Doctoral Supervision

Research Education: Whose space for learning?

by Terri Seddon

Reference:

Doecke, B and Seddon, T. 2002 Research Education: Whose Space for Learning? Australian Education Researcher 29 (3), pp.85-100

Recent changes in the funding of research degree programs in Australia have had an impact on the way research students... more Recent changes in the funding of research degree programs in Australia have had an impact on the way research students are prepared and licensed as researchers. In particular, the design of programs must now address issues of student progress, support and pacing in order to access funding for timely completions. In a sense, the social space within which research training has traditionally been addressed is being reconfigured through the application of funding levers, coupled with increased reporting procedures relating to a specified set of research outcomes. This paper draws on recent theorising of social space in order to investigate the scope and character of this reconfiguration. We argue that research education remains a complex and contested zone despite the pressures of neo-liberal globalisation to impose a model of research in its own image.

Research Education: Whose space for learning?

by Terri Seddon

Reference:

Doecke, B and Seddon, T. 2002 Research Education: Whose Space for Learning? Australian Education Researcher 29 (3), pp.85-100

Recent changes in the funding of research degree programs in Australia have had an impact on the way research students... more Recent changes in the funding of research degree programs in Australia have had an impact on the way research students are prepared and licensed as researchers. In particular, the design of programs must now address issues of student progress, support and pacing in order to access funding for timely completions. In a sense, the social space within which research training has traditionally been addressed is being reconfigured through the application of funding levers, coupled with increased reporting procedures relating to a specified set of research outcomes. This paper draws on recent theorising of social space in order to investigate the scope and character of this reconfiguration. We argue that research education remains a complex and contested zone despite the pressures of neo-liberal globalisation to impose a model of research in its own image.

Ph. D. training and social responsibility in a changing climate—the roots of an educator's dilemma

by Chris Trevitt

Realising pedagogical potential of the Bologna Process third cycle

by Chris Trevitt

Just what the doctorate ordered

by Tara Brabazon

Times Higher Education, September 22, 2010

Supervising International Undergraduate Medical Students

by Gavin Melles

On Quality and Standards in Research Training

by Nigel Palmer

Palmer, N. (2011). On Quality and Standards in Research Training. Melbourne, Australia: Centre for the Study of Higher Education.

An edited version of this paper first appeared in The Australian online Friday November 18th, 2011.

In October 2011 the Australian Government released Defining Quality, a consultation paper focussing on quality aspects... more In October 2011 the Australian Government released Defining Quality, a consultation paper focussing on quality aspects around research training. The paper addresses the quality of the physical and intellectual environment, the flexibility and ‘fit’ of the scheme and its broader fitness for purpose in supporting research education. A second paper, due for release in June 2012, is set to address technical aspects of the scheme, including options for how results from the Federal Government’s research quality measurement exercise, the Excellence in Research for Australia Initiative (ERA), may influence funding allocations under the RTS scheme. While addressing different issues, the two papers are related. Funding formulae are typically associated with measures of performance, and those in turn are taken as measures of quality. Conceptions of what constitutes quality are therefore likely to inform the indicator mix which will eventually determine the distribution of federally funded places and possibly also scholarships from 2013. Before jumping to conclusions regarding the prospect that ERA may determine the allocation of federally funded research higher degree places or scholarships, it is important to be clear on three very important points:

1. Firstly that quality and performance are not the same;
2. Secondly that ERA currently measures neither when it comes to research training;
3. Thirdly there are existing dimensions and characteristics associated with a quality research training environment (as outlined in Appendix I); and
4. Finally, the possibility of identifying an activity or characteristic as either a threshold or a performance standard does not in itself mean that it should become one.

The Defining Quality consultation paper is the first part of a two-stage consultation process informing review of the Federal Government’s scheme for funding research education: the Research Training Scheme (RTS) (DIISR, 2011a). The RTS is the national tuition scheme for domestic places in research masters and PhD study, which alongside the Australian Postgraduate Award scheme is the principal support program for research education in Australia (DIISR, 2011c). Review of the RTS comes as part of the Federal Government’s Research Workforce Strategy (DIISR, 2011b). The Defining Quality consultation paper is well prepared and development of the Strategy has been an example of best practice in public policy development. However, this initiative is due to intersect with two other Federal Government initiatives: the Excellence in Research for Australia Initiative (ERA) and the formation of the new Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) (ARC, 2011; Australian Government, 2011b). This intersection will have important implications for the definition and measurement of quality and standards in research training in Australia, and for prospects for continued innovation and improvement in this area in the future.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight some important considerations in the intersection between the RTS, ERA and the implementation of the proposed Standards Framework under the new Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). It also aims to inform discussion on the definition and measurement of aspects of a quality research education environment more broadly.

