Ten Years of Supervisor Development - Enhancing Quality through Developing Case

Studies

Liverpool’s CoP 14/15: Policy on Research Student Supervision: 3c) ‘All supervisors are required to engage in professional development as appropriate in relation to best supervisory practice. Additionally all appointed supervisors, whether UoL staff or those appointed with ‘Recognised Supervisor’ status, must undertake appropriate UoL supervisor training or other workshops which have been approved by UoL.’

2004 – Supervisor Good practice workshops2008 – CPS Session ‘Supervising PGRs’2014 – Research Degree Examination Arrangements: Duties of Internal Examiners

Aim of session:To provide colleagues with experience and practice in creating case studies to inform the development of research student supervisors.

• 2004 - go to departments – tell them what they need to do – spell out regulations – cover everything – delivered by a team

• 2005 – mix the departments – ask them what they think they need to do – point out and spell out changes in the regulations – cover everything– delivered by a team

• 2006 – work with the departments, mix them together, use case studies to illustrate regulations - create discussion – make it part of Certificate of Professional Practice – cover everything – delivered by a team

• 2007 – 2009 – any of the above depending on who’s in the team• 2009 – 2012 Delivered as part of the CPS and in Schools and Faculties by a team. • 2012 – present – delivered by one person (never supervised) – online supplementary

session – variations – tailored for individual schools – emphasis on case studies• 2014 – Internal Examiners course – non-compulsory• 2015 – proposed CoP changes to make suite of supervisor development sessions –

Independent chairs, internal examiners and Supervising PGRs compulsory.• 2015 – Online supplementary courses as 5 year ‘refreshers’

Supervising PGRs - a history of development

Introduction – the eternal triangle1. Approaches to Supervision2. Case study 1 – David 3. Good Supervision4. Choosing a Research Student5. Induction6. Responsibilities and Teamwork

7. PGR Development and the RDF8. Motivating Your Research Student9. Supervisor Style10. The VivaBibliography

Present format - face to face session (3 hours)

Student

Supervisor Institution

No player really understands what the relationship between any of the other players is really like

Each player has their own needs, motivations and interests

This means that negotiation is the key

element of the relationship

Introduction: The eternal triangle...

Collegiate style –Based on SRHE Publication: Capturing Best Practice in Postgraduate Supervision, Alan Rousseau and Adrian Eley, 2010.

Case Study 1: David

David is a part-time PhD student and member of academic staff. He has a heavy workload as

with teaching commitments. He’s a clinical trainee and he has a new, young family to support.

6 years into his PhD he announces he is going to suspend for a year to cope with ‘work issues’.

His primary supervisor then leaves (the two events are unconnected) and the new supervisor

is concerned by lack of written work and lack of focus (both of which had previously been

brought up by former supervisor in Annual Progress Reports). One of the second supervisors

says that David is suspending so that he can catch up with his writing. She explains that those

on clinical training pathways and with heavy teaching loads often do this. The new primary

supervisor says that this is surely a bit late and that David probably could never cope. She

writes to David and demands to see an action plan detailing how the thesis will be completed.

David then complains on grounds that the new supervisor requires too many changes with

insufficient time before completion, plus he submits evidence of suffering from depression.

Questions to ask:

•Please list the issues.

•What should be done to sort things out?

•What administrative procedures could prevent the

problems occurring?

•How would you advise the actors?

Advantages and benefits of using case studies:

• Can be fictionalised to protect the innocent and shame the guilty without either being

the wiser

• Can be nuanced to provoke discussion

• Can be made appropriate to existing problem areas

• Allows a combination of issues, problems and good practice to be unearthed and

disseminated to colleagues in a collegiate manner

What kind of a supervisory approach do you use?

Concept of research supervision held by supervisor

Most prominent activity Knowledge and skills needed

Possible student reaction

functional Rational movement through tasks

Directing, Project management

OrganisedObedience

enculturation Gatekeeping Diagnosis of deficiencies to be remedied. Nurturing

Apprenticeship, Role modelling

Critical thinking EvaluationChallenge

Argument (gently Socratic or constructive controversy)

Constant inquiry/fight or flight

emancipation MentoringSupporting student in constructing knowledge

FacilitationAnalysis and reflection

Personal growthReframing knowledge.

