ICPD-3 Workshop

Florence, 2nd April 2012

Design and Delivery of Research Supervisor Training

for Professional Doctorates

Gill Clarke, Oxford University, UK<gill.clarke@gtc.ox.ac.uk>

Professor Tony Fell, University of Bradford, UK<a.f.fell@bradford.ac.uk>

Dr Annette Fillery-Travis, Middlesex University, UK<a.fillery-travis@mdx.ac.uk>

Research Supervisor Training for Professional Doctorates

• Context Significant growth of Professional Doctorates in UK Drivers for training/development of Research Supervisors

• Principles of research supervisor development• Professional Doctorate programme structures• Doctoral research phases, supervisory styles & coaching• The Learning Contract & managing expectations• Key areas of supervision

Resources – Professional & research skills – Writing skills – Meetings – Completion

• Examination issues• Revising research degrees chapter in UK Quality Code• Discussion – Reflection on experience

Context – 1

• In the world of work outside academia there is a clear need for research up to Doctoral level

• PhD not always perceived to offer requisite professional & transferable skills for employment outside academia

• Professional Doctorate – significant growth in UK: Facilitates development of research skills in

the world of work Opportunity for development of practitionersConfers status as a researcher

Consistent with Life-long Learning agendasFulfils legitimate career aspirations

inc. Education, Business, Healthcare, Law, Engineering …

Context – 2

The Professional Doctorate aims to:• Fulfil the essential requirements of any doctorate:

Original contribution to scholarshipPublishable researchWork of the candidate is their own independent researchCandidate defends and supports the Thesis in a Viva

• Produce research and professional competences that are broadly equivalent to a regular PhD

Principal differences: Orientation towards the world of work Emphasis on the reflective practitioner

• Facilitate development as an independent researcher and as a reflective practitioner in the professional arena

Context – 3

• Practice-based Doctorate also fulfils comparable needs in Arts – Design – Architecture – Theatre – Music – Dance … Emphasis on the creative context – Exhibition, Performance …

• Broad range of Prof Docs in Australia, UK, USA since 1980’s EdD, DBA, DEng, DProf, DClinPsy, DHealthSci & related areas…

• Drivers for Research Supervisor development Need to ensure consistency of student experience of doctoral

research Expectations of employers of work-based candidates Applies to both Internal and External Supervisors Recommended in National Codes of Practice (QAA) National QAA Audit …

Principles of Research Supervisor Development

• Generic programme facilitates inter-disciplinary learning

• Programme structured to cover doctoral training in sequence from recruitment to the Viva voce

• Create maximum opportunity for Supervisors to share experiences

• Key materials selected to ensure minimum of short PPt presentations

• Case Studies focus discussion in small groups*• Encourage Supervisors to develop their OWN model of

research supervision from the materials discussed

*Group membership should be balanced to represent all sectors

*Typical Case Studies – 1

• Mismatch of expectations Conflicting advice: Jack & Jill / Ali (Y1) Arrogance & the 7-day week syndrome:

Hamish & Anita (Y1)

• Neglect – “Visiting Professor syndrome” Stella & Amy (Y1)

• Neglect – ineffective supervision by Work-based supervisor Percival & Danny (Y2/3)

• Conflict of Interest Huw & Jane (Y3)

*Typical Case Studies – 2

• Financial pressures Jack & Jon / Freddie (Y3)

• Plagiarism Inadvertent: Pietro & Li (Y3) Non-inadvertent: Mary & Bernardo (Y4) Non-inadvertent: Nic & Jenny (Post-Doc)

• Problematic PhD Exam Prof Charles & Dr Eva / Steve (Y3)

* Developed at University of Bradford over the past 12 years

Programme Structures – 1

The structure of Professional Doctorates & Practice-based Doctorates varies with the UK HEI:

• Nature of structured training & experiential training

• Balance of time between research training versus research activity

• Nature and quantum of research outputThesis / Dissertation – length Artefact (& Thesis) – originality Performance (& Thesis) – aesthetic features

• Mode of Assessment

Programme Structures – 2

Professional Doctorates typically involve 3 parts:• [A] Directed study – predefined structured training

Typically modular & credit rated (ECTS) – validated / audited Substantial Portfolio of original data give evidence of competences Portfolio assessed to evaluate candidate’s performance

• [B] Research programme Substantial research programme focused on professional practice Research may comprise one theme – or multiple linked themes In the UK research is not subject to credit-rating Thesis is often shorter than the PhD thesis – because PD is

balanced by extensive Portfolio compiled during [A]

• [C] Assessment of Thesis and Examination by Viva voce

Programme Structures – 3

Model 1 Model 2

[A]Directed Study

and Assessment

[B]Research and

Writing of Thesis

[C]Assessment of

Thesis & Viva

[A]Directed Study

and Assessment

[B]Research and

Writing of Thesis

[C]Assessment of

Thesis & Viva

Examination

Board Decision

Phases of Doctoral Research & Supervisory Styles

• Structured training & experiential professional skills

• Research activities fall into 3 Phases: Research Phase 1: Getting started Research Phase 2: Moving forward

