Ph.D. partnership: effective doctoral supervision using a coaching stance

Wilson, Jay; James, Wendy

doi:10.1080/0309877x.2021.1945555

Cited by 13 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The present study adds to the body of research showing discrepancies between supervisors' and students' discourse models during thesis supervision. While previous studies highlight different perspectives on effective supervision, desired feedback, thesis supervisory expectation, and attitudes (Zacharias, 2007;McMartin-Miller, 2014;Dawson et al, 2018;Wilson and James, 2022), this study specifically points out different perspectives on thesis supervision as part of a process of learning. In our previous study, the Swedish and Indonesian supervisors foregrounded the learning purposes of supervision (Nangimah and Walldén, in press).…”

Section: Students' Reactions To the Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…They may also have different perspectives and attitudes toward thesis supervision. Supervisors may see effective supervision as a purposeful coaching based on its various intentions, such as functional project management; enculturation to the academic community; and the development of critical thinking, emancipation (Lee, 2011), students' agency, and problem-solving skills (Wilson and James, 2022). On the other hand, students may have positive and negative perceptions towards supervisor' actions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How supervisors provide and students react to EAL thesis supervision: Voices from Sweden and Indonesia

Nangimah

Walldén²

2023

Front. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThesis supervision is a critical part of students’ academic literacy development. Previous research has shown different dimensions of this development with limited attention to cross-cultural aspects. In particular, there has been little research on how students and supervisors negotiate supervision practices in non-anglophone contexts. This study aimed to explore students’ and supervisors’ reported priorities and experiences regarding the provision and reception of feedback in English as an Additional Language thesis supervision.MethodWe conducted a qualitative case study to illuminate supervisor’s and students’ experiences of supervision in Sweden and Indonesia. It involved 39 participants (14 supervisors and 25 students) from one Swedish and three Indonesian universities. One-on-one semi-structured interviews were conducted and analyzed thematically using Biesta’s functions of education, Habermas’ communicative action theory, and perspectives on academic literacy.FindingsFirstly, we found that Swedish and Indonesian supervisors had different feedback provision priorities. Swedish supervisors described prioritizing content-focused feedback to facilitate students’ socialization into academic writing. Conversely, most Indonesian supervisors expressed balancing content- and form-focused feedback with a greater emphasis on qualifying as English teachers. Despite these differences, supervisors in both contexts tended to isolate academic language use from discipline-specific values and practices. Secondly, students in both contexts largely expressed an instrumental orientation to achieving their goals and were frustrated by supervisors phrasing feedback as questions. Many students expressed unfamiliarity with necessary methodologies and theoretical frameworks, which made supervisors’ feedback difficult to decode.DiscussionSince only a few of the students viewed the feedback as a support for their process of learning, this study calls for a clear communication about the academic socialization intention through supervision. However, academic socialization cannot solely be the responsibility of supervisors but must be embedded in the curriculum courses.

show abstract

Section: Students' Reactions To the Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 79%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How supervisors provide and students react to EAL thesis supervision: Voices from Sweden and Indonesia

Nangimah

Walldén²

2023

Front. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Students recorded higher levels of self-confidence whilst promoting their ability to find solutions to their problems. Recent work by Wilson and James (2021) suggests that adopting coaching methods in supervision enables academics to focus more on their students' needs, personality, experiences, and ways of thinking rather than on meeting their objectives. They suggest that to understand student needs, supervisors need to be open to listening to what the student brings into the conversation and realise they have a mutual relationship based on respect and trust.…”

Section: Literature Review: Coaching Methods and Doctoral Supervisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Wilson and James (2021), CT can be developed by adopting a more informal supervisory style than the functional and directive supervisory approach. Indeed, their autoethnographic study revealed findings of a supervisory relationship based on the student's interests and expressed needs and how beneficial it was in improving student control over goal setting and decision-making.…”

Section: Literature Review: Coaching Methods and Doctoral Supervisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating and Normalising Coaching as a Routine Practice in Doctoral Supervision