Anne Lee 2007

Case study 1Head of Department Professor Edward Thompson had known Professor Arthur Peppercorn since they were at Cambridge together. The last time Thompson had collaborated with this friend over a PhD examination Peppercorn had told him that he owed him a favour and now Thompson was calling it in. He asked him to examine a piece of work by a research student whose registration was close to the end. He’d assured the supervisor that he he’d try and get a ‘fair but meaningful’ team of examiners. The new junior lecturer in the department Dr Davina Jones looked like a good internal as a malleable but enthusiastic new colleague - keen and privileged to accept the job. This would be an excellent opportunity for her professional development. Dr Jones quickly accepted the role before reading the thesis which had some very large and gaping holes. As she reflected on her possible actions the phone rang and a voice said ‘Hello there…Professor Peppercorn here… I don’t think there are any problems, do you?’

Introduction

PARAMETERPlot line Unrecognised

virtueFatal flaw Debt that must

be paidEternal triangle

Spider and Fly Romance Gift taken away

The hero that cannot be kept down

Journey

Form Tragedy Comedy Farce Who dunnit Drama Sci-Fi Horror Thriller Musical

Setting City Town Village Countryside Fantasy world Space Sea Air Prison

Period Past Present Future Unspecified Simultaneous past/present/future

Tense Past Present Future Past historic Present-past

Principle character

Man Woman Child Teenager Animal Alien Robot God Crowd

Principle relationship

Friends Lovers Political allies Travelling partners

Colleagues Pet Slave Servant Debtor

VALUE

• Circle a box on each line (don’t think about it too much!)

• Write the plan of your novel using the values you have selected…

Your turn – to create a case study!

Case Study 1. Daisy Jones and Professor Ivatt

Daisy Jones had made a complaint to the Director of Postgraduate Research. This mystified her supervisor Professor Ivatt who had never had any problems with Daisy previously. Word had reached him that she had said that he was - he could hardly believe it – ‘non-communicative,’ and that he, ‘ran a private club’ and that he was ‘un-encouraging!’ He was gobsmacked. He had regarded her as ultra-reliable and she was calm, for a research student entering into her fourth year and with her Viva looming. Perhaps a little too quiet. The latest thesis draft was sound however and he’d told her so and he’d told her he was very impressed. Perhaps she was a little quiet in research group discussion sessions – but she was someone who had presented him with so few problems and God knows there have been those that have! Anyway – that was the case until now. He wondered where he had gone wrong? All the lab-work was fine – again he’d told her so and had given her an example of the sort of reference he gave others and would give to her. If only she would say something in the research group meetings – he could do with another voice to shut the others up! She never stayed behind but always went home promptly at 6.00. If she would only network a bit more with the others she might realise the benefits to be gained and might be in a better position to apply for those post-doc positions he told the others about last week in the Pub...

Morphological analysis tool for supervisor development case studiesParameters value

Plot line Unrecognised virtue

Fatal flaw Trial by ordeal Thwarted ambition

Eternal triangle Spider and fly

Gift taken away

Journey or quest

Heroic endeavour

Form tragedy comedy farce melodrama legal Who dunnit? crime epistolary Mystery

Topic/issue(s) Language problems

conceptual Communication issues

Process or planning

writing progress personal Power imbalance

illness

Code of practice

examination supervision admin recruitment Training Plagiarism or ethics

induction meetings records

Setting Lab office classroom fieldwork industry corridor home viva Cafe/Pub

Good/bad practice

expectations contact deadlines monitoring communication planning ideas training networking

Principle character(s)

supervisor student male female Director of PGR HoD/other Second super

admin family

Supervisor style

Directive functional

supportive Critical thinking emancipation enculturation Self-serving absent bullying dysfunctional

Student style Genius Hard worker

Big picture disorganised All-rounder ideas bullying Detail withdrawn

Nature of relationship

Love interest enemy fawning Traveller and guide

mentoring coach friend slavery worship

Second supervisor

Never there Always there

passive Conflicts with main

Different field leaves Too many industry supportive

Science Physics Chemistry Bioscience geology medicine Engineering Computer science

Maths Technology

Humanities Architecture History Archaeology management sociology Art English Media Philosophy

Circle one or more boxes to write the plan of your case study

Case Study 3 - Ruby

Ruby was the primary supervisor’s first student therefore an

experienced second supervisor was appointed who played a

major part in shaping the research project and offered

access to some commercial research data. They then left

the university. No access is available then to the promised

data so Ruby had to change her project. The department

could not find a suitable colleague so no new second

supervisor was appointed but Ruby struggled on to

completion anyway. Unfortunately she is recommended for

award of MPhil and is bitterly upset. She submits a Research

Degree Appeal on grounds of inadequate supervision and

procedural irregularity.

