Advertisement

Pressures, Pathways, and Practices: Learning as a First-Year International Research Candidate

  • Marie Manidis
Reference work entry
Part of the University Development and Administration book series (UDAA)

Abstract

The chapter examines the in situ learning of international higher-degree research (IHDR) candidates in their first year of enrolment. This initial year of a research degree is characterized as one of the intense institutional, disciplinary, and research learning (Brown, Navigating international academia: Research student narratives. The Netherlands: Sense Publishers, 2014). Candidates’ learning is examined in the context of broader pressures on doctoral pedagogy as well as in the context of local orientation and academic practices and disciplinary pathways. Learning is understood as “an outcome of participating in practice” (Boud and Hager, Studies in Continuing Education 34(1): 17–30, 2012, p. 23).

Progress in IHDR candidates’ learning is investigated through an extensive ethnographic study supplemented by findings from a precursor evaluation survey. Theoretically the studies draw on practice-based views of learning and knowledge (Gherardi and Strati, Learning and knowing in practice-based studies. Gloucester: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2012; Schatzki, Introduction: Practice theory. In The practice turn in contemporary theory, eds. Schatzki, T.R, K. Knorr Cetina, and E. von Savigny, 1–14. London: Routledge, 2001) and trends in the growing importance of (scientific) knowledge itself in our everyday lives (Knorr Cetina 1999. Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; Nerland Research & Occasional Paper Series: Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley 14: 12, 2012).

The aim of the chapter is to highlight how and why participating broadly and proactively in research actions and activities (nested in practices Green, The primacy of practice and the problem of representation. In Understanding and researching professional practice, ed. B. Green, 39–54. Amsterdam: Sense Publishers, 2009b) make a difference to first year IHDR learning. Recommendations are made regarding the importance of attending to the frequency and kind of candidate, supervisory, and disciplinary practices (Maton, Canons and progress in the arts and humanities: Knowers and gazes. In Social realism, knowledge and the sociology of education, eds. K. Maton, and R. Moore. London: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2010) maximizing participatory involvement within disciplines. The depth and richness of the empirical data are likely to provide useful insights useful for international research candidates, their supervisors, and academic staff alike.

Keywords

Higher education Research pedagogy International candidates Learning Epistemic and research(er) practices 

