1. Supervision in Postgraduate Programs, March 8, 2016 1.C:a 09.30-10.00 Local regulations, appointment procedures, previous evaluation and steps taken. 2.a) Schedule and literature, b) Group 1 and 2, c) what to prepare for every meeting, d) examination requires, e) nonattendance/absence? 3.10.00-10.30 Course participants presentation: a) university, b) department/subject/research interest, c) experience of being a supervisor (of doctoral students), d) expectation on this course? 4.10.30-10.45 Break 5.10.45-12.00 i) Criteria for Academic Thesis ii) Discussion around: a) Guo, b) Christie et al and ”Successful Supervisor A Dialogue Facilitator” 6.12-13 Lunch 7.13-16 The Swedish culture - values and gender related topics within Swedish postgraduate programs (Senior Professor Leif Lindberg & Ph. D. Charlotte Silander)

2. Guide to Appointment procedures for the appointment of teachers at Linnaeus University ( Approved by the Rector, 17 December 2012, ) Dnr:LNU 2012/518, page 20

3. Local regulations for third cycle education programmes Linnéuniversity, Reg. no 2013/486-1.1 1 2 3

4. In Swedish= ASP, allmän studieplan

6. Previous evaluation 1)Discussion on the problem of sexual harassment. 2)Supplementary course/ continuing course on supervision. 3)Course literature usage? 4)Lecturer criticism Steps taken 1)Will be discussed in session 1 and 3. 2)This fall of 2016 (lunch-) seminars will be arranged on the topic of supervision. 3)The course literature will be used during the course but is primarily regarded as books of reference for future use. 4)Replaced lecturer. 20152016

9. 1.University 2.Department/subject/research field 3.Supervision experience 4.Expectations? frånv

10. 1.University 2.Department/subject/research field 3.Supervision experience 4.Expectations?

11. Criteria for Academic Thesis Thomas Sandstedt & Martin Stigmar 1.Background 2.Aim 3.Method 4.Results: Form, content and socialisation 5.Answers from: a) director of studies, doctoral students and supervisors 6.Discussion-what did we find?

12. Background and research questions -are there any failed dissertations in Sweden by the examining committee, if so in what subjects? Limitations: -i) humanities and social sciences, -ii) 1984-2003 -iii) Gothenburg, Linköping, Lund, Sthlm, Umeå, Uppsala

13. Dissertation work, from start to end B) Notification is posted at the Library and electronically A) Research courses and writing C) Public defence/viva see page 279 in ”How to write a Thesis” D) Examining committee assesses the doctoral thesis with Pass or Fail.

14. ssubject Använ darna mn: Lösen ord: sgrade Använ darna mn: Lösen ord: Political science Law Economy Sociology Theater and film Psychology Religious history Pedagogy Art

16. Results: Form, content and socialisation - Abstract - Title - Aim/relevance - Problem/-s - Coverage/main thread/constructive alignment - Originality and own contribution/-s - Method och empirism - Theory and previous research - Analysis - Argumentation - Resultats/Discussion Form: Motivates ”How to Write a Thesis”, Murray, p 14, p 22, 24-25, 26, 31-32

17. Content Three criteria: 1.Societal relevance 2.Scientific relevance 3.Communicative/understandable

18. Socialisation Learn how to understand the scientific community, through: a) regulations, norms, language, rituals, etc, b) active participation in seminars, conferences, applications etc, c) independence, d) originality– but not too much, legitimacy and identity.

19. curiosity, endurance, self-discipline, target oriented, communicative, intellectual capacity, working discipline, carefulness and stubborness (Erasmie, 1983). Desired abilities amongst doctoral students

20. ”För att bli antagen till forskarutbildning krävs det att den sökande har grundläggande behörighet och den särskilda behörighet som fakultetsnämnden kan ha föreskrivit, och bedöms ha sådan förmåga i övrigt som behövs för att klara utbildningen” (Högskoleförordningen, 1993:100, 9 Kap., 2 §). Önskvärda karaktärsdrag/egenskaper/förmågor hos forskarstuderande: nyfikenhet, uthållighet, självdisciplin, målinriktning och god kommunikativ förmåga, intellektuell kapacitet men även arbetsdisciplin, noggrannhet och envishet (Erasmie, 1983). a) att kunna se vad man inte vet, dvs. att inse sin egen begränsning samt ha förmåga till självkritik, b) att kunna se vad som går att ta reda på, dvs. att ha kunskap om metoder och tekniker samt ha förmåga att prioritera, c) att kunna se vad som är värt att veta, dvs. att kunna relatera forskningsproblem till samhällsbehov, d) att kunna bygga upp en strategi för kunskapssökande, dvs. förmåga att hämta relevant information. Which abilities do you find important?

21. No criteria exist

22. i)Why do you think criteria are often left out? ii)How does this affect the process of writing a thesis?

23. These are outcomes, ie not criteria, The higher Education Ordinance

24. Play tennis-no fence?

25. Discussion 1) Criteria are not regarded as necessary, but the ground for judgement needs to be discussed: 2) The thesis as process and/or product? 3) Mini demands (according to Torstendahl, 2005) a) Logical consistancy, b) Empirical testability, c) All relevant material is taken into consideration, d) Coherence in presentation of results, e) New results/contributions (not only what has already been shown in previous research) (Torstendahl, 2005, p. 214).

26. Different subject traditions Criteria might obstruct innovative thinking, Consensus between senior researchers is more important than criteria, however risk for group-think. Discussion (cont.)

27. Thesis as process or product? Mini demands-relevant for your doctoral student´s work? Independent work and/or innovative? How can you be supportive as supervisor?

28. Conclusions Tacit knowledge, experienced based. Agreement about what is a complete and finished thesis. Difficult/impossible to agree on criteria. Flexibility in judgements by experts.

29. Page 100, twenty memorable lessons-discuss or any other relevant aspect of Guo’s memoir

30. Using Communicative Action Theory to Analyse Relationships Between Supervisors and Phd Students in a Technical University in Sweden Michael Christie, Ramon Garrote Jurado 1) p 189: ”…different disciplines induce different styles of supervision” -how about your discipline? 2) p 192: ”…most of the incidents concern researchers in the natural sciences where collaborative laboratory work is important.” -what is your experience? 3) p 193: ”…situations where communication broke down because of different expectations from the supervisors and students in matter of writing and feedback…” -How can misunderstandings be prevented? 4) p 194: ”It is debatable whether or not it is a supervisor’s duty to provide emotional support”. - What is your opinion?

31. Successful Supervison- A Dialogue Facilitator Mental preparation Myself as a person Goals and vision Fact box Discuss usability