Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Experiencing variation: learning opportunities in doctoral supervision

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Instructional Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study contributes towards a better understanding of learning dynamics in doctoral supervision by analysing how learning opportunities are created in the interaction between supervisors and PhD students, using the notion of experiencing variation as a key to learning. Empirically, we have based the study on four video-recorded sessions, with four different PhD students and their supervisors, all from life sciences. Our analysis revealed that learning opportunities in the supervision sessions concerned either the content matter of research (for instance, understanding soil structure), or the research methods—more specifically how to produce valid results. Our results illustrate how supervisors and PhD students create a space of learning together in their particular discipline by varying critical aspects of their research in their discussions. Situations where more open-ended research issues were discussed, created more complex patterns of variation. Both PhD students and supervisors can learn from this. Understanding of this mechanism that creates learning opportunities can help supervisors develop their competences in supervisory pedagogy.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

References

  • Åkerlind, G., & McAlpine, L. (2015). Supervising doctoral students: Variation in purpose and pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education. doi:10.1080/03075079.2015.1118031.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bastalich, W. (2015). Content and context in knowledge production: A critical review of doctoral supervision literature. Studies in Higher Education. doi:10.1080/03075079.2015.1079702.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berge, M. (2011). Group work and physics—Characteristics, learning possibilities and patterns of interaction. PhD. Chalmers tekniska högskola, Institutionen för tillämpad informationsteknologi.

  • Berge, M., & Ingerman, Å. (2016). Multiple theoretical lenses as an analytical strategy in researching group discussions. Research in Science and Technological Education. doi:10.1080/02635143.2016.1245657.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability (formerly: Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education), 21(1), 5–31.

  • Bowden, J., & Marton, F. (1998). The university of learning. Beyond quality and competence. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruce, C., & Stoodley, I. (2011). Experiencing higher degree research supervision as teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 38(2), 226–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dysthe, O. (2002). The learning potential of a web-mediated discussion in a university course. Studies in Higher Education, 27(3), 339–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, D., & Linder, C. (2009). Teaching in higher education through the use of variation: Examples from distillation, physics and process dynamics. European Journal of Engineering Education, 34(4), 369–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harré, R., & van Langenhove, L. (Eds.). (1999). Positioning Theory: Moral contexts of intentional action (1st ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingerman, Å., Berge, M., & Booth, S. (2009). Physics group work in a phenomenographic perspective—Learning dynamics as the experience of variation and relevance. European Journal of Engineering Education, 34(4), 349–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • John, T., & Denicolo, P. (2013). Doctoral education: A review of the literature monitoring the doctoral student experience in selected OECD countries (mainly UK). Springer Science Reviews, 1(1–2), 41–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L., Lee, A., & Green, B. (2000). The PhD and the autonomous self: Gender, rationality and postgraduate pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education, 25(2), 135–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiley, M. (2009). Isn’t research just research? What are candidates and supervisors thinking? In A. Brew & L. Lucas (Eds.), Academic research and researchers (p. 161). London: The Society for Research into Higher Education: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiley, M. (2011). Developments in research supervisor training: Causes and responses. Studies in Higher Education, 36(5), 585–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiley, M., & Mullins, G. (2005). Supervisors’ conceptions of research: What are they? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 49(3), 245–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi, S. (2014). Learning dynamics in doctoral supervision. PhD Thesis, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

  • Kobayashi, S., Grout, B., & Rump, C. Ø. (2013). Interaction and learning in PhD supervision–a qualitative study of supervision with multiple supervisors. The Journal of Danish University Education, 8(14), 13–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi, S., Grout, B. W., & Rump, C. Ø. (2015). Opportunities to learn scientific thinking in joint doctoral supervision. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52(1), 41–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi, S., Godskesen, M., & Wichmann-Hansen, G. (2017). Ph.d.-vejlederkurser i Danmark: Status på indhold og diskussion af kvalitet. The Journal of Danish University Education, 12(22), 99–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kullberg, A. (2010). What is taught and what is learned. Professional insights gained and shared by teachers of mathematics. PhD. University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg. http://hdl.handle.net/2077/22180.

  • Lam, H. C., & Tsui, A. (2013). Drawing on the variation theory to enhance students’ learning of Chinese characters. Instructional Science, 41(5), 955–974.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, A. (2008). How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3), 267–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, A., & Green, B. (2009). Supervision as metaphor. Studies in Higher Education, 34(6), 615–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lepp, L., Remmik, M., Leijen, Ä., & Leijen, D. A. J. (2016). Doctoral students’ research stall. Supervisors’ perceptions and intervention strategies. SAGE Open, 6(3), 1–12. doi:10.1177/2158244016659116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manathunga, C. (2005). Early warning signs in postgraduate research education: A different approach to ensuring timely completions. Teaching in Higher Education, 10(2), 219–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manathunga, C., & Goozée, J. (2007). Challenging the dual assumption of the ‘always/already’ autonomous student and effective supervisor. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(3), 309–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography—Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10(2), 177–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 193–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2013). Meanings are acquired from experiencing differences against a background of sameness, rather than from experiencing sameness against a background of difference: Putting a conjecture to the test by embedding it in a pedagogical tool. Frontline Learning Research, 1(1), 24–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., Runesson, U., & Tsui, A. (2004). The space of learning. In F. Marton & A. Tsui (Eds.), Classroom discourse and the space of learning (pp. 3–40). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Tsui, A. B. M. (Eds.). (2004). Classroom discourse and the space of learning. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCallin, A., & Nayar, S. (2011). Postgraduate research supervision: A critical review of current practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(1), 63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. H. F., Shanahan, M., & Laughksch, C. (2007). Students’ conceptions of research. 2: An exploration of contrasting patterns of variation. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 51(4), 415–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. H. F., Shanahan, M. P., & Laugksch, R. C. (2005). Students’ conceptions of research. I: A qualitative and quantitative analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 49(3), 225–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murtonen, M., & Lehtinen, E. (2005). Conceptions of research and methodology learning. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 49(3), 217–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pang, M. F. (2003). Two faces of variation: On continuity in the phenomenographic movement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(2), 145–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pang, M. F., & Ki, W. W. (2016). Revisiting the idea of “critical aspects”. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60(3), 323–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pang, M. F., & Ling, L. M. (2012). Learning study: Helping teachers to use theory, develop professionally, and produce new knowledge to be shared. Instructional Science, 40(3), 589–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pang, M. F., & Marton, F. (2005). Learning theory as teaching resource: Enhancing students’ understanding of economic concepts. Instructional Science, 33(2), 159–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rovio-Johansson, A., & Ingerman, Å. (2016). Continuity and development in the phenomenography and variation theory tradition. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60(3), 257–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runesson, U. (2006). What is it possible to learn? On variation as a necessary condition for learning. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(4), 397–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wisker, G., Robinson, G., Trafford, V., Warnes, M., & Creighton, E. (2003). From supervisory dialogues to successful PhDs: Strategies supporting and enabling the learning conversations of staff and students at postgraduate level. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(3), 383–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to the University of Copenhagen for financial support for this research into doctoral supervision. We are also grateful to the supervisors and PhD students who welcomed us into their supervisory space. And finally, we would like to thank the reviewers for their valuable comments. This research was conducted at the Faculty of Science, University of Copenhagen, and supported by the PhD School of Life Science and the Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen, Øster Voldgade 3, 1350, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Sofie Kobayashi & Camilla Østerberg Rump

  2. Science and Mathematics Education, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden

    Maria Berge

  3. Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Højbakkegaard Allé 8, Taastrup, 2630, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Brian W. W. Grout

Authors
  1. Sofie Kobayashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Berge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Brian W. W. Grout
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Camilla Østerberg Rump
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sofie Kobayashi.

Appendix: Coding scheme

Appendix: Coding scheme

We first coded the transcripts for ‘focal awareness’: this code was used as a basic code to signify that new content is brought into the discussion that might be varied following one of the four patterns. After coding for focal awareness we coded for the four patterns of variation described by Marton et al. (2004), i.e., contrasting, generalizing, separating and fusing. The patterns of variation are dependent on the object of learning identified. The categorization of patterns is contextual and not always apparent from the excerpt itself. An example is given below.

In this case we recognize the generalising on the background of the previous conversation about selecting sites for collecting snails.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kobayashi, S., Berge, M., Grout, B.W.W. et al. Experiencing variation: learning opportunities in doctoral supervision. Instr Sci 45, 805–826 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-017-9422-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-017-9422-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation