Postgraduate Supervision - The University of Waikato

TDU TalkISSUE 7 ▪ SEPTEMBER 2010POSTGRADUATE SUPERVISIONFrom the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Teaching and Learning)Associate Professor Richard Coll, Pro Vice-Chancellor (Teaching & Learning)From the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Postgraduate)Professor Giselle Byrnes, Pro Vice-Chancellor (Postgraduate)Developing Research Supervision Skills: Executive SummaryJean Rath, with permission from Ako AotearoaClosing Metaphor: Supervision as a Rackety BridgeBarbara Grant, University of AucklandThe Pedagogy of ‘Good’ PhD Supervision: A National Cross-Disciplinary Investigation of PhD SupervisionMark SinclairSupervision Research in ProgressGina Wisker, Brighton University & Gill Robinson, Anglia Ruskin UniversityInger Mewburn, RMIT, MelbourneReflection on Supervision ConversationsRoger Barnard, Department of Applied Linguistics, School of ArtsBooks on Supervision ConversationsPostgraduate Research Month

colleagues into postgraduate supervision; ‗best practice‘ in supervision,including the University‘s expectations and ‗negotiating the terrain‘ interms of supervisor/supervisee agreements. Subsequent conversations in2010 will cover bicultural issues in supervision, best practice in supervisionfeedback and a reflective conversation looking at what we‘ve covered todate, and what participants might want covered in 2011. The conversationshave provided space for supervisors to share their own insights and to learnfrom those of others. We have also recently been asked to facilitate asession for supervisors in the Science area – where much work is done inlabs, rather than the more one-to-one meetings that are the norm in otherFaculties.In the remainder of this edition, we profile work that has been shared withus by colleagues such as Dr Barbara Grant of the University of Auckland,our first ‗external‘ speaker, who shared ideas with us at the July 2010conversation. We suggest, from the literature, strategies that might helpsupervisors to guide their supervisees to successful completion. We providefeedback received from conversation participants, which may encourageuniversities and tertiary providers elsewhere to consider this form of staffdevelopment and support for this special form of teaching. We hope thatyou find the issue of interest, and that it causes you to reflect on how betterto support your own postgraduate students.Best wishesPip Bruce Ferguson, supported by colleagues Prof. Giselle Byrnes, Dorothy Spiller,Trudy Harris, Preetha Pratapsingh and Shant Lochan.”Make a space at your place for teachingSome of the best learning happens throughconversation and most of the working life of academicsis focused around the department. So why not makethe occasional space for conversation about teaching inyour department?• 3 • SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK

Associate Professor Richard Coll, Pro Vice-Chancellor (Teaching & Learning)“Like most jobs being a PVC has its ups and downs. A real ‗up‘ forme was attending the Ako Aotearoa Tertiary Teaching ExcellenceAwards in Wellington on 04 August.It was great to see such a wonderful celebration of teaching excellence inour tertiary education institutions.As you might imagine the competition for such awards is intense, and thecalibre of awardees truly impressive. Winning against this level ofcompetition is a real testament to the capability of our two winners, Dr.Alison Campbell from the Faculty of Science and Engineering, and TeKahautu Maxwell from the School of Māori and Pacific Development. Italso is a real compliment to those who supported their nominations andapplications.The awardees were plainly passionate and highly dedicated teachers. Aparticularly interesting observation was that the teachers held highexpectations of their students, but were very much prepared to go the extramile in encouraging, supporting and cajoling a highly diverse bunch ofstudents. These teachers bring about life changes in their students, but areamazingly humble about the influence they have on their students‘ lives.Our winners, like other awardees, are so inspirational that students makeenrolment choices based on who is teaching the papers.What I think is fascinating in terms of personal attributes of our ownawardees, is that they feel privileged to teach some wonderful students.In my opinion the University is privileged to have such capable and trulydedicated teaching staff.I would like to congratulate Alison and Te Kāhautu; they have donethe University and their students proud. I am sure they willprovide genuine inspiration for students and staff alike..”SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK• 4 •

Professor Giselle Byrnes, PVC (Postgraduate)“Just a little over two years‘ ago, I took up the leadership role of ProVice-Chancellor (Postgraduate), with the aim of enhancing thepostgraduate research culture of the University, building our capacity andcapability in the area of postgraduate supervision and maintaining theUniversity‘s national and international reputation for quality in thisimportant area. I think that we‘re well on the way to achieving these goals.My role, like that of all the Pro Vice-Chancellors, has a strong strategicfocus. We work as a team to support each other in our respective portfolios.My particular role has two aspects. First, on behalf of the PostgraduateStudies Committee I consider applications for enrolment, extensions,nomination of examiners, completions and so on. This puts me in contactwith supervisors, students and postgraduate advisers on a near-daily basis.As part of my role, I also chair the University Scholarships Committee, andwork with colleagues in the Scholarships Office on a range of initiativesdesigned to enhance our support and commitments in that area. I workclosely with the staff of the Postgraduate Studies Office, whoseresponsibility it is to support students from enrolment right through tograduation. During 2010, I will be running 17 workshops for students andsupervisors, working with colleagues from around the University inaddition to the activities planned for Postgraduate Research Month inOctober.Second, I‘m working at present on a range of projects aimed at realizingour objectives of growing our research capacity and capability—such as,how to build sustainable relationships with external research organizationsthrough postgraduate supervision, how to support part-time candidates andthose staff enrolled in a higher degree, and how to best ‗scaffold‘ andsupport new and emerging supervisors into the important role ofpostgraduate supervision. I am working with colleagues to advocate for theneeds of students and supervisors, to guarantee that we deliver high qualityoutcomes in postgraduate research and training, and to ensure that oursystems, processes and practices around postgraduate research andsupervision are robust, sustainable and support excellent quality.• 5 • SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK

Two years into the role, I feel as though I now have a good grasp of themain issues and challenges facing postgraduate students and theirsupervisors. I can now identify a range of different supervisory practicesacross the institution and I‘ve learnt a huge amount about the ways thatdisciplinary differences impact upon supervisory practice in a particularfield.One of the real privileges of this role is working with postgraduate researchstudents and with supervisors—all of whom are engaged in cutting-edgeresearch projects. I have enormous respect for the many generalprofessional staff colleagues (at the Faculty and University level) who worktirelessly to support postgraduate students and supervisors.Having a student focus is a key priority and informs my work at every step.While we work towards realizing institutional goals and meeting thebroader objectives around increasing recruitment, retention and completionamong our postgraduate student body, I believe that we mustn‘t lose sightof the importance of a well-rounded ‗Waikato‘ experience.Giselle Byrnes.”SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK• 6 •

The article below was downloaded from Ako Aotearoa’s website http://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/project/developing-research-supervision-skills/resources/pages/developing-research-supervision-skill on August 4, and isused with permission of Ako Aotearoa and author Jean Rath.IntroductionSupervising students undertaking research projects, dissertations or thesesat all levels from pre-degree to doctorates is a significant part of the workof tertiary educators, and the relationship between supervisor and studenthas been shown to be a critical factor in the retention of students. Mostliterature and research initiatives relating to supervision are aimed atpostgraduate level students and supervisors. Moreover, there is only anemerging literature to address the specific requirements of supervision inthe Aotearoa New Zealand context. Therefore, this exploratory projectsought to generate knowledge about current practices across a range of typeof organisations and qualification levels within the Aotearoa New Zealandcontext. The overarching objectives were to: Identify existing resources and professional development activities thatare available at universities, polytechnics, wānanga and relevant privatetraining establishments [PTE]. Provide baseline data and networking opportunities for future projects. Generate tentative practical recommendations to assist tertiaryinstitutions and their staff in developing effective research supervisiontraining.Methods and ResultsA national online survey and qualitative case studies of five institutions(three polytechnics, a university and a PTE) were carried out. Eachinstitution determined the nature of information obtained and the keyinformants interviewed during site visits. Case study organisations wereguided to identify staff offering leadership in professional development andsupervisors identified by the institution as adopting good practice.Responses were received from seven universities, six polytechnics, onewānanga and four PTEs (response rate 45%).• Only two institutions provided institution-wide supervisor professionaldevelopment at sub-degree level.• All the universities indicated that supervisor support or training isavailable for work at doctoral level.• 7 • SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK

• All universities provided an orientation for novice postgraduatesupervisors. Topics included: codes of practice, information aboutdealing with problems, ethics, managing candidature, working withinternational students and orientation for experienced supervisors newto the institution.• The same material was covered for supervisors of Masters levelresearch, however, the response count was the same or lower for eachsubject.• Several universities and polytechnics provided professionaldevelopment for postgraduate research supervisors at an institutionallevel and devolved support for supervisors at other levels was facultiesor schools (this resulted in some organisations having little centralisedknowledge about the overall provision of professional development).• Several polytechnics and PTEs did not regard themselves as providingany professional development for supervisors of student research.• Of those organisations providing professional development forsupervisors, all provided printed materials (most frequently a Handbookfor both students and supervisors), 90% made use of training sessionsand a mentoring programme, 40% operated a peer buddying scheme orpeer support group, and half provided web-based resources.The case studies highlighted the diverse institutional policies and practicesin relation to supervisors‘ professional development. Only the universityhad a formalised training programme for supervisors. Other institutionsrelied on wider, system-based, initiatives that focussed on staff researchand/or teaching capabilities. Few supervisors had undertaken formalsupervisor training, however, they had access to a range of skills,experiences, resources and non-supervisory formal professionaldevelopment opportunities. An inductive analysis of the interview dataidentified five main themes in supervisors‘ narratives: memories ofsupervision, supervision as teaching, transferring skills, personal attributesand learning from colleagues.Implications for supervisor professional developmentThe results highlight the range of institutional approaches to supervisorprofessional development and the major themes of the complex narrativesthat supervisors employ to make sense of their experience. One outcomehas been to raise awareness of supervisor professional development acrossa range of tertiary organisations. It is hoped that this will enhance futurenetworking between staff developers who prepare staff to supervise studentresearch at a variety of qualification levels. Based on the areas highlightedas important within the report, there are several implications for thedevelopment of practice:SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK• 8 •

• Supervision should be recognised as a space for crafting (and recrafting)scholarly identities for both students and supervisors.Professional development should encourage challenging reflectivepractices to acknowledge and build upon the knowledge and lifeexperiences of supervisors with regard to their prior professional andpersonal experiences.• Many supervisors develop their skills by evolving and expanding uponother teaching duties. Institutions can enhance this process byacknowledging pre-existing skills and by developing tertiary teachingqualifications that include supervision as a specialist pedagogy.• Professional development models should seek to facilitate a process thathonours the supervisory relationship as requiring not only competentindividual supervisors, but also a supportive community of academics,other staff and students.• Devolution of professional development responsibilities to Faculty orSchool level allows for the development of discipline specificsupervisory pedagogies. Such developments must be coupled witheffective communications between all units concerned with teachingand research development.• Staff need to be well-prepared to supervise small research projects; thisstrengthens the research-teaching nexus at pre-degree andundergraduate level, provides a stimulus for community and industryengagement, and impetus to postgraduate programmes.• Web-based resources are rapidly becoming a key vehicle to facilitateprofessional learning networks and encourage community-building.Their emergence is important in developing inclusive ways to workwith students and/or supervisors at a distance across global academicand practitioner communities.The research project was a scoping exercise. Future more in-depth researchis required that adopts longitudinal, multi-dimensional, multi-methodapproaches to help develop credible models of how professionaldevelopment affects the structure, acquisition, application and retention ofsupervisor knowledge, and how this influences students‘ experiences andoutcomes. The role of supervisors remains crucial in ensuring that studentscomplete their education in a timely manner and gain enriched abilitieswith regard to research skills, scholarly endeavour and academic identities.• 9 • SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK

Barbara Grant, who spoke at our July Supervisor’s Conversation, haswritten many papers on supervision. In one, published in the HERDSAAnnual International Conference (Melbourne, 1999), she used themetaphor of a ‘rackety bridge’ to help supervisors to understand thedynamics of the supervision process on both parties. This quote, accessedfrom http://www.herdsa.org.au/branches/vic/Cornerstones/pdf/grant.pdfon 4 August 2010, explains her metaphor.This brings me to my closing metaphor which is also my title: I want tosuggest that negotiating a supervision relationship is like walking on arackety bridge. On the one hand, supervision is like the bridge in that it hasa kind of material reality: the institution offers a ‗sound‘ pedagogicalstructure within which the interactions between supervisor and student areassumed to occur. This structure has been defined more explicitly in recenttimes as a ‗code‘ of mutual responsibilities. Yet, on the other, because ofthe workings of power, identity and desire, supervision is not static butrackety, a bridge disturbed by erratic movement. Once an agreement forsupervision is reached, and student and supervisor begin to walk on thebridge together, to act in relation to one another, many unpredictableeffects occur, threatening the stability of the bridge and those walking on it.As Gilah Leder describes it (1995 p. 5), supervision is a ―question ofbalance‖; negotiating it requires a certain situational attentiveness. Whenwalking jointly on a rackety bridge, both supervisor and student need to besensitive to the effects of their actions and responses on the other, orsomeone (most often the student) may fall off. At times, both need to beflexible in their tactics and willing to try new ways of acting towards theother in order to maintain a balance that allows progress to be made. This isnot to say, though, that both are equal. In my metaphor, the supervisorweighs more by virtue of her/his institutional position and therefore musttake greater care in how s/he walks on that bridge. A small, thoughtlessmove can throw the student off the bridge. No movement at all can provokeunwise movements from the student. For instance, some students end up‗jumping‘ up and down to ensure their supervisor notices their presence onthe bridge among all the other distractions and pressures of academic life.Grant, B. (1999) Walking on a racketybridge: mapping supervision. Inonline proceedings of theCornerstones: What do we value inhigher education? Conference,Higher Education Research andDevelopment Society of AustralasiaAnnual International Conference,Melbourne, Australia, July 12 – 15.SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALKWhile supervision is risky, it is also potentially a highly pleasurablepedagogy for both student and supervisor. For the student there are thepleasures of working one-to-one with an academic, of being recognised asan academic her/himself (and many other pleasures besides); for thesupervisor there are the pleasures of seeing a student‘s capabilities growand flower in the writing of the thesis, of co-producing a good piece ofacademic work, of fostering the development of the discipline (and morebesides). To make the most of these pleasures we must attend to them andactively promote them, which means acknowledging that supervision is farmore than a simple contract of mutual responsibilities between supervisorand student. (Grant, 1999, page 9).• 10 •

In research reported on the site above, Mark Sinclair carried out work in2004 that aimed to investigate claims that there is a relationship betweenresearch higher degree supervision, and completions.http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/07C6492B-F1BE-45C6-A283-6098B6952D29/2536/phd_supervision.pdfThe work used a two-phase nationwide survey in Australia that approached5450 possible respondents (40%, or 1048, of whom responded in the firstphase) plus 1032 possible respondents (of whom 75%, or 770, replied, inthe second phase). They supervised students between 1990 and 1997 in 26state and private universities in Australia. In addition, Sinclair then carriedout face to face interviews with 83 PhD supervisors and 26 present orformer higher degree candidates across 17 universities. The research foundthat there were emergent principles of ―the pedagogy of ‗good‘ PhDsupervision‖ which offered food for thought.Hands-on supervisors:• Have a more interventionist approach based on accepting that candidatesare not always ideally prepared and setting the candidate up for a morestructured approach to their candidature• Achieve an early and lasting agreement with candidate regardingexpectations of each other coupled with action consistent withagreements• Maintain the supervision relationship by a combination of an ‗opendoor‘ consultation policy and regularly initiating contact with candidates• Get to know their candidates well enough for a personal dimension oftrust to exist within an otherwise professional relationship• Acknowledge the power differential between selves and students and―use their superior position to mentor candidate‘s professionaldevelopment with a view to the candidate established her/himself as apeer‖ (p.vii)• Explicitly negotiate a ―firm timetable‖ for candidature – includingavailable support and project logistics, institutional quality checks,project-specific milestones such as the production of thesis text, thepresentation and publication of conference and journal papers• Treat the first year as crucial – provide for a mix of formal and informalinteractions between selves and candidates, other candidates andrelevant sources of expert advice, require writing and give feedback fast,encourage candidates to multi-task so they don‘t get bogged down by anapparent lack of progress in one area of the research• Foster collaborations between candidates (via face to face and electronicmeans)• 11 • SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK

• Involve academics and other experts additional to the supervisor in thecandidate‘s research• Integrate candidate‘s into supervisor‘s broader associations withresearch groups and teams as well as industry networks• Enhance the candidates professional development via activities such asjoint preparation of conference presentations and journal papers• Have a fluctuating frequency of interaction, also amount and level ofinput, after the first year but intensify their interactions with thecandidate during ―peak candidate activity‖ especially writing• Go through a number of iterations of thesis and publication drafts withcandidates• Negotiate authorship protocols that reflect respective contributions madeby supervisor, candidate and any additional authorsCulturally Responsive Research and PedagogyA symposium to be held atThe Faculty of Education, University of WaikatoNovember 13-15The vision for the symposium is a gathering of around 100 people, of whom three will beinternational keynote speakers and 20 will be, by invitation, presenters of papers. Remainingregistrations will be more open, but we will be making a special place for emerging scholarswhose doctoral work is focused on the conference theme.Our aim, then, is for a mix of experience and expertise, from seasoned scholars to fresh andeager doctoral students with an interest in the theme. We are planning for a mix of overseasvisitors, and local presenters and symposium members with an interest in and a willingness topresent on the way the symposium theme is played out in a range of contexts, including, ofcourse, New Zealand/Aotearoa.Keynote speakers: Hilary Janks, University of the Witwatersrand; Christine Sleeter, ProfessorEmerita, the College of Professional Studies at California State University Monterey Bay; KrisGutiérrez, Professor, School of Education, University of Colorado at Boulder.For further details and to register: http://www.crrp.ac.nzInquiries: Terry Locke, t.locke@waikato.ac.nzSEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK• 12 •

Gina Wisker, Brighton University & Gill Robinson, Anglia Ruskin UniversityInger Mewburn, RMIT, MelbournePip and Giselle were privileged to attend the Quality in PostgraduateResearch Conference in Adelaide, Australia, in April. Interestingsupervision-related papers were presented at this conference, and we takethe opportunity to share a couple of these here (abstract only; theconference proceedings are not yet loaded).In the first paper, Gina Wisker of Brighton University and Gill Robinson ofAnglia Ruskin University looked at ―Doctoral Orphans: Nurturing andsupporting the success of postgraduates who have lost their supervisors‖.Their abstract reads:Relationships between doctoral students and supervisors have variouslybeen described in ways which range from a ‘dance’ (Wisker) matchinglearning styles and enabling productive, sound research, to a masterslave interaction (Manathunga, Peseta) with all the attendant problemsaround authority, power and silencing. This paper draws on workconcerning the range of supervisor relationships and interactions withstudents, theories of identity, belonging, ontology, and learning ina dialogue to consider ways in which supervisors and learningcommunities work with doctoral students who have for whatever reason‘lost’ their supervisor(s).Supervisors move on, supervisory relationships can become problematic.Students can be the victims in such instances and some have describedthemselves as ‘orphans’ when they find themselves without supervision.Adjusting to new supervisory teams is difficult, and can cause stress,anxiety, leading the student to experience being ‘stuck’ in their work,existing in a ‘liminal space’ between paralysis and productivity. Forsupervisors ‘adopting’ such students, the issues of engaging with apartially developed project, helping to enable the student to overcome theanxieties and work with the new relationship, and ways of working towardsa successful relationship and a successful doctorate are all major issueswhich require planning, tact, sensitivity, management and goodcommunication skills.Small scale research uses narrative interviewing to explore the learningjourneys of (1)several doctoral students who have experienced this loss oftheir supervisor and (2) supervisors who have undertaken supervision ofstudents midway into their projects, focusing on the issues and identifyingways of overcoming problems the interactions and relationship mightthrow up.• 13 • SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK

Gina has kindly offered to share her email address with readers who mightbe interested in this work. You can contact her on g.wisker@brighton.ac.ukIn the second paper, On ‗whingeing‘: the hidden work of troubles talk inPhD communities, Dr Inger Mewburn‘s abstract described ―telling storiesabout ourselves, we are also performing a version of our self to others(Frank, 1995). This paper explores the phenomenon of ‘troublestelling’ (Jefferson, 1984) amongst PhD students and discusses the value ofthis practice in shaping scholarly communities. Self Narratives work topresent a certain kind of self to others and orientate us in our relationships.By providing the space for performing an uncertain scholarly self at a safedistance from supervisory influence or the text itself, ‘troubles telling’occupies an important niche in the PhD landscape. However, troublestelling behaviour is often misunderstood by supervisors andadministrators; denigrated as complaining rather than seen as fertileterritory for the crafting of the scholarly self. Drawing on literature inconversational analysis and examples from within PhD communities, thispaper works to set aside this negative stereotype and celebrate the positivepower of whingeing.And a blog:While the full paper is yet to be produced, Inger also keeps a veryinformative blog that may be of interest to supervisors,particularly a recent contribution on „a complex supervisor/student relationship issue‟. Now read on (you might like toshare this one with students approaching „hand-in‟ stage!)“This one is about a complex supervisor / student relationshipissue: what happens if you think your thesis is ready to submitbut your supervisor doesn‟t?If you read my university homepage you will see that part of myjob involves consulting with PhD students about „administrativematters‟. This is a broad brief; basically it means that I see PhDstudents who are in distress for various reasons.Usually I am able to direct them to another university servicearea better equipped to help. But PhD students are veryresourceful people – often I can give them a bit of a pep talk andthey end up solving the problem themselves.One of the pep talks in my repertoire is the “It‟s Time” talk. Bythis I mean – it‟s time to have that difficult conversation withyour supervisor about scholarly independence. Let me explain.SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK• 14 •

