Supervision

How to choose a supervisor?

 The supervisory team
• Each student/supervisor relationship is different

• Minimum of 2 supervisors (University Regulations)

• Principal Supervisor
– Responsible for daily and strategic direction
– Member of School staff or from an Associated Institution who has
been approved by College

• Second Supervisor
– Must be from School staff if principal supervisor is not
– If outwith School appointed and agreed by Graduate School
– Role varies depending on project
 Student-supervisor relationship changes over time
• 1st meeting: “What do I want from my PhD?” (career aspirations, skills,…)

• Month 1: "What am I doing here?"

 is there a project out there somewhere?

• Months 2-3: "What should I do next"

 is that where the project is?

• Months 4-6: "This is what I've done so far - what should I do next?"
 aha ... I've got a clue what the project is now!

• Months 6-36: "This is what I've done and this is what I'm going to do next -
is that OK?"
 it's your project! – take ownership
Groundrules (from Code of Practice)
Student to:
• Work diligently, and meet expected standards
• Be responsible for the academic quality of the thesis
• Maintain regular contact with the supervisor, and submit work as
required
• Publish and present conference papers
• Play a full role in the intellectual life of the School
• Seek advice from supervisor (or others as appropriate),
immediately if a problem arises
 Survey of Supervisors’ Views
Characteristics encouraged in research students
– Enthusiastic, curious, open-minded, creative, critical
– Soon takes ownership of and responsibility for project
– Uses time effectively
– Regular meetings/communication with supervisor
– Appreciates that research does not always goes smoothly; takes constructive criticism
well
– Views PhD as an apprenticeship in research; small amount of good quality work
Unhelpful characteristics
– Does not inform supervisor of progress
– Stuck in subordinate role, passive
– Reactive rather than proactive
– Thinks can write up in last 6 months
– Avoids interaction with intellectual community
Groundrules (from Code of Practice)
Supervisor to:

• Be available throughout study period

(or have made alternative arrangements)
• Comment on written work within a reasonable
time period
• Provide access to appropriate equipment and
advise on necessary training
 Survey of PhD students
Characteristics students like to see in supervisors
– Honesty, enthusiasm, organised
– Helpful, defend interests
– Approachable, good listener, reassurance

Characteristics that are unhelpful in supervisors

– Too busy, absent, forgetful, controlling
– Not committing enough time to you
– Not finding out what you want from the PhD
What to do if things go wrong
• Don’t panic!
• Seek advice as soon as possible
• Speak to your Supervisory Team
• Speak to your Institute Director
• Consult tutor for research students
• Speak to Head of Graduate School
• Postgraduate Secretaries can offer advice on non-academic matters
• University advice services
 General advice
• Read a few Informatics PhD theses.. see what is expected
• Break your work-plan down into 6 – 10 month chunks
– Each one builds on previous achievements
– Synchronize completion of ‘chunk’ with conference submission deadline
– Avoids the ‘’all or nothing’’ problem
– Provides externally-defined milestones (will keep you on track!)
• You are all perfectly capable of succeeding
• So:
– Be confident,
– communicate your ideas to colleagues,
– listen to others, and
– seek out PhD “best practice” from others in your group / institute / school

• Avoid common pitfalls

– Impractical plans (or none at all)
– Too much implementation, at the expense of innovation / novel ideas
– Irregular or infrequent contact with supervisor
– Getting diverted or tinkering / re-working previous results
– Postponement – “I’m OK, 3 years is a long time…”
 Disclosure
• I “chose” thesis supervisors for my MSc and my PhD
• I changed my PhD thesis supervisor and dropped the
thesis topic chosen by him
• I found the topic for both my MSc and PhD research
• My primary PhD supervisor left McGill and I had to
work with a new co-supervisor (first time supervisor)
as well as my original supervisor (long distance from
California)
• I survived to tell the tale!
 Suggestion