Bordogna¹,

Lundgren‐Resenterra

2023

IJDS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/Purpose: Recent research highlights the growing decline in doctoral students’ mental health and wellbeing, caused not only by the pressures, stress, and isolation of doctoral studies but also by existential issues around personal development and future prospects. Consequently, we argue that there is an urgent need to reassess the supervisory process to support doctoral students in addressing these concerns. This paper offers a potential solution to this challenge by exploring and examining how integrating coaching methods into doctoral supervision can support doctoral students’ growth and development, thereby increasing their wellbeing and human flourishing. Coaching aims to help individuals produce optimal performance and improvements in personal and professional settings by deploying a series of tools and models. Coaching is essentially a non-directive form of development, enabling people to identify goals and skills and then extracting the capacity people have within themselves to achieve their ambitions. This paper explores how coaching methods could be made a regular feature of doctoral supervision. Background: The need to reconfigure doctoral supervision as a practice to address humanistic issues regarding whole-person development, self-actualisation, and personal worth is nothing new. Over the years, researchers have produced models of doctoral supervision, highlighting the growing need for supervision to incorporate more pastoral and emancipatory elements, which facilitate personal growth instead of focusing purely on academic function and criticality. Although coaching is identified in previous studies as being a valuable addition, nothing examines how to modify existing supervision practices to accommodate more pastoral elements. Methodology: This paper offers a conceptual analysis whereby the argument primarily synthesizes existing research on doctoral supervision to understand why coaching methods may provide a solution to the evolving requirements of student welfare and emancipation. Since the commentary in this paper is not based on the findings of an empirical study, the following two conceptual research questions frame the discussion. First, are coaching methods beneficial when supervising doctoral students? Second, what are the challenges when implementing and integrating coaching methods into existing doctoral supervisory practice? The paper utilises the Normalisation Process Theory as a ‘thinking tool’ to help answer these questions. The theory evaluates phenomena in applied social research settings to help understand how complex practices are made workable and integrated into context-dependent ways. Therefore, the theory acts as an analytical tool, enabling researchers to think through implementation issues when designing complex interventions and their evaluation. Contribution: This paper contributes to knowledge by highlighting ways in which management responsible for a doctoral provision in higher education settings can modify their organisational structures and systems to encourage coaching methods to become a normalised part of doctoral supervision, thereby legitimising its practice. Findings: The Normalisation Process Theory has value because it produces a roadmap for integrating and implementing new or modified practices into existing systems of operation. It, therefore, assists by producing an output that enables a current/new practice to be dissected and categorised under specific headings. In this research context, this output assisted in understanding the operational challenges when considering the normalisation of a practice. The theory helped generate something managers tasked with managing doctoral provision could consider (i.e., institutional paradigms, policies, regulations, etc.) when thinking about what may need to be reconfigured to enable coaching methods to become an integrated and normalised part of doctoral supervision over time. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is recommended that practitioners consider the integration of coaching methods into supervision. First, once implemented, it requires monitoring to ensure the practice’s quality and consistency amongst the supervisory community. Secondly, to assess the impact of the practice on other services within the organisation, such as student services or faith services, and thirdly, to ensure training in coaching methods is made timely and relevant to assist all academics involved in doctoral supervision. Recommendation for Researchers: The authors recommend collecting empirical evidence using the Normalisation Process Theory to evaluate the integration and normalisation of a range of practices in higher education settings. Moreover, once implemented, more research is required on the long-term value of coaching methods within doctoral settings. Impact on Society: Doctoral education is increasingly significant in a world where knowledge is fundamental to generating economic growth. Identified as having the technical and professional skills needed to fuel the knowledge-based economy, student wellbeing, and mental health must be optimal to ensure they can contribute to the knowledge-based economy as effectively as possible. Future Research: More research must be conducted on how doctoral supervision can become more humanistic; for example, by focusing on student self-awareness, reflection, and reframing instead of just the traditional academic function. Consequently, improving these facets is vital in developing sustained wellbeing and life-long success.

show abstract

“…For example, full-time students remain the norm in most PhD programs (Zhou and Gao, 2021), and research has shown that persistence is decreased when students feel different from the dominant student group (Baker and Pifer, 2015;Gardner and Holley, 2011;Pifer and Baker, 2014), while feelings of difference or lack of programmatic fit may usually be resolved through the doctoral student socialization process (Gardner, 2008), studies have shown that part-time students, when compared to full-time students, are less likely to be socialized or integrated into their departments (Deem and Brehony, 2000;Gardner and Gopaul, 2012). Perhaps due to this lack of socialization, these students have reported strained relationships with their program faculty, including feeling unsupported by their departments and having weak relationships with their advisors (Baker and Pifer, 2015;Wilson and James, 2022;Zhang et al, 2020). For their part, faculty have described perceiving part-time students as less scholarly or committed to their studies than their full-time counterparts (Nora and Snyder, 2007;Skakni, 2018;Smith, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring motivation and satisfaction in part-time PhD students

Turner

2023

SGPE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aims to explore the motivation and satisfaction of part-time PhD students in the USA through the lens of self-determination theory (SDT). Design/methodology/approach Following an explanatory sequential mixed methods design, data sources consisted of a survey (N = 100) and focus groups (N = 20) of part-time PhD students. Findings Findings suggest that part-time PhD students achieve greater satisfaction when they are autonomously motivated. Part-time PhD student satisfaction may be increased through shifting motivation from an external to an internal locus of control, such as when doctoral work is framed within the context of solving practice-based problems. Facilitating this change requires those involved in the practice of research doctoral education to work toward satisfying students’ innate needs of autonomy, competence and relatedness with others, yet many part-time PhD students describe experiences within their doctoral education that do not meet these needs. Implications for research and practice are presented. Originality/value This paper tests the applicability of SDT, a widely used theory in doctoral studies, to part-time PhD students, an understudied student population in the USA.

show abstract

Ph.D. partnership: effective doctoral supervision using a coaching stance

Cited by 13 publications

References 18 publications

How supervisors provide and students react to EAL thesis supervision: Voices from Sweden and Indonesia

How supervisors provide and students react to EAL thesis supervision: Voices from Sweden and Indonesia

Integrating and Normalising Coaching as a Routine Practice in Doctoral Supervision

Exploring motivation and satisfaction in part-time PhD students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About