References

  1. Bell, S. 2010. Women in science: Lessons from Australia. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology 2 (2): 438–452.Google Scholar
  2. Bernstein, B. 1999. Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology of Education 20 (2): 157–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boud, D., and A. Brew. 2017. Learning to teach as development of practice. In Theorising Learning to Teach in Higher Education, ed. B. Leibowitz, V. Bozalek, & P. Kahn, 77-92. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Boud, D., and P. Hager. 2012. Re-thinking continuing professional development through changing metaphors and location in professional practices. Studies in Continuing Education 34 (1): 17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bourdieu, P. 1977. Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P. 1986. Habitus, code and codification. Actes De La Recherche En Sciences Sociales 64: 40–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown, J., ed. 2014. Navigating international academia: Research student narratives. The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. CAPA (Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations). 2012. The research education experience: Investigating higher degree by research candidates’ experience in Australian universities. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
  9. Collier, S.J., and A. Ong. 2005. Global assemblages, anthropological problems. In Global assemblages, technology, politics and ethics as anthropological problems, ed. S.J. Collier and A. Ong, 3–21. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  10. Commonwealth of Australia. 2016. Education services for verseas Students Act 2000. Commonwealth of Australia. http://www.legislation.gov.au/, viewed Act No. 164 of 2000. Accessed 6 May 2016.
  11. Cook, J., and S. Brown. 1999. Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization Science 10 (4): 381–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cullen, D.J., M. Pearson, L.J. Saha, and R.H. Spear. 1994. Establishing effective PhD supervision. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar
  13. Cumming, J. 2007. Representing the complexity, diversity and particularity of the doctoral enterprise in Australia. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
  14. de Souza Bispo, M. 2015. Methodological reflections on practice-based research in organization studies. Brazilian Administration Review 12 (3), Art. 5: 309–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. DIISRTE. 2012. Australian innovation system report. Canberra: Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education.Google Scholar
  16. Edwards, A. 2017. Cultural-Historical approaches to teaching and learning in higher education: Teaching to support student agency. In Theorising Learning to Teach in Higher Education, ed. B. Leibowitz, V. Bozalek, & P. Kahn, 124-138. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. EHEA. 2010. The Bologna process, European Higher Education Area. European Higher Education Area. http://www.ehea.info/, viewed 18 Feb 2016.
  18. Felt, U., J. Igelsbock, A. Schikowitz, and T. Volker. 2013. Growing into what? The (un-)disciplined socialisation of early stage researchers in transdisciplinary research. Higher Education 65: 511–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fenwick, T., R. Edwards, and P. Sawchuk. 2011. Emerging approaches to educational research: Tracing the sociomaterial. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Garcia, O., and L. Wei. 2014. Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gergen, K.J. 2009. Relational being: Beyond self and community: Beyond self and community. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Gherardi, S. 2008. Situated knowledge and situated action: What do practice-based studies promise? In The SAGE handbook of new approaches in management and organization, ed. D. Barry and H. Hansen, 516–525. Los Angeles: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gherardi, S. 2009. Practice? It’s a matter of taste! Management Learning 50 (5): 535–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gherardi, S. 2013. Is organizational learning possible without participation? In Organisation und Partizipation, vol. 13. ed. S. M. Weber, M. Göhlich, A. Schröer, C. Fahrenwald, H. Macha, 29–43. Wiesbaden: Springer.Google Scholar
  25. Gherardi, S., and M. Perrotta. 2010. Where is induction? Profession, peer group and organization in contention. Society and Business Review 5 (1): 84–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gherardi, S., and G. Rodeschini 2015. Caring as a collective knowledgeable doing: About concern and being concerned. Management Learning 47 (3): 266-284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gherardi, S., and A. Strati. 2012. Learning and knowing in practice-based studies. Gloucester: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  28. Goffman, E. 1959. The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  29. Green, B. 2009a. Introduction: Understanding and researching professional practice. In Understanding and researching professional practice, ed. B. Green, 1–18. Amsterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  30. Green, B. 2009b. The primacy of practice and the problem of representation. In Understanding and researching professional practice, ed. B. Green, 39–54. Amsterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  31. Hager, P. 2011. Theories of workplace learning. In The Sage handbook of workplace learning, ed. M. Malloch, L. Cairns, K. Evans, and B.N. O’Connor, 17–31. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hager, P., and M. Johnsson. 2012. Collective learning practice. In Practice, learning and change: Practice-theory perspectives on professional learning, ed. P. Hager, A. Lee, and A. Reich, 249-266. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  33. Hendrickson, L., A. Balaguer, K. Baranyai, S. Brusse, M. Alinejad, J. Simpson, and R. Smith. 2013. Australian innovation system report 2013. Canberra: Innovation Research, Department of Industry.Google Scholar
  34. Hopwood, N. 2016. Professional practice and learning times, spaces, bodies, things. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hopwood, N., and J. Paulson. 2011. Bodies in narratives of doctoral students’ learning and experience. Studies in Higher Education 37 (6): 667–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. James, R., and G. Baldwin. 1999. Eleven practices of effective postgraduate supervisors, Centre for the Study of Higher Education and the School of Graduate Studies. Melbourne: The University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  37. Jones, M. 2013. Issues in doctoral studies – forty years of journal discussion: Where have we been and where are we going? International Journal of Doctoral Studies 8: 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Keat, R. 1982. Merleau-Ponty and the phenomenology of the body. University of Edinburgh. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cf6d/6d8c9810dd475e3ee7dd4cd26e2e82a27124.pdf. Edinburgh: Oct 2015.
