Transcript Presentation Title goes here

Centre for Higher and Adult Education (CHAE)
The potentially useful role of IR in research into doctoral study
success: A user’s perspective
SAAIR Forum
NMMU, Port Elizabeth
21-23 September 2009
Eli Bitzer
Centre for Higher and Adult Education
Stellenbosch University
How desperate are aspiring PhDs (and supervisors)?
Germany Rocked By Allegations of Ph.D. Bribes
By Jochen Leffers, Der Spiegel (online), 24 August 2009
Did hundreds of German university professors take bribes to
work with specific Ph.D. candidates?
Investigators in Cologne are looking into whether a
company bribed dozens of professors to advance the
academic careers of its clients. A number of Ph.D.
holders might soon lose their titles, and academics
are worried the scandal will put a dent in the
reputation of German universities...
2
And PhD degree mills…
Dublin News 18 November 2005
Adding grist to the mill for those of us who suspect our politicians have
outsourced governing to underqualified professionals, news from
breakingnews.ie and practically everywhere else suggests a second big-wig
government adviser has attained a PhD from a diploma mill. I didn’t get all
that involved in the last debacle, others were far better qualified to
commentate on it and it seemed a politically isolated event. It seems that
this outbreak of PhD purchasing is not confined to Barry MacSweeney at
all.
Reports this morning said Dr Con Power, the chair of the Financial
Services Ombudsman Council, had obtained a PhD from Pacific Western
University, which is regarded as a so-called "degree mill".
This morning's reports said he was insisting that his PhD was legally
awarded on the basis of many years of research and publications.
3
Universities and their contribution to development (adapted
from Castells, M. 2009. Lecture at UWC).
Era
Contribution
Universities as
producers of values
• Religious and imperial values promoted
• Via church or imperial state
Universities as
producers of elites
• Selection and training of elite classes
for society
• Ivy League, Grand Ecole, Oxford
Cambridge
Universities as
producers of
professionals
• E.g. Law, Engineering, Medicine,
Accounting
• Based on societal and economic needs
Universities and their contribution to development
Era
Contribution
Universities as
• Emergence of the scientific movement
producers of science • Von Humboldt movement in Germany,
MIT, Land Grant universities
Universities as
producers of mass
education
• Need for large numbers of educated
members of society (particularly after
WWII and colonialism)
• E.g. large undergraduate classes, open
and distance learning, ICT
Universities as
producers of
entrepreneurs and
entrepreneurial
activities
• Needs of society for innovation,
business applications, the knowledge
economy, science and technology
• E.g. Silicon Valley (Stanford), University
of Singapore
Points from an ensuing discussion
• Traces of all these (historical) functions can be found in any
university system at a particular point in time. Systemic
diversity is preferable, but all universities need to have access
to excellence in the system.
• The importance of lifelong learning whereby knowledge is
constantly recycled and renewed.
• The importance of technology – particularly in countries
where classroom learning for large numbers is not affordable.
• The production of flexible citizens with core values.
• Rigidity of the disciplines needs to be negotiated.
• The importance of universities to operate in the public
interest. Autonomy from the state should be earned by public
accountability.
6
Implications for doctoral education (in developing
contexts)
• Not all universities need to train doctoral students. Not all
universities need to train up to the doctoral level of studies in
all disciplines/fields.
• Flexibility and trans-disciplinarity needed to solve pressing
problems.
• Doctoral inquiry and studies should reflect public interest
(not only private and institutional interests). Forms an
important basis for the scientific quality and strength of a
country.
• Doctoral quality should not be compromised and
(international) standards maintained and enhanced.
7
Postgraduate training – time for an overhaul?
• Concerns
• Time-to-degree and completion rates
• Uneven supervision and mentoring practices
• Poor research preparation of students
• Limited number of doctorates in science and engineering
• After 10 years of study, completion rates in
• Engineering – 46%
• Life Sciences – 62%
• Physical Sciences – 55%
• Social Sciences – 55%
• Human Sciences – 47%
• Median completion time = 7.6 years
[Council of Graduate Schools as reported by Cohen and
Cherwitz, 2006]
8
The South African postgraduate scene (Mouton 2007)
•
Overall it takes approximately 40 undergraduates to produce one PhD. When
adjustments are made for professional bachelor degrees the figure is 22:1
•
Every third or fourth Master’s student goes on to a PhD
•
The average time to complete a PhD between 2000 and 2005 was 4.7 years.
68% of students completed their studies within the first 5 years. Students in
Arts and Education take longer (1 to 1.3 years) to graduate than students in
Life and Physical Sciences.
•
Although no accurate statistics are available, it is estimated that up to 40% of
students who enroll for PhD studies do not finish. This is not significantly higher
than comparable international figures.
•
Mouton found that the problem does not lie so much with attrition, but much
more with the quality of PhDs compared to international standards. Systemic
issues that need attention:
- Overburdened and inexperienced supervisors
- Insufficient research preparation for doctoral students
- Insufficient financial support for PhD students
- Insufficient resources devoted to postgraduate support.
What are the factors associated with doctoral degree success and attrition?
9
Louw’s conceptual framework related to student support
I. Student background factors
Self-perception of competence
Historical experiences
Academic support
Self-confidence
Learning style
Study skills
Options and choices
II. Student factors
Academic
Perceived
low level of
academic
integration
Learning
backlogs
Heavy workload
Inadequate study
skills
Lacking
foundational
knowledge
Lack of
commitment
Lack of confidence
10
(Source: Louw 2005)
Social
Perceived low
level of social
integration
Academic/social
imbalance
Language
difficulties
Financial
constraints
Lack of family
support
III. Institutional factors
Academic
Inadequate support
Inadequate language &
communication in classes
Large classes
In adequate facilities
Inefficient
administration
Skewed access
measures
Inadequate teaching
Type of assessment
Inadequate/wrong
course information
Social
Limited opportunities
Limited facilities
Inadequate accommodation
Factors influencing degree completion and creativity [Lovitts
B E 2005: Studies in Higher Education, 30(2):137-154]
11
Factors contributing to/subtracting from postgraduate
(M & D) success
Positives
•
•
•
•
High stakes: Monetary value of postgraduate studies (2009 rand
values): Master’s (50% research component – R 55 284; Master’s
(Full research – R 102 602); PhD (Full research – R 307 806)
What we know: Academic and social integration are important
(Pascarella & Terenzini)
Factors influencing PhD completion have been identified (Lovitts
2005; Monathunga 2006)
Positive supervision experiences have been reported (see UNSW
survey 2006/7)
Negatives
•
•
•
•
12
Intellectual isolation of students (Ryan & Zuber-Skerritt 1998)
Financial constraints (De Zoysa 2001)
Lack of a sound methodological base and integration into a
research culture (Gilliam & Kritsonis 2006)
Factors associated with attrition (Kamas, Paxson, Wang & Blau
2001)
Most common factors associated with PhD attrition (Kamas,
Paxson, Wang & Blau 2001)
“To what extent did the following affect
your decision to leave Berkeley?”
(Engineering PhD dropout 1991 – 2001)
%
responding
as a factor
%
responding
as major
factor
Realized that didn’t need a PhD for my career
74%
48%
Wanted to get on with my life
69
37
Degree took too long
60
35
Realized I didn’t want an academic career
60
30
Lack of guidance from advisor
54
29
Too many hoops to jump through to get a PhD
52
22
Unexcited by my research topic
51
23
13
Comments
1. As in undergraduate education, doctoral studies performance and success
seem to be a function of a complex set of variables.
2. In comparison to the USA, Europe and Australasia, we need more research
and action in South Africa on these variables and issues.
3. Examples of research issues
3.1 The potential effect of the ‘massification’ of PG studies and increasing PhD
participation rates. Particularly at Universities of Technology.
3.2 Increasing student diversity and related issues (e.g. distance and culture).
Especially supervision to students from Africa and student academic literacy
levels.
3.3 Increased student funding needs and possible inadequate levels of funding.
3.4 Strategic areas where postgraduate studies and PhD studies in particular are
crucial. The need for inter- and trans-disciplinary studies and accompanying
challenges.
3.5 The relevance of PhD studies, its contributions and potential impact.
3.6 The epistemological, ontological and societal value of PhD studies.
Samples of reported research
PG Supervision Conference 2007 (examples) (See SAJHE 21:8)
•
•
•
•
Sid Bourke (Newcastle, Australia): ‘PhD thesis quality – Views of examiners’. Studied
2121 examination reports on 804 theses across disciplines in Australia. Found difficulty
in determining thesis quality from examiner reports, inconsistencies and lack of finer
discrimination beyond marginal and the best theses.
Heinke Roebken (Germany): Variations in supervision practices. Variants between
‘total freedom’ to ‘apprenticeship’ models. A question of structure, cost and
throughput.
Rowena Murray (Scotland): Writing from and disseminating doctoral work. Writing
and publishing strategies to make doctoral research publicly known.
Johann Mouton: Myths, conceptions and challenges in the postgraduate system in
South Africa.
PG Supervision Conference 2009 (examples) (See Acta Academica,
Forthcoming)
•
•
•
Gina Wisker (England): The doctoral research journey. A study of threshold concepts
in doctoral studies and the non-linear paths of the postgraduate research process.
Barbara Grant (New Zealand): Doctoral supervision in post-colonial sites. The
challenges accompanying supervision across cultures and value systems.
