Council for Research Education SVERIGES LANTBRUKSUNIVERSITET Supporting a culture of research and education 8 th November 2011 Dr Anne Lee

Trends in doctoral education Identifying ‘doctorateness’ Recent developments in the UK relating to learning outcomes Creating appropriate milestones

Trends in doctoral education (Taylor 2009) 1.Massification 2.Globalisation 3.Diversification 4.Commodification 5.“McDonaldisation” 6.Regulation 7.Capitalisation 8.Multiplication

Implications for supervisory practice Group supervision Supporting diversity Meeting institutional demands for completion Following polices and procedures Generic skills and careers advice Meeting student expectations

What do students want? Identifying student motivation, objectives and needs FunctionalEnculturationCritical thinking EmancipationRelationship Development What students might be seeking Certainty Clear signposts and learning outcomes Evidence of Progress Belonging Direction Career opportunities Role models Ability to think in new ways Ability to analyse, to recognise flaws in arguments Self Awareness Autonomy Self actualisation Friendship Nurturing Equality Beliefs about how people learn Absorbing Regurgitating Emulating Replicating Theorise Analyse Discovery Constructivism Being affirmed ValuesPerformativityBelongingRigourAutonomyLove Agape

Identifying ‘doctorateness’ UK Framework for Higher Education Dublin Descriptors Researcher Development Framework Stepping stones to the Doctorate

Dublin Descriptors: The Third Cycle Qualifications are awarded to students who: have demonstrated a systematic understanding of a field of study and mastery of the skills and methods of research associated with that field; have demonstrated the ability to conceive, design, implement and adapt a substantial process of research with scholarly integrity; have made a contribution through original research that extends the frontier of knowledge by developing a substantial body of work, some of which merits national or international refereed publication; are capable of critical analysis, evaluation and synthesis of new and complex ideas; can communicate with their peers, the larger scholarly community and with society in general about their areas of expertise; can be expected to be able to promote, within academic and professional contexts, technological, social or cultural advancement in a knowledge based society;

The Researcher Development Framework Major new approach to researcher development Builds the UK research base Develops world-class researchers Enhances the personal, professional and career development of researchers Developed through UK-wide interviews with successful researchers in a range of disciplines Led by Vitae in collaboration with the HE sector and other stakeholders

The Researcher Development Framework Framework of the knowledge, behaviour and attributes of successful researchers Enables self-assessment of strengths and areas for further development Common framework across institutions in the UK Universal language for communicating researcher capabilities

Using the RDF Researchers: identify strengths and priorities for professional and career development Managers and supervisors of researchers fundamental to planning researcher development Staff supporting researchers in HEIs underpins strategies for researcher development Policy makers, employers and other stakeholders realising researchers’ potential for all sectors of the economy and society

4 domains 12 sub-domains 63 descriptors

PLACING QUESTIONS FOR ASSESSING A THESIS Adapted from Trafford V and Leshem S (2008) Stepping Stones to Achieving your Doctorate: by focussing on your viva from the start. Maidenhead. McGraw Hill/Open University Press INNOVATION AND DEVELOPMENT (High) SCHOLARSHIP AND INTERPRETATION (Low) Practice of research Demonstrating doctorateness (High) Technology of the thesis Theoretical perspectives (Low)

PLACING QUESTIONS FOR ASSESSING A THESIS Adapted from Trafford V and Leshem S (2008) Stepping Stones to Achieving your Doctorate: by focussing on your viva from the start. Maidenhead. McGraw Hill/Open University Press INNOVATION AND DEVELOPMENT (High) SCHOLARSHIP AND (Low) INTERPRETATION Research questions Choice of topic Location of study Research design and operational fieldwork issues (also Defending doctorateness Contribution to knowledge Conceptualising findings Synthesising findings Developing conceptual frameworks Establishing links, concepts (High) Resolving practical research problems Content of the thesis Structure of the thesis Identifying the research approach and the paradigms Implications of findings Awareness of wider literature Familiarity with relevant literature (Low)

Some typical examination questions 1.Why did you choose this topic for your doctorate? 2.How did you arrive at your conceptual framework? 3.How did you design your research? 4.How would you justify your choice of methodology? 5.Why did you decide to use XYZ as your main instrument(s)? 6.How did you select your respondents/material/area? 7.How did you arrive at your conceptual conclusions? 8.How generalisable are your findings and why? 9.What is your contribution to knowledge? 10.We would like you to critique your thesis for us 11.What are you going to do after you gain your doctorate? 12.Is there anything else you could tell us about your thesis which you have not had the opportunity to tell us during the viva? Pp20-22 Trafford and Leshman (2008)

How to prepare the student for their assessment FunctionalEnculturationCritical Thinking EmancipationRelationship Development Ensure that the assessment criteria are clear. Ensure the timetable is clear. Give the assessors all the information they need. Enable formative assessment and feedback in good time. Encourage students to pre-assess each other’s work against the assessment criteria. Get previous students to talk about their experience of the assessment Rehearse the process with a group so they can hear each other’s questions Explore the implications of the assessment criteria early on. Get the students to identify the questions they might be asked. Rehearse the process and reflect on it afterwards Involve the students in the design of appropriate assessment criteria. Help the students to pre- assess their own work and identify how secure they felt about each judgement. Rehearse the process Ensure that no student could believe that a personal relationship with any other student might prejudice the assessor’s judgement. Ensure that students feel that you recognise the amount of work they have put in, as well as the results they get.

Creating appropriate milestones? Regular supervision meetings Completion of summary forms of supervision discussion Log books signed off Agenda for supervision meetings planned a year ahead Self assessment on progress towards meeting learning outcomes presented to supervisor Presentations to colleagues Agreed deadlines for papers to be written – First draft – Soliciting feedback – Submissions Mock defence

RDF Links and resources RDF: RDS: RDF profiles: Downloadable CPD tool: Contact:

References Dublin Descriptors (2004) Higher Education Funding Council. (October 2011/33) PhD study. Trends and Profiles Higher Education Academy: Postgraduate Research Experience Survey Higher Education Academy Professional Standards Framework Lee A (2012) Successful Research Supervision. Abingdon. Routledge. QAA (2004) Code of Practice for Postgraduate Research Programmes QAA (2008) Framework for Higher Education Qualifications Taylor, S. (2009) The Post-Humboldtian Doctorate: Implications for Supervisory Practice. in V.King, F.Deepwell, L. Clouder, L. and C. Broughan (eds.) Academic Futures: Inquiries into Higher Education and Pedagogy. Cambridge, Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Trafford V and Leshem S (2008) Stepping Stones to Achieving your Doctorate: by focussing on your viva from the start. Maidenhead. McGraw Hill/Open University Press