Search results

In this paper the authors seek to argue that doctoral supervision is one type of human resource development relationship in higher education (HE), and that this relationship may be close or distanced, and involve technical and social support. The paper aims to highlight the seldom‐discussed aspects of power and emotion within doctoral supervision, with specific focus on the feedback process, suggesting that students and supervisors may not be adequately developed for their roles.

The authors conducted two small cumulative studies in the UK, involving a small focus group and a national survey of students and supervisors. The focus of the first study is to elucidate potentially influential variables in the supervisory relationship. The second study builds on emergent themes relating to forms of supervision (dimensions, structure and support) with specific focus on manifestations of power and emotion.

The focus group findings exemplify the power and emotion that pervades doctoral research. Key survey findings relating to power within the doctoral relationship suggest that students perceived their supervisors as having less power than themselves. With respect to emotion, the findings suggest a low level of emotion management on the part of students, who are unaware of displaying or even experiencing their emotions. As the most frequent reason for meeting, students and supervisors need to see feedback as being positive for self‐development, but also need to be aware of the power and emotion dimensions of this sensitive aspect of doctoral supervision.

Although both studies were small, the authors' findings do contribute to developing a more sophisticated understanding of the forms, power and emotion of doctoral supervision. However, further research is required to identify whether these issues are pertinent to UK students and supervisors alone, or whether they transcend national cultures and higher education systems.

The research finds that supervisors appear to learn about supervision through reflecting upon how they were supervised as students. This raises important issues for HRD in higher education for staff development. It also brings into focus how both students and supervisors are developed in recognising and dealing with their emotions, identifying and controlling shifting power dynamics, giving and receiving feedback and managing their evolving relationship.

Few studies have explored the power and emotion of doctoral supervision, yet dealing with these requires academic staff and student development.

Purpose – To outline the role of the group supervision model in postgraduate training, especially its advantages in respect of research involving industry sponsors. Design/methodology/approach – The paper considers the various categories of supervision and the pivotal role played by the supervisor. It analyses indicators of supervisor effectiveness in four major categories including supervisory style, the supervisor competence and supervisor characteristics and attitudes. Finally, it discusses how universities have worked on student attitudinal and skill problems through the provision of postgraduate training courses and changes to the supervisory system. A number of group supervisory practice models are described and the role and function of a supervisor are considered. Findings – The quality of postgraduate study is not purely a question of supervision methodology and motivation but hinges also, but not exclusively, on institutional admission procedures and policies, faculty/school administration policies as well as assistance and infra structure that is provided by faculty/school to supervisors and students, including financial assistance, access to child care, pastoral care, computing, library, office space, phone access, access to secretarial support, provision of research seminars and presentations, funding for library searches, conferences, travel, fieldwork, photocopying, and opportunities for casual work within the school. Research limitations/implications – The paper acknowledges that current supervision of postgraduate research students is deficient in many cases, but cannot provide, for ethical reasons, examples of bad practice. It does acknowledge that problems exist manifesting themselves in inadequate supervision, emotional and psychological problems in the student body, communication problems between supervisors and supervisees, knowledge deficiencies in the student body with the ultimate effect of late completions and low retention rates. Practical implications – The paper shows that universities must work towards improved linkages to ensure that they can take advantage of partnership opportunities. Originality/value – The paper has identified approaches to panel supervision and outlines the role of the industry partnership model. It is helpful to both students and supervisors trying should to determine under what research arrangement they conduct their research.

This paper presents a new constructivist model of knowledge development in a case study that illustrates how a group of postgraduate students defined and evaluated effective postgraduate supervision. This new model is based on “personal construct theory” and “repertory grid technology” which is combined with interviews and group discussion. It is argued that this approach leads to a more meaningful interpretation of results and facilitates formative evaluation and professional development of supervisors. In this case study we discuss details of our evaluation method and its benefits and limitations. We explain how this approach enables both supervisors and students to participate actively in research and development activities, to develop their own constructs or theories of effective supervision, and to communicate their suggestions for improvement. Further applications of this constructivist model to postgraduate supervision practice and to research in higher education are suggested.

The paper explores the extent to which degree‐based postgraduate training programmes contribute to the development of individual skills and careers in agricultural science as well as towards institutional capacity for national agricultural research in Africa. In the case of the International Livestock Research Institute’s Graduate Fellowship Programme it was concluded that advanced agricultural science training in Africa provides a vital process of human and institutional development. The results of this study indicate the success of degree‐based training in terms of achieving improved gender equity, rapid employment, and a high rate of return to the country of origin. These results stand out against the “brain drain” commonly associated with capacity building in national agricultural research systems (NARS). The paper recommends strategies to be adopted by ILRI and its partners for future degree training and capacity building in sub‐Saharan Africa.

This chapter provides an overview of the challenges, opportunities, and successes facing contemporary doctoral programs. The authors outline the changing dynamics of doctoral studies, including the various degrees that are associated with doctoral programs and the changing demographics of doctoral students. Drawing from aspects of situated learning theory, the authors position the chapters in this volume in relation to learning communities and communities of practice in the ways that reimagine and re-invigorate traditional models of doctoral education.

Julian Barling received his PhD in 1979 from the University of the Witwatersrand (South Africa) and is currently associate dean with responsibility for the graduate and research programs. Julian is the author/editor of several books, including Employment, Stress and Family Functioning (1990, Wiley) and The Psychology of Workplace Safety (1999, APA). He is senior editor of the Handbook of Work Stress (2005, Sage) and the Handbook of Organizational Behavior (2008, Sage), and he is the author of well over 150 research articles and book chapters. Julian was formerly the editor of the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. In 2002, Julian received the National Post's “Leaders in Business Education” award and Queen's University's Award for Excellence in Graduate Student Supervision in 2008. He is a fellow of the Royal Society of Canada, SIOP, APS, and the European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology. He is currently involved in research on leadership, work stress, and workplace aggression.

This paper presents and describes an outcome-oriented dissertation study model called “PROD²UCT”, designed explicitly for students engaged in construction engineering and related subjects research.

The model is grounded in theory, underpinned by extant literature and reinforced with professional domain expertise.

PROD²UCT identifies seven key stages in outcome-oriented dissertation study: pick, recognise, organise, document and draft, undertake, consolidate and tell. These are described along with practical considerations for their effective implementation.

The model’s primary influences stem from “best practice”, experiential knowledge, pedagogical ideals and academic views/values. Given this, it is acknowledged that “representation” and “inference” are typically governed by “subjectivity” (which naturally differs from person-to-person).

Originality is threefold: PROD²UCT encourages students to consider the “end” before the “beginning”; it serves as a road-map offering guidance at seven key chronological stages; finally, it is specifically designed to be outcome-oriented. The latter requires intended dissertation outcomes to align with evidence, research design decisions and implementation methods.

Measuring the performance of academic departments received little attention compared to other industries due to their complex nature and difficulty in measuring their outputs. However, measures of performance are needed to assess whether they meet their set objectives and foster an environment of continuous improvement. The objective of this paper is to develop a performance measurement system for educational institutions. It outlines the properties of adequate performance measures and the steps for developing such measures in an educational environment. Three types of performance measures are proposed. These are outcomes, inputs and process measures. Suggestions are made to select the most appropriate and relevant performance measures pertinent to academic departments’ goals and objectives. Also the need, relevance and implementation issues in the context of the Saudi Arabian educational system has been discussed and highlighted in the paper.

Entrepreneurship education is being taught to undergraduates in tertiary institutions and fresh graduates in youth programmes to encourage start-ups and create employment as a strategy to stem youth unemployment. As such, entrepreneurship education programmes are expected to include rigorous processes of programme design, implementation and evaluation so as to achieve changes in behaviour, attitude and action of participants measureable in terms of start-up and jobs created. Two entrepreneurship education programmes implemented in Nigeria are evaluated to ascertain the level of effectiveness in design, implementation and evaluation and the outcomes in terms of start-ups and employment created. Research methods adopted in the two programmes combine observation techniques with content analyses, action research in case study and focus group interviews. In addition, test-retest techniques in a quasi-experimental design, with a structured questionnaire is adopted in programme number two only. The findings are that while it is suspected that the design stage is jumped in programme number one, in programme two, the design is poorly done. Implementation is ineffective in the two programmes because objectives did not arise from programme design as they ought to and evaluation methods are inappropriate and so ineffective. The recommendations include review of the design of the two programmes to generate appropriate and measurable objectives; adopting implementation strategies that will achieve the measurable objectives generated from revised programme designs and adopting appropriate evaluation techniques that has capacity to measure outcomes and impact in addition to outputs.