– The “Productive Phase” Research Phase 3: Completion

– Completing the programme; Writing up the Thesis;– Examination by Viva voce

• Supervisor develops adaptive, interactive style for each phase

• Phases map onto the Blanchard-Hersey model

- Directing- Phase 1

-Mentoring-Phases 1&2

- Coaching- Phase 2

- Delegating- Phases 2&3

1

2

4

3

SUPP

ORT

IVE

BEH

AVIO

UR

DIRECTIVE BEHAVIOUR

High

HighLow

Supervisory Styles – Directive / Supportive behaviourduring a typical Professional Doctorate

[A.F. Fell & A. Fillery-Travis, 2011; adapted from Blanchard & Hersey,1986]

Supervisory Styles

• Every supervisor has their own preferred style

• An effective supervisor adapts their style interactively for each individual candidate – Depending on:

the candidate’s situation & needstheir innate ability their stage of academic development

with care to maintain equity among other research candidates

• The Blanchard model clarifies the changing relationship between research candidate and supervisor over time For talented researchers the supervisory style

quickly moves to quadrants 3 & 4 coaching-delegating Whereas … for some candidates the supervisory style remains

in quadrants 1 & 2 strongly directive• Bottom line: No supervisory style is always right –

“One size doesn’t fit all ”

Supervisor as Coach

‘ To support project work now is to find ways of assisting students to develop the expertise needed in any given situation… There is little appropriate didactic role in transmitting knowledge.’

Boud and Costley (2007)

Typical PD candidate

• Mature (typically 35-50)

• Well established at work, advanced practitioner

• May have few traditional qualifications to access HE – or could have many!

• Often has considerable pre-understanding (formal and informal learning)

• How do you approach your interaction with them?

The Learning Contract – 1

• A ‘Psychological Contract’ already operates – so better to make it explicit

• Initial meeting with supervisory team is key• Clarify practicalities such as how you meet, when,

how often, local arrangements• Assess candidate aspirations/motivation for research• Identify the expectations you have of the candidate –

and they of you • Explore their needs as learners

eg for overseas candidates – English as a Foreign Language

• Clarify formal review processes & requirements

The Learning Contract – 2

• Clarify Prof Doc training / modular requirements • Outline the intended research programme

Big picture – locate project in wider programmeDevelop initial plans jointly (eg literature

background)Later during directed study (Part 1) identify

milestones and research objectives – short/medium term

• Support engagement and ownership of research programme by candidate

• Revisit the learning contract periodically – and ask for feedback for yourself

Key Areas of Supervision – 1 Resources etc

• Identify ResourcesFacilities – research spaceLibrary / internal & external resources IT / access to PC, software eg SPSS, N-Viva Other resources – equipment, specialists (eg Stats)

• Other issues Induction into research – HEI level, Group level Induction into Ethics for research areaClarify IPR issuesProtocols for publication Identify role of Independent Advisor (if appointed)

Key Areas of Supervision – 2 Skills Development

• Professional skills:Review experiential training in the Prof Doc arena

eg relevant research methodologies/skills

• Structured training in generic & transferable skills Training Needs Analysis (TNA) Explore / assess / recognise specific skills Jointly agree on skills required for research Review usefulness of training – cyclical process each year –

repeat TNA Identify additional skills development requirements

• Keep records of training received• Many directed study programmes (Part 1) deliver

appropriate skills for research

Key Areas of Supervision – 3 Meetings / Review

• Supervisor/s and candidate meet on an agreed basisJoint responsibility to define minimum contactRegular / ad hoc or both?ProfessionalismFrequency varies throughout programme

• Records of meetings essential Candidate keeps record of all planned

meetings Empowerment of student – owns the recordsAssessment of understanding of agreed goals

Prompt, constructive feedback to student• Annual research progress review – Progress Report

Key Areas of Supervision – 4 Writing & Presentation Skills

• Continual development of the student’s writing style through:Regular reportsWrite sections of Thesis as research progressesDepartmental / Group seminar presentationsShort publications

eg WBL e-journal Abstracts for Conferences

Conference paper/s – Oral or Poster presentations If appropriate plan a Journal publication

real or aspirational

• Avoid the Year 2/3 stall – psychological or otherwise!

Key Areas of Supervision – 5 Completion

• Confirm Thesis is “owned” by the candidate • Clear any sensitive issues with industrial/external partner• Give supportive advice on completion / timely submission• Encourage candidate to read cognate theses• Annual Progress Reports often the starting point• Best practice – encourage student to:

Write up sections as research progresses Integrate sections to compile draft ThesisDraft / publish short paper/s as work continues

Gives independent peer review supportExternal validation for research programme

• Develop the “generic thesis planner” – planning device

Generic Thesis Planner – 1

Generic Thesis Planner – 2

Examination issues – 1 • Selection of Examiners – Internal and External – can

present difficulties due to requirements for additional professional expertise

• Requirements: Independent of student work – No conflicts of interestBalanced for examination experience and expertiseShould be available, fair & reasonable.Chair of Board ensures fair play – represents HEIStudent usually invited to comment on proposed

Examiners before final proposals are made• Examination process

Examiners file independent pre-Viva ReportsSupervisor/s may attend Viva voce – but only if student

agrees

Examination issues – 2• Best practice – preparation of the candidate:

Encourage candidate to memorise & practise a short synopsis of the whole research

Alternatively – PowerPoint presentation often required

Candidate has a ‘Practice run’ or ‘Mock Viva’ with Supervisor / colleague

Candidate compiles correction list tabled at the start• Best practice – conduct of Viva voce:

Supportive atmosphereMany examiners start by asking for a short summary

Builds up candidate’s confidence very effectivelyExploration of relevant background to researchRigorous, fair discussion of contribution to knowledgeSupportive role of Internal Examiner, as appropriate

Examination issues – 3Viva outcomes:• Examiners nearly always file joint Reports

on Thesis and also on Viva • Minor Corrections are recommended most often (> 80%)

With a list of recommended amendments

• Major Corrections/Resubmission recommended less often With a list of recommended amendments + possible Viva

• MPhil or Masters in Professional Practice An option if Thesis and Viva are not of doctoral standard

• Disagreement of Examiners Separate Reports clarifying nature of disagreement Additional (adjudicating) External Examiner may be appointed

Research Supervisor Training for Professional Doctorates

• Context Significant growth of Professional Doctorates in UK Drivers for training/development of Research Supervisors

• Principles of research supervisor development• Professional Doctorate programme structures• Doctoral research phases, supervisory styles & coaching• The Learning Contract & managing expectations• Key areas of supervision

Resources – Professional & research skills – Writing skills – Meetings – Completion

• Examination issues• Revising research degrees chapter in UK Quality Code• Discussion – Reflection on experience

3rd International Conference on Professional Doctorates (ICPD)

1-3 April 2012, Florence

Revising the research degrees chapter of the UK

Quality Codeor

‘Re-inventing the wheel’?

Gill ClarkeA definition of re-inventing the wheel:

‘To recast something familiar or old into a different form’ (unattributed)

QAA Code of Practice 1999Section 1: Research Degree Programmes(Version 1)

QAA Code of Practice2004 - Section 1: Research Degree Programmes(Version 2)

1999 to 2004: PERIOD OF RAPID DEVELOPMENT

2004 TO 2012: PERIOD OF SLOWER CHANGE

QAA UK Quality Code 2012 - Research Degrees (Version 3)

Summary of main changes to Research Degrees chapter

• Change of title• Introduction• The research environment

(indicator 4)• Selection, admission and

induction of students (indicators 5-8)

• Supervision (indicators 9-12)• Development of research and

other skills (indicators 14-15)

The research environment (indicator 4)

• Added sentence to take account of independent providers

• Added reference to work settings and work-based supervision

• Updated knowledge exchange section

• Replaced Joint Skills Statement with Researcher Development Statement

• Added a section about collaborative provision

Supervision (indicators 9-12)

• More emphasis on continuing professional development for supervisors

• Change to indicator 10 re supervisory teams and highlighted roles in support network

• Indicator 11: suggested format of written guidance and strengthened explanatory text

How do HE providers facilitate good supervision?

• Appoint the right people as supervisors and support their development (I.9)

• Encourage good communications between supervisors and students and multiple sources of support for both (I.10)

• Spell out supervisors’ and students’ roles and responsibilities (I.11)

• Ensure supervisors have enough ‘space’ to be effective (I.12)

What students appreciate from their supervisors…

• Genuine interest in their research• An intuitive approach that adapts to changing student

needs over time• Engagement with and constructively critical and

timely feedback on their work• Relationships that are friendly but not too informal• Clarity about procedures – being well-informed

Updates and questions from consultation

• Is the supervision of professional doctorates adequately covered?

• Does the (main) supervisor have to be doing current research?

• Indicator 10: is it stronger/clearer?• Importance of not over-burdening supervisors,

especially by using teams• More guidance on work-based supervisors and

supervision?• Why don’t we use numbers to regulate e.g. number

of students per supervisor?

Current Issues

• Prof Docs currently showing substantial growth in UK• Supervisor training for Prof Docs relatively new in UK• New UK Quality Code supports training internal &

external supervisors• Most candidates register part-time

– Problems with funding – unhelpful Research Council policies– Employers / Research partners may give support for staff

development– Difficulties with long-term / long-distance supervision

• Proliferation of Prof Doc titles• Debate on comparability of standards of Prof Doc

vis-à-vis traditional PhD

Reflection on Experience

• Comments on generic model for PD supervisor training?

• National / international experience of training and response of PD Supervisors?

• Developing PD Case Studies for training scenarios – need for a data bank?

• Training needs for Supervisors of Practice-based Doctorates?

• …