  39. Kemmis, S. 2009. Understanding professional practice: A synoptic framework. In Understanding and research professional practice, ed. B. Green, 19–38. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  40. Kemmis, S., J. Wilkinson, C. Edwards-Groves, I. Hardy, P. Grootenboer, and L. Bristol. 2014. Changing practices, changing education. Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Knorr Cetina, K. 1999. Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Knorr Cetina, K. 2007. Culture in global knowledge societies: Knowledge cultures and epistemic cultures. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 32 (4): 361–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kornblauch, H. 2005. Focused ethnography. Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 6: 44. no. 10 September 2012.Google Scholar
  44. Lave, J., and E. Wenger. 1991. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Manathunga, C. 2014. Intercultural postgraduate supervision: Reimagining time, place and knowledge. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Manidis, M. 2013. Practising knowing in emergency departments: Tracing the disciplinary and institutional complexities of working, learning and knowing in modern emergency departments. PhD thesis, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney.Google Scholar
  47. Manidis, M., and R. Addo. 2017. Learning a practice through practise: presenting knowledge in doctoral spoken presentations. Studies in Continuing Education, 39(3).  https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2017.1306504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Manidis, M., and R. Goldsmith. 2017. Governing the social, material, textual, and advancing professional learning of doctoral candidates in the contemporary university. Teaching Public Administration.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0144739417706428
  49. Marginson, S., C. Nyland, E. Sawir, and H. Forbes-Mewett. 2010. International student security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Maton, K. 2010. Canons and progress in the arts and humanities: Knowers and gazes. In Social realism, knowledge and the sociology of education, ed. K. Maton and R. Moore, 154-190. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  51. Mauss, M. 1973. Techniques of the body. Economy and Society 2: 70–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Nerland, M. 2012. Changes in knowledge cultures and research on student learning. Research & Occasional Paper Series: Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley 14: 12.Google Scholar
  53. Nicolini, D. 2013. Practice theory, work, & organization: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Noddings, N. 2003. Is teaching a practice? Journal of Philosophy of Education 37 (2): 245–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Norton, A., and I. Cherastidtham. 2014. Mapping Australian higher education, 2014–5. Melbourne: Grattan Institute.Google Scholar
  56. Paltridge, B., and S. Starfield. 2007. Thesis and dissertation writing in a second language: A handbook for supervisors. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
  57. Parry, S. 2007. Disciplines and Doctorates. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  58. Perrotta, M. 2013. The Study of Technoscientific Imaging in STS. Tecnoscienza: Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies 3(2): 163-175.Google Scholar
  59. Rampton, B., J. Maybin, and C. Roberts. 2015. Theory and Method in linguistic ethnography. 2015. In Linguistic ethnography: Interdisciplinary explorations, ed. J. Snell, S. Shaw, and F. Copland, 14–50. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schatzki, T.R. 1997. Practices and actions: A Wittgensteinian critique of Bourdieu and Giddens. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 27 (3): 283–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schatzki, T.R. 2001. Introduction: Practice theory. In The practice turn in contemporary theory, ed. T.R. Schatzki, K. Knorr Cetina, and E. von Savigny, 1–14. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  62. Schatzki, T.R. 2006. On organizations as they happen. Organization Studies 27 (12): 1863–1873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Schatzki, T.R. 2009. Timespace and the organization of social life. In Time, consumption and everyday life: Practice, materiality and culture, ed. E. Shove, F. Trentmann, and R. Wilk, 35–48. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  64. Schatzki, T.R. 2010. The timespace of human activity: On performance, society, and history as indeterminate teleological events. Plymouth: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  65. Schatzki, T.R. 2011. Landscapes as temporal spatial phenomena. In The place of landscape, ed. J. Malpas. London: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  66. Sfard, A. 1997. On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Reviewer 27 (2): 4–13.Google Scholar
  67. Sieweke, J. 2014. Imitation and processes of institutionalization – Insights from Bourdieu’s theory of practice. Schmalenbach Business Review, 24–42. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract.2223963 (accessed 20 April 2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Spaulding, L.S., and A.J. Rockinson-Szapkiw. 2012. Hearing their voices: Factors doctoral candidates attribute to their persistence. International Journal of Doctoral Studies 7: 199–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. University of Queensland. 2008. 3MT three minute thesis. Brisbane: University of Queensland Australia. viewed 3 Feb 2016.Google Scholar
  70. Vagle, M.D. 2015. Curriculum as post-intentional phenomenological text: Working along the edges and margins of phenomenology using post-structuralist ideas. Journal of Curriculum Studies 47 (5): 594–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Ward, M.-H. 2013. Living in liminal space: The PhD as accidental pedagogy. Sydney: University of Sydney.Google Scholar
  72. Wittgenstein, L. 1986. Philosophical investigations. 3rd English, Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe edn. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  73. Wright, T., and R. Cochrane. 2000. Factors influencing successful submission of PhD theses. Studies in Higher Education 25 (2): 181–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Technology SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations