Article S13.1 Developing Research Supervision Practices Weng Marc LIM Swinburne University of Technology Sarawak Campus, Malaysia wlim[at]swinburne.edu.my Suggested Citation: Lim, W. M. (2016). Developing research supervision practices. Research World, 13, Article S13.1. Retrieved from http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/S13.1 Note. This is a report on a supervisor training session titled “The Stages of PhD Supervision,” held at Swinburne Sarawak on October 26, 2016. The session was led by Professor Santina Bertone, from Swinburne Melbourne, Australia. The audience consisted of accredited supervisors from all faculties of Swinburne Sarawak. Introduction Research supervision is part and parcel of being an academic in a research-intensive university. The training session provided an overview of supervision practices across the different stages of a research student’s candidature process. The material for the training session was based on a research project in Australia that has led to the development of the Research Supervision Toolkit—the toolkit is available online. The session leader, Professor Santina Bertone was one of the Chief Investigators in that project (the other Chief Investigator was Professor Eddie Blass), which was funded by the Office of Learning and Teaching, Australia. Selected insights from the session, relevant to developing research supervision practices, are presented below. These are structured along the stages of candidature progress. Stage 1. Candidate Screening and Selection Accurate screening and selection of potential candidates is vital to the success of research supervision. In fact, some of the critical decisions are often made at this stage. Supervisors need to be able to diagnose a broad range of personal capabilities and relational strengths that potential candidates may bring to their education and development as researchers. Such a diagnosis can be done by specifying a list of criteria, such as: (a) life experience, (b) theoretical knowledge, (c) academic publications, (d) intellectual capability, (e) knowledge of research methods, (f) employment demand in the chosen field, (g) energy and enthusiasm, (h) academic and professional network, (i) project experience, (j) distance to university, (k) family or social commitments, (l) self-management capability, (m) timeliness in work delivery, and (n) availability of emotional support, among others. Subsequently, supervisors can rate the potential candidate on a 10-point scale indicating their current capability and networks, where lower ratings would indicate a need for support and development. Apart from that, supervisors will also need to evaluate whether they have the capacity to supervise the potential candidate. In particular, supervisors need to consider whether they are comfortable in supervising a student based on a list of criteria, such as whether the proposed topic falls within their research interest, whether an effective supervisory team can be formed to support the student, and whether they can commit to supervising the student. Stage 2. Early Stage of Candidature When a candidate is enrolled, supervisors may focus on two priorities: (a) developing the candidate’s knowledge and skills and (b) clarify mutual expectations (or ground rules). To develop candidate’s knowledge and skills, supervisors can offer and/or suggest appropriate alternative sources. This can be done by having an open discussion with the candidate and by having a checklist to identify areas where the candidate may require training. Most candidates require training on academic writing, oral communication, literature search, data analysis methods, research ethics, and time management. To clarify mutual expectations, supervisors ought to have an open discussion with the candidate—to agree verbally or in writing—the expectations of both parties. Among the common expectations are frequency of meetings, roles of supervisors, quality of work, ethics and integrity, communication, and workload commitment. At this early stage of candidature, supervisors may need to guide students on writing their research proposal and ethics application (if the project involves collection of primary data). For research proposals, supervisors can encourage students to begin with a broad topic and subsequently narrow it down, following a review of the existing literature in the area. Writing is often the hardest part, and therefore supervisors ought to encourage students to start writing a page to refine their research questions. This would eventually grow into the full research proposal. The key to get students to progress well in writing the research proposal is to schedule frequent meetings. For ethics applications, supervisors play an important role in refining research methods and instruments, communicating in plain language, considering the benefits and risks of conducting the research, and explaining the ways in which research findings will be communicated to the public. Stage 3. Middle and Late Stages of Candidature Often, research students experience their candidature as an emotional rollercoaster. There are ups and downs of euphoria and despair, and thus, supervisors need to be emotionally aware and prepared to offer support when needed. The session leader referred to a commonly observed “mid-candidature slump.” Effective emotional management is especially important in the middle to late stages of candidature. Supervisors can help by taking genuine interest in the life and work of candidates and also by emphasising the importance of being part of the scholarly community. Nonetheless, most supervisors are not equipped with the necessary skills in emotional management, and thus supervisors who encounter candidates with serious emotional issues should refer such candidates for professional counselling. More importantly, writing of the thesis becomes highly important in the middle and late stages of candidature. Some candidates may experience “writer’s block.” To encourage candidates to write, supervisors can consider the following: (a) asking candidates for chapter plans, (b) encouraging them to write in chunks (i.e., write small sections of 300 to 500 words to accomplish small writing goals frequently, rather than waiting for an opportunity to write large sections of the thesis at once), (c) encouraging them to send early drafts, (d) guiding students on areas where they are struggling (e.g., data analysis or interpretation of results), and (e) encouraging candidates to participate in conferences. Taking breaks if necessary and setting deadlines should also be useful to improve the productivity of candidates at this stage of candidature. Conclusion In short, research supervision is no easy task. It is getting particularly difficult due to the increasing diversity among research students and the varying expectations of contemporary research-based careers. It is the hope of the author that the report will lead to further conversations on improving supervision practices in the emerging research landscape. Acknowledgment Many thanks to Professor Santina Bertone for the insightful session and Professor D. P. Dash for the invitation to publish the report in Research World.
Xavier Institute of Management, Xavier Square, Bhubaneswar 751013, India Research World (ISSN 0974-2379) http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/Home | ||
 |