Morphological analysis tool for supervisor development case studiesParameters value

Plot line Unrecognised virtue

Fatal flaw Trial by ordeal Thwarted ambition

Eternal triangle Spider and fly

Gift taken away

Journey or quest

Heroic endeavour

Form tragedy comedy farce melodrama legal Who dunnit? crime epistolary Mystery

Topic/issue(s) Language problems

conceptual Communication issues

Process or planning

writing progress personal Power imbalance

illness

Code of practice

examination supervision admin recruitment Training Plagiarism or ethics

induction meetings records

Setting Lab office classroom fieldwork industry corridor home viva Cafe/Pub

Good/bad practice

expectations contact deadlines monitoring communication planning ideas training networking

Principle character(s)

supervisor student male female Director of PGR HoD/other Second super

admin family

Supervisor style

Directive functional

supportive Critical thinking emancipation enculturation Self-serving absent bullying dysfunctional

Student style Genius Hard worker

Big picture disorganised All-rounder ideas bullying Detail withdrawn

Nature of relationship

Love interest enemy fawning Traveller and guide

mentoring coach friend slavery worship

Second supervisor

Never there Always there

passive Conflicts with main

Different field leaves Too many industry supportive

Science Physics Chemistry Bioscience geology medicine Engineering Computer science

Maths Technology

Humanities Architecture History Archaeology management sociology Art English Media Philosophy

Circle one or more boxes to write the plan of your case study

Case Study: HosseinHossein tried to go on all the training courses he could while he was doing his PhD but he kept missing out on ‘Academic English classes for International Research Students’ run by the English language Unit. His supervisor kept saying his writing needed improvement. However, Hossein thought his writing can’t be that bad or they would not have let him progress into his second year. Anyway, all he had to do was submit a couple of pages of text and say a few things at his talk. Essentially, his supervisor Dr Gresley had said he was fine. His second supervisors Dr Churchward and Mrs Robinson seemed to have no issues, they just looked at him quizzically. His lab work was very good – they all said that. However, family issues had arisen and he needed to go back home and see his mother. Before he left he submitted a draft of his thesis but Dr Churchward, who had now taken over as primary supervisor because Dr Gresley had left, thought it was not of sufficient standard for a PhD. Dr Churchward emailed him suggesting that he change his registration from PhD to M.Phil. Hossein was unsettled and upset after returning from abroad and he was not interested in an M.Phil. He decided to put in a complaint to the University based on poor supervision.

Caroline was a data analyst working for the Cancer Network and was involved in collating and analysing regional cancer statistics. Her first degree was in maths and statistics and her current work was mainly focussed around breast cancer data and referral rates to specialised breast units. The consultant surgeon she worked with recognised Caroline’s potential and encouraged her to register for a part-time MPhil/PhD. Caroline was a highly motivated young woman, was keen to pursue a research degree and had a progressive line manager who saw this as a good development opportunity. The project was clearly defined and she registered in 2003 with Dr. Garrett in the University department, with the Mr. Evans, consultant surgeon as her 2nd university supervisor. She was spending 2 days a week on her project.Progress was satisfactory and she was making a good start on the literature, and writing her first paper with both supervisors. Six months later, the Cancer Network re-sited their analysts and Caroline was moved to a new location. With the move came a change of work schedule and line management. Three months later she was relocated again (plus another management change) and was allocated statistical analysis on head and neck cancer. Her study time fell from 2 days per week to half a day per month. She was no longer involved in breast cancer or the areas of expertise of her supervisors, and the original project was now becoming difficult to execute. Both supervisors were very supportive but Caroline was now working every evening on her MPhil and was becoming very stressed. It was obvious that her original research plan would have to change. Her first advisory panel interview highlighted that the project now appeared to be lacking in direction and that she should remain on an MPhil registration.

Questions

• How do we create case studies using good practice?

• How can we use case studies with supervisors and PGRS in the same session?

• What other means of fomenting discussion can colleagues recommend?