Sioux McKenna (UKZN): ‘I won’t be squeezed into someone else’s frame: Narratives
of supervisor selection’. Issues of knowledge, embodied subjectivity and power by
following three questions arose: Whose knowing is important? Who should I be?
Whose PhD is it?
HEQF Level specifications for M & D (2007)
Master’s (Level 9)
Doctorate (Level 10)
Credits
180 (min. 120 at level 9)
(For a coursework master’s, a
minimum of 60 credits should be
devoted to conducting and
reporting research)
360 at Level 10
Purpose and
characteristics
Develop knowledge at advanced
level.
Prepare for advanced and
specialised employment.
Graduates must:
Able to deal with complexity.
Make sound judgements using
data.
Communicate conclusions.
Demonstrate self-direction and
originality.
Act autonomously in planning and
implementing.
Continue to advance in
knowledge, understanding and
skills.
Represents research at the most
advanced level.
Culminate in the submission,
assessment and acceptance of thesis.
Coursework not part of credits.
Demonstrate high level research
capacity.
Work should make a significant
academic contribution.
Work should satisfy peer review and
merits publication.
Graduate must be able to supervise
and evaluate research in
specialisation area.
16
HEQF postgraduate management audit criteria (CHE, 2005)
Supervision roles
• Advise on postgraduate project management
• Guide students through the research process
• Ensure academic quality at the appropriate level
• Counsel and mentor for student support
• Administer the research process.
Criteria
Research phases: (1) Developing and evaluating proposals
(2) Accessing resources
(3) Conducting and concluding research
(4) Making research public
Specifications: (1) Policies/regulations relating to PG research
(2) Quality management structures relating to PG research
(3) Research information on PG research
(4) Support and development strategies relating to PG research
The PhD research journey (Wisker 2009)
Research is a journey
It looks mapped but - risks, surprises, deviations
A dissertation/thesis is a building
Ordered, coherent, organised, linked
Research on PG student satisfaction and
needs (an example)
Albertyn RM, Kapp CA & Bitzer EM. 2008. Profiling exiting
postgraduate students' performance and experiences. SA
Journal of Higher Education, 22(4): 749 - 772.
Context
Qualifications at master’s (MPhil) and doctoral (PhD) level in field
of higher and adult education
• 2007: Exit & alumni survey to scrutinise experiences of
graduates from these programmes
• 2008: Follow-up qualitative study
Objectives
• to identify the students' needs (survey)
• to investigate their experiences of postgraduate
studies (follow-up study)
 to identify possible ways supervisors can improve
their practice of postgraduate supervision (study
and reflection)
Survey
• Sample
• Students registered between 2001 and 2006
• Graduated and discontinued
• 78 students
• Measuring instrument
• Based on questionnaire designed for previous study (Centre
for Higher and Adult Education)
• Adaptations made to include constructs identified in the
studies of Manathunga, (2005), McCormack (2005) and Lindén
(1999)
• Biographical, study information, Likert-scale questions on
students' needs and supervision needs, and open-ended
questions on students' postgraduate experiences
Findings: SURVEY (Student needs)
RESEARCH COMPONENT:
Difficult aspects
MPhil
PhD
Writing a research proposal
75%
20%
Research methodology
75%
50%
Research design
63%
50%
Data analysis
63%
50%
Data management
63%
50%
Preparing a title
63%
0
23
General skills: Difficult aspects
•
•
•
•
•
24
Writing
Using computer programmes
Receiving feedback
Interpreting feedback
Time management
Supervision needs
MANAGERIAL INPUT: Important
aspects
MPhil
PhD
Directing the student
75%
20%
Monitoring
75%
60%
Helping reach research objectives
63%
60%
Organising
63%
60%
Helping set realistic time frames
40%
60%
Planning
63%
40%
Be more ‘hands on’ and involved i.e. “bug” students for
the next chapter
MPhil student
25
Supervision needs
RESEARCH INPUT: Important aspects
MPhil
PhD
Advice regarding topic selection
88%
40%
Providing criteria for proposals
88%
40%
Referring to statistician
63%
20%
Advice on appropriate research method
63%
60%
ACADEMIC INPUT: Important aspects
MPhil
PhD
Discipline/subject expertise
90%
40%
Assessing progress
80%
100%
Evaluating regarding quality
90%
100%
Mentoring
50%
80%
26
Supervision needs
LANGUAGE INPUT:
Important aspects
• Helping develop
arguments logically in
scientific writing
• Extending vocabulary
through feedback
• Assisting in developing
reading and editing skills
27
INTERPERSONAL
INPUT:
Important aspects
• Motivation
• Counselling
• Emotional support
Findings: FOLLOW-UP STUDY (experiences)
Themes:
• Learning process
• Impact on:
• Professional knowledge and skills
• Application of various scholarships
• Critical reflection
• Benefits:
• Intrinsic outcomes
• Confidence
• Metacognition
• Extrinsic outcomes
• Competence
• Recognition
28
Benefits
INTRINSIC:
Confidence, metacognition
• I think I have developed more selfconfidence and assertiveness but not
enough. (MPhil student)
• My studies provided that
independence and also selfconfidence have given me a better
understanding of who I am and why I
function in a certain way. (PhD
graduate)
• I think the studies made me more
aware that I actually know a little
and that a person always remains a
student. (PhD graduate)
29
EXTRINSIC:
Competence, recognition
• My input at the various
committees (local and
international) has been significant
in terms of my gained knowledge.
(MPhil student)
• …the extrinsic is nice. I had
comments such as:You have singlehanded changed the culture in the
university……… I have received an
additional two increments in the
first year and after 18 months my
post was re-evaluated and changed
to that of PL back dated to the
same date as the increments. (PhD
graduate)
‘Doctorateness’ as threshold concept (Trafford and
Leshem, 2008)
Problems/concerns/issues
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
31
Research output (comparative)
Link: Research   Productivity
Dropout rates
(S)low completion rates
Funding and resources
HEQC (Quality)
HEQF (Outcomes)
Purposes (Differentiated)
Standards and benchmarks
Inexperience (students and supervisors)
Lack of research base
Lack of training
What constitutes quality supervision? (Workshop
participants)
Views on quality before workshop (n=21)
After workshop (n=21)
Quality supervision means to be an expert in the field in
which the student is working, to give timely and relevant
feedback, to be available for discussions and to encourage
the student to make progress.
To be a mentor to a student, to establish a relationship of
trust, to be aware of policies regarding postgraduate
supervision, to be aware of support to students and guide
them towards using the support and to make ground
rules clear to students right from the start.
To act as a facilitator to the student, to inspire, lead by
example and remain actively engaged in research by
writing articles and presenting conference papers.
To ensure that students exit the programme with
confidence, ecourage critical thinking and have a thirst for
creating new knowledge on a continued basis –
knowledge that can aid industry and the community for
empowerment.
Spending dedicated time on a regular basis with students to
guide their research activities towards their research
objectives.
I have learnt now that supervison is more than facilitating
excellent research. It also involves personal relationships,
effective time management as well as attending towards
the psychological and emotional needs of students. I see
supervision now in a holistic way, not merely in research
terms.
Being more knowledgeable about a topic so that a student
can be guided properly. This means to be ahead in
knowledge and in methodological options.
To be more than an expert in the field. This include issues
such as being able to relate well (professionally) to your
students, providing support, being able to convey
information and provide feedback and comments to
students in an understandable manner and to encourage
students towards hard work, perseverance and
commitment.
32
Challenges of supervising in richly diverse contexts
•
•
Increase in diverse student populations at universities
Typical challenges faced by supervisors:
-
-
33
Language and writing
Lack of vocabulary
Cultural background differences and expectations
Research training at the previous level
Teaching and learning styles
Ethical aspects- ownership of work
Student agency/ insecurity
Social practices
Conclusions
1. Participation in postgraduate education is on the increase and rightfully
so. Apparently a worldwide phenomenon as undergraduates increase.
2. We do not know much about the variables and constraints associated
with postgraduate studies and supervision – particularly at the PhD
level in South Africa.
3. Postgraduate supervision constitutes much more than research
training. It seems to involve a range of epistemological, ontological and
institutional variables and issues.
4. Researchers needed who do not only focus on trends and macro-level
(national and institutional) issues, but also on institutional and
educational issues associated with (successful) postgraduate education
and supervision.
5. Apparently, there are particular data and information needs where IR
can play a significant role to fill the void.
Examples of PG researcher data and information
needs that might link to IR
1. Feedback: From students (current and completed; discontinued; full-time;
part-time; international)
Supervisors (process and product issues)
Examiners (reports; process issues)
2. Departments: Proposal processes; supervisor workload distribution;
candidate and supervisor selection criteria and processes; training and
preparation for supervision; supervisor-student contracts and agreements;
Formative evaluation processes and progress reports; number and quality of
outputs/publications from PhD studies.
3. Student throughput: Student admissions (variance); throughput rates;
success rates; time to degree; student attrition issues; support systems and
mechanisms (e.g. effectiveness and efficiency of assistance with data analysis,
language support, writing support); comparative institutional data.
4. Examiner reports: Quality of research products (theses and dissertations);
quality of reports; effectiveness, efficiency and contribution of oral
examinations to quality.
5. Qualification value: Market value of institutional M/D qualifications; career
opportunities and paths of M’s and D’s.
6. Other: Performance in previous degree; undergraduate performance;
financial position (e.g. grants and bursaries); implications of PhD attrition at
various levels.