Search results

Although the international education sector is one of the significant contributors to the Australian economy, international students continue to experience various forms of social inequalities. This paper aims to focus on overseas doctoral researchers (ODRs) – candidates and graduates – and capture their experiences.

Drawing on the adaptive capacity framework, an exploratory qualitative study was carried out based on interviews with doctoral candidates (n = 6), doctoral graduates (n = 5) and supervisors (n = 4) in various Business Schools in Australian universities. Given this study’s exploratory and interpretive nature, the research question was deliberately broad: what insights can be generated for key stakeholders by capturing the experiences of ODRs in Australia through the lens of adaptive capacity?

Findings indicate that financial pressure, social exclusion and cultural bias were the three main challenges ODRs had to overcome; female ODRs perceived that supervisors and faculties often overlooked the mental health aspects; and better pedagogy of research supervision, institutional support and national policies are needed to develop adaptive ODRs.

If ODRs are to become an integral part of the knowledge economy, key stakeholders need to focus on support mechanisms for these researchers. That way, Australian universities can not only improve their image of treating international students only as a part of the revenue flow but also enhance the educational experiences of ODRs and set them up for future success.

The contribution of this paper is twofold. First, it demonstrates the utility of the adaptive capacity lens to capture the experiences of ODRs. Second, it discusses research implications for the three key stakeholders: supervisors, higher education institutions and the government.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on pedagogy as a crucial element in postgraduate research undertakings, implying active involvement of both student and supervisor in process of teaching and learning.

Drawing on Australian higher degree research supervision practice to illustrate their argument, the authors take issue with reliance on traditional Oxbridge conventions as informing dominant practices of supervision of postgraduate research studies and suggest pedagogy as intentional and systematic intervention that acknowledges the problematic natures of relationships between teaching, learning, and knowledge production as integral to supervision and research studies.

The authors examine issues of discursive practice and the problematic nature of power differentials in supervisor‐supervisee relationships, and the taken‐for‐grantedness of discursive practice of such relationships. The authors do this from the perspective of the student involved in higher degree research programs, a departure from the bulk of the literature that has as its focus the perspective of the supervisor and/or the institution.

The paper examines the perspective of the student involved in higher degree research programs, a departure from the bulk of the literature that has as its focus the perspective of the supervisor and/or the institution.

Research reveals very little about how the supervision of social studies student teachers ought to be enacted. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

Based on the broader arguments for the democratic purposes of social studies, the author argues for the development of the democratic capacities of teacher citizens by creating deliberative and dialogic spaces in social studies field-based teacher education.

Four conceptual dimensions of dialogic pedagogy in the supervision of social studies student teachers are explored: questioning, listening, negotiation, and self-critique.

Because supervision of student teachers is a pedagogical interaction, a pedagogy of social studies field-based teacher education must be grounded in dialogue and deliberation.

This chapter examines a recently launched initiative for developing institutional leadership for scholarly approaches to and the Scholarship of Graduate Student Supervision (SoGSS) at the University of British Columbia (UBC). This initiative is led by the Dean, Associate Dean, and former Associate Dean of the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies and is supported by a team of National Teaching Fellows and a graduate student. It involves a customized graduate student supervision (GSS) leaders’ cohort within the International Faculty SoTL Leadership Program at UBC. The initiative arose from institutional concerns about quality assurance and strategic supports for the enhancement of GSS in UBC’s multidisciplinary research-intensive context. The following were noted: (1) widespread discrepancies in the ways that GSS (sometimes referred to as mentoring) is being taken up and exercised across campus; (2) lack of strategic leadership for GSS within units and related professional development initiatives; and (3) inadequate faculty assessment and evaluation protocols (e.g., formative for professional development purposes or summative for tenure, promotion and reappointment purposes) for discipline-specific GSS practices.

This paper aims to respond to the need for a model of doctoral supervision that can capture and represent the focus, range and complexity of instructional intentions, practices and possibilities.

The study draws on the substantive literature on supervision and changing doctoral programs in the Fine Arts and relatively new empirical findings about supervision and learning. The authors posit a holistic model of supervision ranging across micro–macro and product–person dimensions. The model is further explained and illustrated using four supervisor cases in Fine Arts.

The model offers a heuristic for supervisors to reflect on and identify existing emphases, alignments and integrative possibilities to better understand the complexities of Fine Arts supervisory practices.

There is a dearth of research that addresses how doctoral supervisors perceive and articulate their roles and breadth of responsibilities in light of new programs and changing sectoral expectations.

This paper is about action learning and the pedagogy of professional doctorates. The purpose of this paper is to explore the pedagogical problems of the relatively new professional doctorates and consider whether action learning offers potential solutions.

This conceptual paper seeks to answer the question: how good is the fit between the learning processes of action learning and the learning goals of professional doctorates?

The main conclusions of the paper are that action learning can support the learning of students enroled on professional doctorates by helping them realise the following three key learning outcomes, namely, the capacity to contribute to the advancement of knowledge, that is relevant to professional practice; their own personal and professional capabilities as practitioners; and their capacity to bring about change that directly enhances professional practice, i.e. they can make a direct contribution to professional practice, e.g. through some successful project that they undertake.

While this paper is not based on research, the main implication is that action learning can offer a valuable pedagogic approach in supporting the learning of professional doctoral candidates towards their goal of making an original contribution to the advancement of professional practice.

A second implication is the need for many of those university academics responsible for leading and managing professional doctorates to become more familiar with the theory and practice of action learning. A third implication is the appreciation of the need to weigh up cost against the benefits of using action learning as a pedagogic process on professional doctorates.

This conceptual paper is original as it explores the fit of action learning with pedagogic issues of professional doctorates.

Supervision is considered the signature pedagogy and after direct client practice it is rated as the number one learning and development method by practitioners. However, as we set out in this chapter, the relationship between supervision and client outcomes is not a strong one. Drawing on the use of routine outcome data, we demonstrate how clinical supervision can be improved when both practitioner and supervisor demonstrate an attitude of humility and a willingness to learn from the data they collect. Using these data to enhance supervision by improving client outcomes and to inform deliberate practice (DP) is the hall mark of the effective twenty-first century practitioner and supervisor.

In this chapter, the author critically examines the deeply entrenched practices and theories within counselor education, revealing their roots in historically dominant, Eurocentric, and often racially oppressive assumptions. This study brings to light the pervasive impact of these traditional approaches, illuminating their role in perpetuating racial oppression and disparities in mental health care. The author presents a compelling argument for adopting Critical Race Theory (CRT) as an effective pedagogical and clinical practice framework in the counseling profession, a step toward its much-needed liberation. CRT's tenets are examined as a robust alternative, promoting socially just outcomes in counseling and psychotherapy. The article highlights CRT's capacity to address the well-established relationship between racism, white supremacy, and minority mental health. It proposes a groundbreaking model for praxis, predicated on CRT, which holds potential not only to challenge and disrupt oppressive structures but also to pave the way for the liberation of both the oppressed and the oppressor. This seminal work prompts a re-envisioning of counselor education, asserting a call for a transformative shift toward a liberation-based, social justice pedagogy.

The purpose of this paper is to share the reflections of a group of five academics who started supervising practice‐based doctoral students at a similar time in the same institution.

The supervisors engaged in a collaborative research process themselves, exploring their supervision practices, due in part to the relatively limited literature available in the field, and in part as a support mechanism to help them understand what they were doing.

As the first students have now completed, the learning from taking students through the cycle from start to finish for the first time is also now complete in itself. While the supervisors continue to learn both from and within the supervision process itself, that initial experience of supervising doctoral students is now complete and in many ways the doctoral development process of the students themselves.

This paper offers insight into the doctoral development process from the supervisor's perspective, and offers reflections on the supervision process itself, as well as insight into the difficulties that can be encountered when researching your own practice.

The paper aims to describe the application of two key service quality frameworks for improving the delivery of postgraduate research supervision. The services quality frameworks are used to identify key areas of overlap between services marketing practice and postgraduate supervision that can be used by the supervisor to improve research supervision outcomes for the student.

The paper is a conceptual and theoretical examination of the two streams of literature that proposes a supervision gap model based on the services gap literature, and the application of services delivery frameworks of co‐creation and service quality.

Services marketing literature can inform the process of designing and delivering postgraduate research supervision by clarifying student supervisor roles, setting parameters and using quality assurance frameworks for supervision delivery. The five services quality indicators can be used to examine overlooked areas of supervision delivery, and the co‐creation approach of services marketing can be used to empower student design and engaged in the quality of the supervision experience.

As a conceptual paper based on developing a theoretical structure for applying services marketing theory into the research supervision context, the paper is limited to suggesting potential applications. Further research studies will be necessary to test the field implementation of the approach.

The practical implications of the paper include implementation suggestions for applying the supervisor gaps for assessing areas of potential breakdown in the supervision arrangement.

The paper draws on two diverse areas of theoretical work to integrate the experience, knowledge and frameworks of commercial services marketing into the postgraduate research supervision literature.