with their alma mater. The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between the experience of supervision and subsequent supervision practices. Design/methodology/approach – Totally, 40 supervisors who are doctoral students/graduates were approached to participate in the study, and 32 agreed. For each participant, data were collected to explore their development as a supervisor. Findings – Supervisors seek guidance from textbooks, workshops, peers, colleagues and their doctoral supervisor to develop as a supervisor. Their supervision style emerges as a reaction to both positive and negative experiences of supervision. A recurring theme in the data is that if there is something missing in the supervision experience, the student will emphasise this element in their approach to supervision. Practical implications – The changing nature of doctoral provision is changing the role of the supervisor. This paper explores the relationship between a student and their supervisor. The outcome is that insights are provided into how the experience of doctoral supervision is reflected in the supervisory practices of the supervised. Originality/value – The impact of the supervisor on the doctoral student's/graduate's subsequent approach to supervision can be mapped against previous research. Additional research is needed to identify the different styles of supervision practised, and how each style is valued within the academic community.

Nesting doctoral students in collaborative North–South partnerships for health systems research

BackgroundThe European Union (EU) supports North–South Partnerships and collaborative research projects through its Framework Programmes and Horizon 2020. There is limited research on how such projects can be harnessed to provide a structured platform for doctoral level studies as a way of strengthening health system research capacity in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to explore the challenges of, and facilitating factors for, ‘nesting’ doctoral students in North–South collaborative research projects. The term nesting refers to the embedding of the processes of recruiting, supervising, and coordinating doctoral students in the overall research plan and processes.DesignThis cross-sectional qualitative study was undertaken by the EU-funded QUALMAT Project. A questionnaire was implemented with doctoral students, supervisors, and country principal investigators (PIs), and content analysis was undertaken.ResultsCompleted questionnaires were received from nine doctoral students, six supervisors, and three country PIs (86% responses rate). The doctoral students from SSA described high expectations about the input they would receive (administrative support, equipment, training, supervision). This contrasted with the expectations of the supervisors for proactivity and self-management on the part of the students. The rationale for candidate selection, and understandings of the purpose of the doctoral students in the project were areas of considerable divergence. There were some challenges associated with the use of the country PIs as co-supervisors. Doctoral student progress was at times impeded by delays in the release of funding instalments from the EU. The paper provides a checklist of essential requirements and a set of recommendations for effective nesting of doctoral students in joint North–South projects.ConclusionThere are considerable challenges to the effective nesting of doctoral students within major collaborative research projects. However, ways can be found to overcome them. The nesting process ultimately helped the institutions involved in this example to take better advantage of the opportunities that collaborative projects offer to foster North–South partnerships as a contribution to the strengthening of local research capacity.