Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Exploratory Study of the Supervision of Ph.D./Research Students’ Theses

  • Published:
Innovative Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Twenty-five faculty members were interviewed to determine how they supervised their Ph.D. students’ thesis preparation. A content analysis of the interview data indicated that the majority of them were task-focused. They supported their students intellectually, emotionally, and structurally. Some academics considered their students as colleagues, and a few developed research teams. Watching the students grow and develop and doing research with them as colleagues were the most enjoyable aspects of the supervision process. The integrated competing values framework (ICVF) was used to illustrate how most of the study participants were task-focused and were not able to deliver paradoxical roles; nor were they able to reflect on their supervisory capabilities and learn from those reflections.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The use of the word “supervisor” in the Australian context is similar to “major professor” in the U.S. context.

References

  • Acker, S., Hill, T., & Black, E. (1994). Thesis supervision in the social sciences: Managed or negotiated? Higher Education, 28, 483–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ainley, J. (2001). The 1999 postgraduate research experience questionnaire. Canberra, Australia: DETYA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1996). Organizational life 11: Theory, methods and practice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ash, S., & Clayton, P. (2004). The articulated learning: An approach to guided reflection and assessment. Innovative Higher Education, 29, 137–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beasley, N. (1999). Staff development to support research supervision. In G. Wisker & N. Sutcliffe (Eds.), Good practice in postgraduate supervision (pp. 129–138). Birmingham, UK: Staff and Educational Development Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bills, D. (2004). Supervisors’ conceptions of research and the implications for supervisor development. International Journal of Academic Development, 9, 85–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Booth, S., & Anderberg, E. (2005). Academic development for knowledge capabilities: Learning, reflecting and developing. Higher Education Research and Development, 24, 373–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourke, S., Holbrook, A., Lovat, T., & Dally, K. (2004, April). Characteristics, degree completion times and thesis quality of Australian Ph.D. candidates. Paper presented at the Quality in Postgraduate Research Conference: Re-imagining Research Education, Adelaide, South Australia.

  • Burnett, P. (1999). The supervision of doctoral dissertations using a collaborative cohort model. Counselor Education and Supervision, 39, 46–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buttery, E., Richter, E., & Filho, W. (2005). An overview of the elements that influence efficiency in postgraduate supervisory practice arrangements. International Journal of Educational Management, 19, 7–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Graduate Schools. (2005). Graduate enrollment in degrees report. Retrieved April 20, 2007, from http://www.cgsnet.org/Default.aspx?tabid=168.

  • Delamont, S., Atkinson, P., & Parry, O. (1997). Supervising the Ph.D.: A guide to success. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denison, D., Hooijberg, R., & Quinn, R. (1995). Paradox and performance: Toward a theory of behavioral complexity in managerial leadership. Organizational Science, 6, 524–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DEST. (2005). Summary of student numbers, submission 1 2003 and submission 1 2004. Retrieved March 30, 2005; http://www.dest.gov.au/highered/statpub.htm.

  • Dorn, S., Papalewis, R., & Brown, R. (1995). Educators earning their doctorates: Doctoral student perceptions regarding cohesiveness and persistence. Education, 116, 305–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K., & Graebner, M. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 25–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fontana, A., & Frey, J. (2005). The interview: From neutral stance to political involvement. In N. Denzin, & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Qualitative research (3rd ed.) (pp. 695–728). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, R., & Mathews, A. (1999). An evaluation of the desirable characteristics of a supervisor. Australian Universities Review, 42, 5–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gasson, S., & Reyes, L. (2004, April). Ph.D. completion within four years. Paper presented at the Quality in Postgraduate Research Conference: Re-imagining Research Education, Adelaide, South Australia.

  • Gurr, G. (2001). Negotiating the “rackety bridge”—A dynamic model for aligning supervisory style with research student development. Higher Education Research and Development, 20, 81–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harman, G. (2002). Producing Ph.D. graduates in Australia for the knowledge economy. Higher Education Research and Development, 21, 179–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, T. (2002). A quantitative analysis of Ph.D. students’ views of supervision. Higher Education Research and Development, 21, 41–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooijberg, R. (1992). Behavioral complexity and managerial effectiveness: A new perspective on managerial leadership. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

  • Hooijberg, R., & Quinn, R. E. (1992). Behavioral complexity and the development of effective managers. In R. J. Philips, & J. G. Hunt (Eds.), Strategic management: A multiorganisational-level perspective (pp. 44–61). New York, NY: Quorum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Insch, G., Moore, J., & Murphy, L. (1997). Content analysis in leadership research: Examples, procedures, and suggestions for future use. Leadership Quarterly, 8, 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, E., Green, K., & Kleuver, R. (2000a). Psychometric characteristics of the revised procrastination inventory. Research in Higher Education, 41, 267–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L., Lee, A., & Green, B. (2000b). The Ph.D. and the autonomous self: Gender, rationality and postgraduate pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education, 25, 135–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latona, K., & Browne, M. (2001). Factors associated with completion of research higher degrees. Government report in Higher Education Series, 37. Canberra, ACT: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs—Higher Education Division.

  • O’Keefe, B. (2006, January 25). Women behind in academe (p. 22). The Australian.

  • Pearson, M., & Brew, A. (2002). Research training and supervision development. Studies in Higher Education, 27, 135–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, M., Evans, T., & Macauley, P. (2004). Editorial: The working life of doctoral students: Challenges for research education and training. Studies in Continuing Education, 26, 347–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, M., & Kayrooz, C. (2005). Enabling critical reflection on supervisory practice. International Journal of Academic Development, 9, 99–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, R. (1988). Beyond rational management: Mastering the paradoxes and competing demands of high performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, R., Faerman, S., Thompson, M., & McGrath, M. (2003). Becoming a master manager (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, D. (2005). Generative paradox in learner-centered college teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 29, 181–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R. (2001). Reflection in higher education: A concept analysis. Innovative Higher Education, 26, 37–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seagram, B., Gould, J., & Pyke, S. (1998). An investigation of gender and other variables on time to completion of doctoral degrees. Research in Higher Education, 39, 319–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Styles, I., & Radloff, A. (2001). The synergistic thesis: Student and supervisor perspectives. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 25, 98–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, J. (1998). Research training for the 21st century. Government report in Higher Education Series, 33. Canberra, ACT: DETYA.

  • Vilkinas, T. (2000). The gender factor in management: How significant others perceive effectiveness. Women in Management Review, 15(5/6), 261–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vilkinas, T. (2002). The Ph.D. process: The supervisor as manager. Education and Training, 44, 129–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vilkinas, T. (2005). The supervisor’s role as manager of the Ph.D. journey. In P. Green (Ed.), Supervising postgraduate research: Contexts and processes, theories and practices (pp. 163–177). Melbourne, Australia: RMIT University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vilkinas, T., & Cartan, G. (2001). The behavioral control room for managers: The integrator role. Leadership and Organisation Development Journal, 22(4), 175–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vilkinas, T., & Cartan, G. (2006). The integrated competing values framework: Its spatial configuration. Journal of Management Development, 25, 505–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, T., & Cochrane, R. (2002). Factors influencing successful submission of Ph.D. thesis. Studies in Higher Education, 25, 182–195.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to the expert help of Barbara Brougham on this paper and also to Professor Libby Morris for her considerable assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. International Centre for Management and Organisational Effectiveness, University of South Australia, Elton Mayo Building, City West, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia

    Tricia Vilkinas

Authors
  1. Tricia Vilkinas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tricia Vilkinas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vilkinas, T. An Exploratory Study of the Supervision of Ph.D./Research Students’ Theses. Innov High Educ 32, 297–311 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-007-9057-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-007-9057-5

Key words

Search

Navigation