• Put at least as much time into researching and

choosing an appropriate supervisor as you
would into buying a car
 Tips
• Tip 1. Browse before deciding
• Tip 2. Get your paperwork in order
• Tip 3. Don’t talk financing or trade-ins until
you’ve settled on a price
• Tip 4. Don’t fail the test drive
 Remember
• You are not imposing on faculty members when you
meet with them as potential supervisors
– If you get that impression then that is the wrong
person for you!
• You will be helping the faculty member study an area
in which s/he is interested
– You should be an asset to their team
• The faculty member will gain credit for training you
• This should be a mutually beneficial relationship
 And……
• Each student-supervisor relationship is unique
– Even within a team the model may differ across
students
• Some very successful ones are quite informal
and distant; others are close and dynamic
• One type of supervisor does not fit all!
 Early Steps
• Get to know who is who in the Department
– Go to seminars
• Come up with a short list of potential supervisors
– Check out webpages
– Check out publications of potential supervisor(s) and students
– Check out grants
– Speak to current and previous students
– Not only will you get info on the proposed supervisor but you
will also get an idea if there is a “team” feeling or lone workers
– Time to completion is something that you might look into as
well
• Check the supervisory privileges of your potential
supervisor
 The Approach
• Be sure to distinguish between preliminary,
exploratory approaches and the actual request to
become one's supervisor
• Send an introductory email with a nicely prepared
academic CV
– Do not be too rigid in your area of interest at this point
• Once the date is set, ask to read grant applications or
other documents as background
• Be Professional – on time, and prepared
– What are your areas of interest etc….
• Ask about RA opportunities
 Things to Discuss
• Your goal is to find out more about the faculty member
and opportunities for research while at the same time
impressing them
• Mention your career goals
• What are your personal work and learning styles?
• What are your timeframes for thesis completion?
• How will these fit with potential thesis supervisor?
• Are there funding opportunities?
– What are they?
• What careers have previous students gone onto?
 The Decision
• Go back to your first choice and ask…….
• Make sure to call back each person you met
with to tell her/him whether or not you want
to work with her/him
• It is not a problem to tell her/him you decided
to work for someone else
• The faculty member knows you are making a
choice
 Some additional thoughts
• Even if you do not “choose” a particular faculty member
that you met with, you can still interact with them
– There should be no hard feelings on either side
• There are many reasons that a faculty member may say
no after meeting with you that are not a reflection you
– No enough funding available, going on sabbatical, too many
current students, not quite the right fit for the available project
• A professor may ask you first
– Don’t answer too quickly
– Still go through the process carefully.
 The First Meeting
• DO Discuss expectations on both sides!
– Prepare an agenda – share it with your supervisor in advance
– Listen
• Supervisor expectations of you
– Ask questions for clarification
• You need to ask them now because it might be too late if there is a misunderstanding
– Confirm previous discussions about funding
– Frequency and format of meetings
• Presentations, free flow,…., email, teleconference, videoconference
• Prepare an agenda
• Follow up with notes
• DON’T define too many parameters in advance
– No supervisor wants to be interrogated

• DO Tell your supervisor now if you have any specific constraints or expectations
– “I will be leaving to spend 6 months in France……”

• Relationships evolve……let that happen

 Some More Tips

• Be flexible in your expectations for a thesis topic

– Too rigid might turn off a supervisor not working in
that area
• Seek to make the research your own – this is not
merely a big assignment – it is YOUR research
– Look for opportunities to put your stamp on the
project
 TIP: Familiarize Yourself with Departmental
Procedures
• Primary supervisor MUST be a faculty member
• Nomination of supervisor, committee forms
– Deadlines
• Tracking Forms
• Timelines for your degree
• Ask questions if you are confused
– Program Advisor
• Do not assume that your supervisor will have all
the answers
 Manuscript-Based Thesis
• Potential Benefits
• Better positioning for future career
(postdoctoral fellowships or jobs),
• Gaining publishing experience –
something every academic needs,
• Potentially increasing research efficiency,
• Potentially leading to more practical and
useable results,
• Allowing greater depth, breadth and
comprehensiveness,
• Opportunities for real life learning
(manuscript preparation, submission
process, peer review, etc.), and
• Undergoing a more rigorous process in
preparing results for publication than for a
traditional thesis (monograph), with the
resulting thesis potentially being high
quality.
• Potential Challenges
• Working within uncertain timelines
• Developing a thesis that is coherent
• Structuring and formatting, as there
maybe very different audiences and
purposes for the various papers
• A longer time commitment may be
required because:
– Publication process takes time
• Circumstances may change while
completing the research preparing the
thesis, e.g.
– Unfavorable results of a review;
– Unexpected (or null) study results.
• Inclusion of others (reviewers/editors)
into the research process
• Publishing work early on that may not
reflect your level of sophistication at the
end of your thesis
Standards for research (PhD) degree

• What makes a research project attain

standard of PhD degree?
Planning: Nature of the research question

A view of the research project “which students

often begin with and have to be talked out of: it
is a topic or a problem so complex and
enormous that it would take a lifetime’s work to
complete.”
(Lawton 1997: 8)

Supervisors are aware that it is adequate for a thesis to make

an incremental contribution to knowledge and understanding- a
PhD does not have to inspire a revolution in thinking about a
research discipline. As one examiner put it, ‘. . . A PhD is three
years of solid work, not a Nobel Prize.’

(quoted in Mullins and Kiley 2002: 386)

 Expected features of a research
degree (PhD)

• Independence
• Originality
• Contribution to knowledge
• Suitable for publication
 Independence

• PhD graduate - capable of independently

conducting original research of a standard that is
expected of professional researchers in their
particular discipline
• Research and thesis are student’s own work
• Places limits on contribution made by supervisor
(writing sections of thesis; direct analyses of
student’s data; directly interprets data)
- Collaborative work?
 Originality
• Not as frightening to achieve as you might think

• “…flashes of inspiration are infrequent … One often

arrives at the end of a project before one is able to
take the measure of how original the contribution
is, and this illustrates the point … that originality is a
by-product of quite ordinary scholarly activity. All
one has to do is to recognise it when it emerges and
give it full scope.”

(modified from M. Talbot, pers. comm.)

 Contribution to knowledge I
• Nature of the research question
– working at the boundaries of knowledge
– adds to conceptual/theoretical development of
discipline
– not descriptive: seeks explanation, tests predictions
and extends understanding at forefront of discipline
 Contribution to knowledge II

• Effective methodology (important criteria)

– Chosen research methods are valid,
reliable, rigorous and appropriate to the
research question (originality?)
• Evidence of critical evaluation
– intellectual appreciation of theory as well
as the limitations and wider significance
 Suitable for publication

• PhD thesis should contain some elements worthy of

publication
 Research skills

PEAR

PLANNING EXECUTION ANALYSIS REPORTING

Context Scheduling Data capture Reports
Review Techniques Data screening Papers
Protocol Recording Analysis Thesis
Design Computing
 Planning
• Define clear objectives
• Identify context
- importance & relevance
• Literature review
• Study design
• Determine analysis to meet objectives
• Protocol - Schedule and assign tasks
 Failing to plan is planning to fail I
• Research projects require a long-term integration of effort
(+complexity). Planning helps to:
- clarify and manage complexity
- Reduce to a series of more manageable tasks
- better identify requirements of the project e.g. finance,
equipment, time, scheduling and research skills
- derive discipline from setting targets, and motivation from
reaching them!
• ‘Activity trap’ being busy ≠ achieving progress
 STUDY PROTOCOL
• Objective
• Justification
• Review
• Study design
• Time scheduling of tasks
• Time budget
• Financial budget
• Recording methods and forms
 Execution
• Skills usually in your subject area

• Keep to protocol

• Record accurately

• Flexibility
 Analysis
• Check data

• Carry out appropriate analysis

• Perform diagnostic checks on model assumptions

• Follow up unexpected features of data

 Reporting

• Determine target audience

• Use appropriate reporting medium
• Follow style & detail of journal

• Writing - Practice practice practice - courses on

writing and presentation
 Writing and presentation skills
• Reports and papers
• Poster(s) – usually years 1-2
• Oral presentation(s) years 2-3
• Presentation at international meeting(s) – sometime
during period

• Use endnote for references

 Finance
• Usually research grant – about €16000 pa
• Supplement by tutoring/teaching
• PhD students generally not allowed to lecture –
some exceptions possible in final year
 You and your supervisor

• What are your supervisors’ responsibilities?

• What are your responsibilities as a research

student?
 Contrasting
perspectives…
Student Supervisor
my thesis
everything
else

everything else student’s thesis

(from A. Kelly, UCC)

 What are the responsibilities of a supervisor? I

• Giving guidance on research – usually strong

guidance in selecting topic
• maintaining contact with student
• being accessible to student when advice needed
• giving advice on scheduling of successive stages
of the work
• requesting written work as appropriate, and
providing feedback
• Arranging for the student to talk about their
research
• Facilitating extended visit to another institution
 What are the responsibilities of a supervisor? II

• writing reports on the student’s progress;

• ensuring that the student is made aware of
inadequacy of progress or of standards of work
below that generally expected;
• actively introducing the student to researchers
and events in the academic community
• informing the student of the institutional
regulations concerning the oral examination e.g.
nomination procedures for the examiners, and
appeals procedures.
(modified from The University of Reading 2004)
Responsibilities of research students?
I
i) planning the research topic and research
schedule
ii) discuss modes of guidance and feedback, and
agree a schedule of meetings
iii) take the initiative in raising problems or
difficulties
iv) maintain progress of work as agreed with
supervisor, especially presentation of written
materials in sufficient time to allow for
feedback and discussion before proceeding
Responsibilities of research students?
II

v) drafting and circulating the agenda and support

documents in advance of meetings, and drafting
and circulating the minutes of meetings
vi) keep systematic records of work completed, and
provide written progress reports;
vii) prepare thesis in good time and informing
supervisors

(modified from The University of Reading 2004)

 Seek to clarify mutual expectations
• Ineffective communication - ineffective supervision
• Supervisors are not mind readers- discuss
expectations and establish good practice ASAP
– How often does you/your supervisor expect to meet
(formally vs informally)?
– How soon do you expect feedback on written work?
– Do you prefer verbal or written feedback?
• Appointments, or open-door?
• Produce written agendas in advance of meetings
• Agree goals, tasks, changes and keep records of
meetings
 The thesis and examination

Recall features of doctoral research:

• Independence
• Originality
• Contribution to knowledge
• Suitable for publication
The crucial examination of your PhD candidacy
is that of the thesis, not the viva.

• “40% of examiners . . . said that the decision

about the thesis was made before the viva. In
74% of cases the viva served merely to confirm
the examiners’ opinions of the candidate. . .”
(Jackson and Tinkler 2001: 361)
Criteria used by examiners when assessing PhD theses
• Conceptual clarity in the design, conduct and
analysis of the research
• Intellectual appreciation of the conceptual and
theoretical basis of the research, and its
limitations and wider significance
• Coherence of argument throughout the thesis
• Appropriate engagement with the literature
• Grasp of methodology (methods of enquiry; analysis of data)
• Presentation of the thesis and compliance
with academic conventions
• Originality
• Potential for publication
(from Winter et al. 2000: 32-35)
 Authorship in scientific publications
Sample of 809 corresponding authors:
• 19% of articles had evidence of honorary authors (named authors who did
not meet authorship criteria),
• 11% had evidence of ghost authors (individuals not named as authors but
who had contributed substantially to the work)
• 2% had evidence of both (Flanagin et al. 1998).
• Therefore, about one in four articles demonstrated misapplication of
authorship criteria and inappropriate assignment of authorship, which is
‘incompatible with the principles, duties, and ethical responsibilities
involved in scientific publication’
• (from Flanagin et al. 1998)
‘Vancouver Protocol’ - minimum requirements for
authorship in biomedical journals

Authorship credit should be based only on:

• substantial contributions to conception and
design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and
interpretation of data
• drafting the article or revising it critically for
important intellectual content; and
• final approval of the version to be published.

• Whose name goes first?

 Responsible conduct in research I

• Researchers should make every effort to honestly

produce and disseminate information that is as
accurate and reliable as possible

• ‘On Being a Scientist: responsible conduct in research’

http://stills.nap.edu/readingroom/books/obas/
• http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/talks/
• http://www.chem.vt.edu/chem-ed/ethics/vinny/www_ethx.html
• http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/
 Responsible conduct in research II

Negligence typically does not involve premeditated plans to be dishonest:

• insufficient time allocated for designing rigorous studies
• lapses in reliable working methods
• insufficient reflection on the interpretation of research findings
• preventable errors from undue haste and inattention

Misconduct is characterised by premeditated and deliberate attempts to

be dishonest.

Not same as differences in interpretation or honest mistakes

 Examples of misconduct
• falsification of data
• plagiarism (the presentation of another person's
thoughts or words as though they were your
own)
• failure to declare a conflict of interests
• mismanagement of research funds
• presentation of other people’s work as one’s own
• improper allocation of credit and recognition
• breaches of ethical codes of conduct
• cover-ups of misconduct
Getting a PhD
An action plan to help manage your research, your
supervisor and your project
John A. Finn
Routledge Study Guides
 Overview:
• PhD in UCD
• Standards for research (PhD) degree
• Research - the process
• You and your supervisor
• The thesis and examination
• Responsible conduct in research
PhD in UCD – a work in progress
• 4-year structured includes 90 ECTS training
• Programme board: supervisor, 2 advisers,
• At least annual formal review
• Assessment after 1 year to continue
• Accumulate credits in first two years
• Formats of thesis – traditional and including
published papers
• Finance for 4 years?
 A good leader and supervisor:
• Fosters trust;
• Builds people rather than tears them down;
• Is supportive;
• Is consistent;
• Is caring;
• Uses time wisely;
• Is persistent to their goals;
• Is willing to compromise;
• Allows as much freedom is possible;
• Is creative.

59
 Communication Skills
• Present one idea at a time
• Keep it simple
• Make it brief
• Personalize it to the other person
• Use the right tone of voice and body language
• Get acceptance of each idea
• Respond to the emotions of the person
• Appreciate your listener’s concerns
• Encourage listeners to express themselves
 Steps to improve listening skills
• Ask questions
• Concentrate – stay focused
• Identify the main idea
• Listen for the rationale
• Listen for key words
• Organize in your mind
• Take notes
 Praise with a reason
• Mean what you say
• Balance your praise
• Immediately after the event
• Public or private
 Background to this workshop
• Supervisors’ approach to supervising research has a profound
influence on how they will supervise.
• Shared experience, there are often no right or wrong answers,
but there are a range of approaches from which we can
choose.
• Discussion, and using the Surrey and Harvard research results
will help to create that range of approaches.
• Approach to supervision can be linked to core beliefs about
what research is.
• This is only the beginning of a dialogue. If, as is likely, at the
end there are still unresolved questions, we will bring them
together and find the best way forward.
Some Influences on Supervision

• Disciplinary pedagogy • Full or part time students?

• Departmental • Experienced or
practices inexperienced students?
• Conceptual approach • International or home
of supervisor students?
• Codes of practice • PhD, professional or
• Employers/funders’ practitioner doctorate?
requirements • Supervisor/co-supervisor
 Initial questions

• As a PhD supervisor: what are the problems

that you have faced? Do they fall into any
categories?
• As a PhD student: what were the problems
that you faced? Do they fall into any
categories?
 Literature search
• Functional approach (Wisker 2005, Eley and Jennings 2005 Taylor and
Beasley 2005)

• Qualities approach (Wisker 2003a, Zuber Skerrit & Roche 2004)

• Critical thinking (Barnett 1997, Wisker 2005)
• Enculturalisation (Leonard 2001, Pearson & Brew 2002, Lave & Wenger
1991)

• Mentoring (Pearson & Kayrooz 2004, Brew 2001)

• Feminist approach (Leonard 2001)
 Research questions
• What conceptions of supervision do
supervisors hold?
• Is there any relationship between the
conceptions of supervision and the jobs that
PhD graduates subsequently undertake?
• What are the common problems faced?
• What training for supervisors, if any, is
undertaken or might be helpful
Interview questions to supervisors
• What has been your experience of supervising PhD
students? How many, how many different types of
doctoral students?
• What have your students gone on to do?
• How would you define an excellent PhD student or
thesis?
• What effective ways are there of working with your
students? Where do you begin? Where do you go
then? How often do you see them? What do you
do? What do they do?
• What problems have arisen and how have you coped
with them?
• How were you supervised when you did your PhD?
• What do you think of the conceptual models?
Interview/focus group questions to
students
• Tell me about your PhD/research
• What do you want from your supervisor?
• What do you most value getting from your
supervisor?
• What has happened when you have felt most
energised?
• Examples of problems and how you have
coped?
 A framework for concepts of research
supervision

Functional Enculturation Critical Emancipation Relationship

Thinking Development

Supervisors Rational Gatekeeping Evaluation Mentoring, Supervising

Activity progression Master to Challenge supporting by
through tasks apprentice constructivism experience,
developing a
relationship
Supervisor’s Directing, Diagnosis of Argument, Facilitation, Managing
knowledge & project deficiencies, analysis Reflection conflict
skills management coaching Emotional
intelligence
Possible Organised Role Constant Personal A good team
student Obedience modelling, inquiry, fight growth, member.
reaction Apprentice- or flight reframing Emotional
ship intelligence
 Functional approach
• “I have a weekly timetabled formal slot for them and
follow-up if they do not turn up”
• “3 months: literature search
6 months: focus fixed,
12 months transfer report completed…”
• “In the 2nd year we see them monthly and they
produce 5000 words before each meeting”
• Regular pair or small group meetings with supervisor
to present findings
 Enculturalisation
• I would feel I had failed if they did not stay in the field
• My students all know their academic grandfather
• I give my book to all my students
• Students need to know what ‘good enough’ looks like
• You need frequent meetings for international
students
• The international student especially can implement
all your corrections and think that is good enough.
• Some cultures expect you to tell them what to do
 Critical thinking
• “I avoid dependency by getting them to think about
some problems and giving them resources”
• “I want them to stand on their own feet and
challenge the thinking”
• “My tutor was not confrontational, she encouraged
me to be critical of my own ideas”
• “They need to explain to me why, what and how”
• “I ask them to email me a question about their
project every week”
• “I use ‘magic’ words to help them identify the thread
in their argument eg arguably, conversely,
unanimously, essentially, early on, inevitably etc”
 Emancipation
• “Your job as a supervisor is to get them knowing
more than you”
• “I try to get the students to take the initiative”
• “My supervisor encouraged me to read widely,
thinking critically, find examples in newspapers”
• “I try to get them to admit and confront their
problems”
• “You get a lot of satisfaction, you have facilitated
that growth in them”
 Developing a relationship
• Enthuse: You need to fire the imagination, it is
different for different students
• Altruism: My supervisor helped me with my writing
but never pressed me to publish.
• Encourage: Need to inspire and encourage them to
be brave in what they are thinking
• Recognise achievement: I wanted to call my
supervisor the moment I solved the tough maths
• Pastoral support: this was as important as
intellectual support to get me through
 Advantages and Disadvantages
Functional Enculturation Critical Emancipation Relationship
Thinking Development

Advantages Clarity Encourages Rational Personal Lifelong

Consistency standards, inquiry, growth, ability working
Progress can participation, fallacy to cope with partnerships
be monitored identity, exposed change Enhanced self
Records are community esteem
available formation

Disadvantages Rigidity when Low tolerance Denial of Toxic Potential for

confronted of internal creativity, can mentoring harassment,
with the difference, belittle or (Darling 1985) abandonment
creation of sexist, depersonalise where tutor or rejection
original ethnicised student abuses power
knowledge regulation
(Cousin &
Deepwell
2005)
 Dependence and independence
Functional Enculturation Critical Emancipation Relationship
Thinking Development

Dependence Student Student Student Student Student

needs needs to be learns the seeks depends on
explanation shown what questions to affirmation of supervisor’s
of stages to to do ask, the self-worth approval
be followed frameworks
and direction to apply
through
them
Independ- Student can Student can Student can Student Student
ence programme follow critique own autono-mous. demonstrates
own work, discipline’s work Can decide appropriate
follow own epistemolog- how to be, reciprocity
timetables ical where to go, and has
competently demands what to do, power to
independen- where to find withdraw
ly information
 Links to conceptions of research (Brew 2001,

Lee 2008)

Functional Enculturation Critical Emancipation Relationship

Thinking Development

DOMINO TRADING LAYER JOURNEY

IN THE Solving Publications, Data is Personal
FORE- problems in grants, linked existential
GROUND a linear social together issues, linked
IS: fashion networks with hidden to career
meanings

RESEARCH Process of A market Discovering A personal

IS: problem- place for hidden transformative
atising or exchanging meanings journey
solving ideas
problems
 In small groups
• Take a problem you described earlier,
or one of the case studies.
• Explore how the supervisor could
react using each approach to
supervision in turn
• Be prepared to share the group’s
findings
Problems that students face – the supervisors’ view

•Dependency
•Not admitting to problems
•Poor progress. Not understanding
the required standard of work and
showing insufficient initiative
•Supervisor not interested in topic
•Conceptual difficulties
•Differences between supervisors
Some Problems: the students views

•Loneliness
•Not enjoying the topic
•Not knowing what is expected
•Practical issues: money, lifestyle, getting hold
of the supervisor
•Ethical issues: are we being used?
•Stress (especially at transfer and viva)
•Supervisor being too prescriptive ‘my way is
the only way’
•Lack of confidence – is my work good
enough?
 Observations on training
supervisors
• Supervisors have learned most from how they
were supervised themselves
• Understanding a range of approaches is
important
• Co-supervision can be helpful if the roles are
clearly allocated
• Those who need training can be the most
affronted when the suggestion is made that
they need it
 Occupational influences
,

METHODS OF STUDENT
SUPERVISION TOPIC
department norms, previous experience, occupational
co-supervision, contacts, knowledge fertility
team supervision,
group supervision aptitude, skills,
financial aims

UNIVERSITY
SUPERVISOR’S PROCEDURES
CONCEPTIONS recruitment,
contacts, own PhD upgrading,
experience networking
financial support