Over the last six months I have had consults with quite a fewstudents who were arguing with their supervisors about whetheror not the PhD was ready for examination. All these students, Imight add, were physically and emotionally exhausted. Somewere in tears as they told me they just couldn‟t carry on.These students have extreme reactions to a problem whichconfronts all research students: how to become a fullyindependent scholar.Now when I started this blog I promised myself I would becareful about how I approach the issues around student /supervisor relationships. It‟s a particularly fraught area. If youdon‟t believe me scan this archive of papers from the Quality inPostgraduate Research conferences and see how many there areabout supervision problems.Loads.One of the reasons that the relationships can be so fraught isthat there‟s a paradox at the heart of research supervision. Thestated intent of the PhD process is to train novices to become„independent scholars‟. Further, these novice scholars aresupposed to be engaged in making „new knowledge‟. This putsall supervisors in a difficult position.There should come a point, sooner or later in this process, whereyou know more than your supervisor about your topic. If youthink about it – this is in the finest tradition of teaching. Thegreat privilege of research supervision is that a teacher gets tostep back knowing that the student has surpassed them and willgo on to do Great Things.If the process has worked you will be in the best position to judgethe quality of your work and be able to tell your supervisor it isready – and they will agree. The supervisor has helped you todevelop what they already have – an internal critic. Thisinternal critic you have formed while doing a PhD will be yourfriend for life – it is the essence of scholarly independence andwill enable you to do the job of an academic.A caveat. Your thesis being „ready‟ does not mean that it isperfect. Perfect is, as my dear husband says, the enemy of Good.Perfect is also the enemy of done. I think perfectionism is rife inthe PhD scholar community because, well – we are highachievers.But that‟s a post for another time.• 15 • SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK

Of course, if your supervisor‟s internal critic and your internalcritic disagree everything should come to a screaming halt. Thesupervisors I meet take their responsibility for overseeing studentwelfare extremely seriously. Heck – they may even be your friendby this point.Although the supervisor may give many reasons for withholdingtheir permission to submit, it usually boils down to one: theydon‟t want you to fail or have a horrible year of makingsubstantial revisions. They see flaws in your work which makethem think this will happen.This is why I advise students to swallow their pride and make therevisions that are being asked for. However some of the tearfulstudents reject this advice. Some have already accepted thepossibility of revisions or failure and tell me they would rathertake a chance on examination. Other students violentlydisagreed with the changes being suggested by the supervisor,arguing the thesis would be worse if they made them.Part of my „It‟s Time‟ pep talk is to point out the paradoxicalnature of research supervision and the complex issue of scholarlyindependence.Developing empathy with the supervisor, rather than seeing themas the problem, enables you to go back and have an honestconversation about the risks you are prepared to take. Supervisorscan be relieved to hear that you are willing take responsibilityfor the work and its flaws. Often this is enough for theexamination process to begin.In rare cases however the It‟s Time talk doesn‟t work. If youprofoundly disagree with your supervisor about the finalchanges, perhaps a second opinion is called for. It surprises mehow often students think they can‟t ask for another person toread the thesis when they are in this situation. Hopefully youhave a second supervisor or another person in the departmentwho can act as a circuit breaker.It‟s best to try to negotiate with your supervisor about who thisthird reader will be so that you can both be comfortable withtheir advice. You will need to be prepared for this person to tellyou to put your ego back on the shelf and make the changes,because, I‟m sorry to tell you – this is what usually happens.Remember: you might be stubborn rather than right.So – in the end there are no easy answers. I can only highlightthe complexity of the issue and encourage honestcommunication. Perhaps others will have experiences to share?”SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK• 16 •

Roger Barnard, Department of Applied Linguistics, School of ArtsI have attended most of the supervisors‘ conversations since they startedlast year, and found them very interesting and useful.They were interesting because I met colleagues from across the university –some of whom I know quite well, but many others I had not previouslymet – all of us sharing a common concern with how best we can mentorour research students. I found a wide diversity of beliefs and practicesrelated to supervision. This itself indicates that there can be no single ‗bestpractice‘ of supervision that we should all follow. For example, at one ofthe early meetings, we discussed the issue of ‗conditional‘ enrolment,which normally lasts six months. For the physical scientists, this period istoo long, because their methodology is straightforward and their HREapplications are usually simple, if needed at all. For those working in fieldssuch as education, the period is often too short as multi-methods of datacollection, and the ethical implications, need a great deal of time to detail.Another matter of common interest was how best to cater for the needs ofthe growing enrolment of international students into research degrees; evenwhen they have a firm grasp of their field of study, research methodologyand are linguistically competent, they are nevertheless very oftenunaccustomed to the culture of doctoral research at Waikato. Here, too,there are differences of approach not only across faculties but even withindepartments, as individual supervisors take their own position as to howmuch structure and support their candidates need at various times.The sessions were useful to me because I learned a great deal from mycolleagues to integrate into my own practice. An example of this was thediffering views taken about co-publishing with research students; howmuch credit I should take for ‗riding on the back‘ of my students‘ ownresearch? Another point that I need to think hard about is the negotiation ofrespective roles, responsibilities and relationships among the supervisorypanel. A third is to constantly widen my academic horizons to involvecolleagues across the university in interdisciplinary or cross-disciplinarysupervision. (Now, the distinction between these two, if indeed there is one,could be the topic of a future conversation!)I believe, too, that these conversations have provided insights for thePostgraduate Studies Office. The most recent conversation was around howthe university can best support supervisors and their students, and manyideas were discussed. Among these was the need to reduce the amount ofpaperwork involved in, for example, the progress reports required ofcandidates and supervisors. Since we are working with colleagues acrossthe university and sometimes off-campus (for example, on study leave) andperhaps with students being absent while collecting data, it would behelpful if these reports were able to be circulated electronically.Anyway, TDU are to be congratulated on this most enjoyable and helpfulinitiative, and I look forward to future conversations with pleasureanticipation. (The lunch is good, too!)• 17 • SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK

A Handbook for Doctoral SupervisorsStan Taylor, Nigel BeasleyA Proactive Guide to SupervisionA Student’s Guide to Theses and DissertationsSue MiddletonAction Research in Higher Education: Examples and ReflectionsOrtrun Zuber-SkerrittAn Expanded Sourcebook - Qualitative Data AnalysisMatthew B. Miles, A. Michael HubermanAuthoring a PhD: How to Plan, Draft, Write and Finish aDoctoral Thesis or DissertationPatrick DunleavyChanging Doctoral Degrees: An International PerspectiveKeith Allan NobleCreating The Literature PortfolioAlan C. Purves, Joseph A. QuattriniDeveloping Students' Library Research SkillsChristine BruceEffective Literature Searching for ResearchSarah GashEnhancing Postgraduate Supervision at UNE 1995: A jointproject of the postgraduate supervision special interest groupand the academic development unitGraham JonesGood Practice in Postgraduate SupervisionGina Wisker, Nick SutcliffeHandbook for Graduate Teaching Assistants: Center forTeaching EffectivenessGabriele Bauer, Karen SpryHandbook for Research Degrees of MPhil, PhD and EdD at theUniversity of WaikatoHighways to Postgraduate SupervisionLee W. AndresenHow to Get a PhD: A Handbook for Students and TheirSupervisorsEstelle M. Phillips, D.S. Pugh,How to ResearchLoraine Blaxter, Christina Hughes, Malcolm TightManual for Conducting Workshops on PostgraduateSupervisionOrtrun Zuber-SkerrittOn The Art of Doing Field Studies: An Experience-basedResearch MethodologyIB Anderson, Finn Borum, Peer Hull Kristensen, Peter KarnoePostgraduate Research, Supervision and Training: Creating aSupportive Environment for Postgraduate StudyLinda Conrad, Estelle PhillipsPostgraduate Research, Supervision and Training: From ThesisWriting to Research Application: Learning the ResearchCulturePeter SheehanPostgraduate Research, Supervision and Training: GenderIssues in Postgraduate EducationLinda Conrad, Kate RobertsPostgraduate Research, Supervision and Training: Getting intoPrintRoyce SadlerPostgraduate Research, Supervision and Training: Supervisionand the Thesis Writing ProcessNanette Gottlieb• 18 • SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK

Postgraduate Research, Supervision and Training: Supervisionof the Writing Process in the SciencesTrevor HeathPostgraduate Research, Supervision and Training: Supervisionof the Writing Process in the Social Sciences and HumanitiesPeggy NightingalePostgraduate Research, Supervision and Training: The Role ofthe Postgraduate SupervisorEstelle Phillips, Ingrid Moses, Peggy NightingaleQuality in Postgraduate Research: Making Ends MeetMargaret Kiley (Editor), Gerry Mullins (Editor)Reading and Understanding ResearchLawrence F. Locke, Stephen J. Silverman, Waneen WyrickSpirdusoResearch Skills for StudentsBrian Allison, Tim O'Sullivan, Alun Owen, Jenny Rice & ArthurRothwell & Carol SaundersReview of the Research Postgraduate ExperienceDesiree Jurgs, Graham MacKay, Graham JonesSupervising the PhD: A Guide to SuccessSara Delamont, Paul Atkinson, Odette ParrySupervision WorkshopsSue MiddletonThe Good Supervisor: Supervising Postgraduate andUndergraduate Research for Doctoral Theses and DissertationsGina WiskerThesis and Assignment WritingJonathan Anderson, Berry H. Durston, Millicent PooleTraining Needs Analysis: The Thesis Supervisor and the ThesisStudent at Victoria University of WellingtonJoanna Kidman, Cedric Hall, Lorna Murray,Up the Publication RoadD. Royce SadlerThe resources listed are available from the TDU Library, A BlockBasement. For details or to borrow, please contact PreethaPratapsingh: tduadmin@waikato.ac.nz, ext. 4839.So Where's Your Research Profile: A Resource Book forAcademicsKate BeattieSocial Research: Issues, Methods and ProcessTim MayStarting Research - Supervision and TrainingOrtrun Zuber-SkerrittSuccessful Study for DegreesRob BarnesSupervising PostgraduatesIngrid Moses• 19 • SEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK

The focus is on postgraduate research during the month of October, with aseries of events and activities designed to promote awareness ofpostgraduate research and its place within the University and the widercommunity.Co-ordinated by the Postgraduate Studies Office, Postgraduate ResearchMonth will include, the Th3sis in 3 competition, a quiz night, informationevening, ‗meet and greet‘ sessions during campus Cultural Hour,workshops for doctoral students and their supervisors, as well as Facultyseminars and research conferences.19-22 October 2010, Liverpool, UK13-14 November 2010, Faculty of Education, University ofWaikato, Hamiltonhttp://www.crrp.ac.nz17-19 November 2010, University of Waikato, Hamiltonwww.nzethnographyconference.comThe highlight of the month will be the Th3sis in 3 competitionwhich will showcase the cream of this University‘s emergingresearchers. With a first prize of $5,000 towards doctoralresearch expenses, this is a fantastic opportunity for students toshowcase their research in front of an audience. Given a timelimit of just three minutes, contestants will be required to presenttheir research topic and its significance to a panel of judges andpublic audience. Th3sis in 3 heats will be held during October,with ten finalists selected to compete in the finals, held onWednesday 27 October at Hamilton‘s Clarence Street Theatre.Hosted by New Zealand comedian and self-styled opinionist, TeRadar, the final event will provide an evening of free academicinsight and entertainment. The overall winner of Th3sis in 3 willtake away $5,000, and the runner-up will receive $2,500 to puttowards research expenses.For more information on Postgraduate Research Month and theTh3sis in 3 competition, visit http://www.waikato.ac.nz/sasd/postgraduate/postgraduatemonth.shtml.25-26 November 2010, University of Lincoln, Christchurchhttp://www.lincoln.ac.nz/AHEEF-201018-21 April 2011, Stellenbosch, South Africawww.postgraduate2011.co.zaSEPTEMBER 2010 • TDU TALK• 20 •

SeptemberProfessional Development at a GlanceWarm congratulations to Dr. Alison Campbell from the Faculty of Science and Engineering, and Te Kahautu Maxwell from the Schoolof Māori and Pacific Development for their success in the Ako Aotearoa National Tertiary Teaching Awards.ĀHANGA