Alternative Research-Related Spaces in Postgraduate Research Training

  • E. S. Grossman
Reference work entry
Part of the University Development and Administration book series (UDAA)


Tertiary education transformation and associated neoliberalism and new public management policies have created a cascade of events which has impacted upon the supervisor-postgraduate student dyad. Within the health sciences, this cascade contains issues of supervisor workload, student massification, clinical research, academic staff reduction, financial strategies, and the push for mode 2 knowledge production among others which has had negative effects on the quality and quantity of supervisor-postgraduate interaction time. Formal university training initiatives to supply research skills previously acquired from supervisors are deemed insufficient to meet all current postgraduate needs. Informal alternative research-related spaces, especially those with academic staff involvement, have the potential to serve as learning spaces to supply disappearing supervisor skills and experience. Such spaces are deserving of greater scrutiny and future research, as they could provide a workable solution to the intractable tensions between the numbers of values and goals arising in postgraduate learning within South African and other higher education environments.


Supervisor Postgraduate Research Training Alternative spaces Peer group Workload 


  1. ASSAf. 2010. The PhD study. Pretoria: Academy of Science in South Africa.Google Scholar
  2. Batty, C. 2016. Collaboration, critique and a community of peers: The benefits of peer learning groups for screen production research degrees. Studies in Australasian Cinema. Scholar
  3. Bell, F., R. Shackel, and L. Steele. 2013. The books don’t talk to me!: Postgraduate student groups and research student identity formation. Paper presented at the 36th HERDSA Annual International Conference, Auckland, New Zealand 1–4 July, 2013.Google Scholar
  4. Bleiklie, I., and M. Henkel. 2005. Introduction. In Governing knowledge: A study of continuity and change in higher education, ed. Ivar Bleiklie and Mary Henkel, 1–10. The Netherlands: Springer. Accessed 23 Mar 2016.
  5. Brill, J.L., K.K. Balcanoff, D. Land, M.M. Gogarty, and F. Turner. 2014. Best practices in doctoral retention: Mentoring. Higher Learning Research Communications 4: 26–37. Accessed 12 Apr 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. British Council. 2014. Can higher education solve Africa’s job crisis? Understanding graduate employability in Sub-Saharan. Going Global: Africa. Accessed 17 Aug 2015.
  7. Buissink-Smith, N., S. Hart, and J. van der Meer. 2013. There are other people out there! Successful postgraduate peer groups and research communities at a New Zealand university. Higher Education Research and Development 32: 695–705. Accessed 15 Aug 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buttery, E.A., E.M. Richter, and W.L. Filho. 2005. An overview of the elements that influence efficiency in postgraduate supervisory practice arrangements. International Journal of Educational Management 19: 7–16.Google Scholar
  9. Carpenter, J., L. Wetheridge, and S Tanner. 2012. Researchers of tomorrow: The research behaviour of Generation Y doctoral students. Accessed 12 Jul 2014.
  10. Carter, S., and V. Kumar. 2016. Ignoring me is part of learning: Supervisory feedback on doctoral writing. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. Scholar
  11. CHE. 2015. VitalStats. Public higher education 2013. Pretoria: Council on Higher Education. Accessed 9 Mar 2016.
  12. Cloete N. 2016. For sustainable funding and fees, the undergraduate system in South Africa must be restructured. South African Journal of Science 112: Art. #a0146, 5 pages.
  13. Cloete, N., J. Mouton, and C. Sheppard. 2015. Doctoral education in South Africa. 5 Dec 2015.
  14. Cotterall S. 2011. Stories within stories: A narrative study of six international PhD researchers’ experiences of doctoral learning in Australia. PhD. Macquarie University, Sydney. Accessed 12 Apr 2016.
  15. Cullen, D., M. Pearson, L.J. Saha, and R.H. Spear. 1994. Establishing effective PhD supervision. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. Accessed 10 May 2016.
  16. Devenish, R., S. Dyer, T. Jefferson, L. Lord, S. Van Leeuwen, and V. Fazakerley. 2009. Peer to peer support: The disappearing work in the doctoral student experience. Higher Education Research and Development 28: 59–70. Scholar
  17. Ehrenberg, R.G., H. Zuckerman, J.A. Groen, and S.M. Brucker. 2010. Educating scholars: Doctoral education in the humanities. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Gardner, S.K. 2010. Contrasting the socialization experiences of doctoral students in high- and low-completing departments: A qualitative analysis of disciplinary contexts at one institution. The Journal of Higher Education 81: 61–81. Accessed 13 Apr 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Govender, K., and R. Dhunpath. 2013. Harmony and conflict in a PhD cohort supervision model. Alternation 9: 219–247. Accessed 30 Mar 2016.
  20. Grant, B. 2003. Mapping the pleasures and risks of supervision. Discourse: Studies in the cultural politics of education 24: 175–190.Google Scholar
  21. Grossman, E.S. 2016. “My supervisor is so busy…” Informal spaces for postgraduate learning in the Health Sciences. South African Journal of Higher Education 30: 94–109.