Doctoring the system

by Tara Brabazon

Times Higher Education, October 22, 2009

How not to write a PhD thesis

by Tara Brabazon

Times Higher Education, January 28, 2010

Power and the Unconscious in doctoral student-supervisor relationships

by Chrissie Rogers

co-authored with Helen Lucey (Bath) in Power, knowledge and the academy

Graduate Students' Teaching Experiences Improve Their Methodological Research Skills

by Briana Timmerman

published in Science 2011 333(6045): 1037-039

Graduate Students' Teaching Experiences Improve Their Methodological Research Skills

by Briana Timmerman

published in Science 2011 333(6045): 1037-039

Podcasts can lead us into the world of Supervision 2.0

by Tara Brabazon

Times Higher Education, December 29, 2009

Skirt, cap and gown: How fair are universities to female postgraduate students?

by Tara Brabazon

Cultural Studies Review, Vol. 10, No. 1, March 2004, pp. 161-175

Putting the Doctorate Into Practice, and the Practice Into Doctorates: Creating a New Space for Quality Scholarship Through Creativity

by Tara Brabazon

Nebula, Vol. 7.1/7.2, June 2010, http://nobleworld.biz/images/Brabazon_Dagli.pdf

Performance-Based Data in the Study of STEM Ph. D. Education

by Briana Timmerman

Perceived Conflicts Between Affirmation of Religious Diversity and Affirmation of Sexual Diversity: That's Perceived.

by Ann R. Fischer

Fischer, A. R., & DeBord, K. A. (2007). Perceived conflicts between affirmation of religious diversity and affirmation of sexual diversity: That’s ‘perceived.’ In K. J. Bieschke, R. M. Perez, & K. A. DeBord (Eds.), Handbook of counseling and psychotherapy with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender clients (2nd ed., pp.317-339). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

The purpose of this chapter is to explore and invite further discussion of what we perceive as an ethical dilemma... more The purpose of this chapter is to explore and invite further discussion of what we perceive as an ethical dilemma within the field of psychology: How do individuals and organizations proceed when there is a perceived conflict between the two important professional values of respect for religious diversity and respect for sexual diversity? In its most basic form, our question is, "What should psychologists do when students or colleagues perceive that their religion tells them it is wrong to be lesbian, gay, or bisexual?" To affirm religious diversity, we ought to be respectful of norms and ideals of religion as people experience it, but to affirm sexual diversity, we ought to emphasize respect for and normalcy of (American Psychological Association [APA], 1998) lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) identities.

We emphasize "perceived" conflict and take this perception as our starting point, rather than attempting to argue about whether such a perception is warranted. Readers interested in perspectives on LGB-affirming and LGB-oppressing aspects of various religious systems may refer to sources such as Ritter and Terndrup (2002) and Davidson (2000). In other words, our domain here is not the concordance between affirmation of sexual diversity and doctrine or sacred texts within any particular religious tradition, but rather is what we in the mental health fields might do when a conflict is perceived . . . . Thus, in this chapter we address this issue directly by articulating how we attempted to resolve parts of the conflict by working through the steps of an ethical decision-making model (Hill, Glaser, & Harden, 1995).

Animal research practices and doctoral student development in a scientific community

by Karri Holley

Studies in Higher Education, 34(5), 577-591

Five Challenges and Solutions in Online Music Teacher Education.

by David Hebert

Research and Issues in Music Education. Available online, open-access in RIME vol. 5. A response by Kenneth H. Phillips and the author's rejoinder is in RIME vol. 6.

An examination of issues and challenges in the management of online music degree programs. Five key issues are... more An examination of issues and challenges in the management of online music degree programs. Five key issues are discussed: (1) prejudice regarding the legitimacy of online degrees; (2) coordination between distance education and music departments; (3) pressure to maximize profits at the expense of educational quality; (4) management of adjunct music instructors; and (5) management of student behavior and provision of student services. The author acknowledges criticisms, proposes solutions to various problems, and identifies both the potential strengths and future opportunities associated with online degree programs.
A response by Kenneth H. Phillips and the author's rejoinder is in RIME vol. 6:

See http://www.stthomas.edu/rimeonline/vol5/index.htm
(vol. 5)
Also see http://www.stthomas.edu/rimeonline/vol6/index.htm
(vol. 6)

Postgraduate Studies In Europe: Looking Beyond Bologna

by Kent Löfgren