  22. Grossman, E.S., and N.J. Crowther. 2015. Co-supervision: Ensuring the right hand knows what the left hand is doing. South African Journal of Science 111: 1–8. Art. #2014-0305, 8 pages.
  23. Habib, A., and S. Morrow. 2007. Research, research productivity and the state in South Africa. Journal of Higher Education in Africa 5: 113–130.Google Scholar
  24. Harrison, J.E. 2009. Developing a doctoral identity – a narrative study in an autoethnographic frame. PhD. University of KwaZulu-Natal. Accessed 20 Apr 2016.
  25. Kemp, M.W., B.M. Lazarus, G.G. Perron, W.P. Hanage, and E. Chapman. 2014. Biomedical Ph.D. students enrolled in two elite universities in the United Kingdom and the United States report adopting multiple learning relationships. PLoS One 9: e103075. Scholar
  26. Lai, K-W. 2011. Using collaborative peer feedback and supervision to support doctoral research at a distance. In Changing demands, changing directions. Proceedings ascilite eds. G. Williams, P. Statham, N. Brown and B. Cleland. Hobart. 747–757.
  27. Louw, J., and G. Godsell. 2015. Multiple paths to success. In Doctoral Education in South Africa, ed. N. Cloete, J. Mouton, and C. Sheppard. Cape Town: African Minds. Accessed 5 Dec 2015.
  28. Louw, J., and J. Muller. 2014. Literature review on models of the PhD. Cape Town: CHET. Accessed 9 Dec 2015.
  29. Mantai, L., and R. Dowling. 2015. Supporting the PhD journey: Insights from acknowledgements. International Journal for Researcher Development 6: 106–121. Scholar
  30. McAlpine, L., and C. Amundsen. 2015. Early career researcher challenges: Substantive and methods-based insights. Studies in Continuing Education 37: 1–17. Scholar
  31. McInnis, C. 2005. The governance and management of student learning in universities. In Governing knowledge: A study of continuity and change in higher education, ed. Ivar Bleiklie and Mary Henkel, 81–96. Dordrecht: Springer. Accessed 23 Mar 2016.Google Scholar
  32. van der Meer, J., L. Spowart, and S. Hart. 2013. We need support too: Providing postgraduate peer support. In The student engagement handbook: Practice in higher education, ed. E. Dunne, 313–330. UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  33. Murray, R., and S. Moore. 2006. The Handbook of Academic Writing. A Fresh Approach. England, Open University Press, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  34. Neumann, R. 2007. Policy and practice in doctoral education. Studies in Higher Education 32: 459–473. Scholar
  35. Patel, N., P. Naidoo, M. Smith, J. Loveland, T. Govender, and J. Klopper. 2016. South African registrar perceptions of the research project component in training: Hope for the future? South African Medical Journal 106: 169–171. Scholar
  36. Pyhältö, K., A.R. Nummenmaa, T. Soini, J. Stubb, and K. Lonka. 2012. Research on scholarly communities and the development of scholarly identity in Finnish doctoral education. In Higher education research in Finland: Emerging structures and contemporary issues, ed. S. Ahola and D.M. Hoffman, 337–357. Jyväskylä Finland: Jyväskylä University Press. Accessed 29 Jan 2015.Google Scholar
  37. Rhoades, G. 2005. Distinctive local continuities amidst similar neo-liberal changes: The comparative importance of the particular. In Governing knowledge: A study of continuity and change in higher education, ed. Ivar Bleiklie and Mary Henkel, 11–30. Dordrecht: Springer. Accessed 23 Mar 2016.
  38. Rosales, J., C. Moloney, C. Badenhorst, J. Dyer, and M. Murray. 2012. Breaking the barriers of research writing: rethinking pedagogy for engineering graduate research. Proceedings. Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA12) Conference, Winnipeg. 17–20 June. Paper 042: 1–8. Accessed 17 Mar 2016.
  39. Spear, R.H. 2000. Research supervision of research students: Responding to student expectations. ANU occasional paper. no.GS00/1. Accessed 28 Apr 2016.
  40. Steele, L., R. Shackel, and F. Bell. 2012. The importance of the local in a global age: analysis of networking strategies in postgraduate law research learning. Journal of the Australasian Law Teachers Association 5: 1–13. Accessed 3 Mar 2015.
  41. Stracke E. 2010. Undertaking the journey together: Peer learning for a successful and enjoyable PhD experience. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice 7: Accessed 17 Jan 2015.
  42. Stracke, E., and V. Kumar. 2014. Realising graduate attributes in the research degree: The role of peer support groups. Teaching in Higher Education 19: 616–629. Accessed 16 Jan 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. van Biljon, J.A., and R.M. de Villiers. 2013. Multiplicity in supervision models: The supervisor’s perspective. South African Journal of Higher Education 27: 1443–1463.Google Scholar
  44. van der Walt, L., C. Bolsmann, B. Johnson, and L. Martin. 2002. Globalisation and the Outsourced University in South Africa: The restructuring of the support services in public sector universities South Africa, 1994–2001. Final report for CHET, July 2002. Accessed 18 Apr 2016.
  45. Wingfield, B. 2012. How much time does it take to supervise a PhD student? South African Journal of Science 108: 11–12. Art. #1454, 2 pages.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wright, L. 2016. Brave old world: Can today’s university truly be ‘home’ to tomorrow’s minds? South African Journal of Science 112. Art. #a0136, 2 pages.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.East London and Port Elizabeth Health Resource CentresWalter Sisulu University and Cannon RocksEastern CapeSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations