When Ph.D. students compare notes…Is it the supervisor’s or the student’s fault? 

Introduction

Doctoral supervision plays a crucial role in shaping the future generation of scholars and researchers. However, traditional approaches to supervision have often focused solely on academic progress, neglecting the holistic development and well-being of doctoral candidates. This scientific piece aims to explore the concept of humanizing doctoral supervision, emphasizing the importance of nurturing meaningful relationships, promoting collaboration, and prioritizing the well-being of students. By adopting a humanizing approach, supervisors can create an inclusive and supportive environment that empowers students to thrive academically and personally, ultimately enhancing the overall doctoral experience.

 An Impoverished Supervisor’s Story

Being the only recorded Ph.D. holder in my community, probably in my whole village in the North-West of Pretoria, from the humblest of beginnings to the illustrious halls of the University of the Witwatersrand, the journey of an impoverished supervisor is a testament to the triumph of perseverance and a testament to the indomitable human spirit. Born into circumstances that offered little but challenges, I defied the odds and rose above adversity to become a beacon of hope and inspiration to my family.

Growing up in a world of scarcity, my childhood was marked by the constant struggle to make ends meet. The limitations imposed by poverty could have easily deterred me from pursuing my dreams, but I possessed an unyielding determination to transcend my circumstances. Armed with an insatiable thirst for knowledge, I sought solace in books and education, viewing them as the key to unlocking a brighter future.

Through sheer perseverance and unwavering resolve, I excelled academically and displayed an intellect and passion that could not be suppressed. Despite the financial hardships that weighed heavily on my shoulders, I secured scholarships and grants, allowing me to pursue my undergraduate studies. These early academic accomplishments served as steppingstones, propelling me towards my ultimate goal: a Ph.D. at the prestigious University of the Witwatersrand.

I encountered countless obstacles along the way, there were moments of self-doubt, times when I questioned her abilities and wondered if the path, I had chosen was too arduous. However, with each setback, I found the strength to rise again, fueled by a fierce determination to prove my worth and make a difference in the world.

The culmination of my efforts came with the successful completion of my PhD at the University of the Witwatersrand, a pinnacle of achievement that stands as a testament to my resilience, dedication, and unwavering belief in myself. Despite the challenging circumstances that marked my early years, I emerged as a beacon of hope and inspiration, defying societal expectations and carving a path to success on my own terms.

Now, armed with my hard-earned knowledge, I stand ready to pay it forward, using my experiences to guide and mentor others who face similar hardships. From my humble beginnings to my triumphant academic journey, the impoverished supervisor’s perspective is a testament to the power of perseverance and the transformative potential of education. My story serves as a reminder that, with determination and resilience, one can rise above any circumstance and shape a future filled with possibilities the possibility of becoming a future professor as I am currently honored by the University of the Free State as a lecturer and researcher.

Comparing Supervision Experiences: Reputational Risks and Dangers for Institutions

Introduction

In academic settings, doctoral students often work under the supervision of different supervisors throughout their research journey. Occasionally, Ph.D. students may engage in discussions with peers regarding their respective supervision experiences. While sharing insights on supervisory practices is valuable, it’s crucial to recognize the associated dangers and reputational risks for institutions. The implications of Ph.D. students comparing supervision experiences include:

Exchange of Wrong and Right Supervision Practices

When Ph.D. students compare their supervision experiences, they may discuss both positive and negative aspects of their respective interactions with supervisors. These exchanges can facilitate an understanding of effective supervisory practices and help identify areas for improvement within the institution. However, when wrong Supervision Practices are exchanged between students this could cause institutional reputational risk

Identifying Inadequate Supervision:

Comparing notes enables students to recognise cases of inadequate supervision, such as neglect, lack of guidance, or unavailability of supervisors. By sharing experiences, students can identify common issues and discuss potential solutions, creating a space for mutual support.

Reputational Risks for Institutions:

1. Negative Perception: If numerous Ph.D. students discuss consistently negative experiences with their supervisors, it can generate a negative perception of the institution’s supervision practices. This negative reputation may deter prospective students from choosing the institution for their doctoral studies.
2. Reduced Competitiveness: A reputation for poor supervision can impact the institution’s ability to attract high-caliber students and renowned faculty members. This, in turn, may hinder the institution’s competitiveness in academic circles and limit collaboration opportunities.
3. Funding and Grants: Negative perceptions about supervision practices may lead to reduced funding opportunities from research councils, organizations, and potential donors. Funding bodies often consider the quality of supervision when allocating resources, and a tarnished reputation could jeopardise financial support.

Dangers for Institutions:

1. Legal Consequences: In extreme cases, if students have faced significant issues with supervision, they may resort to legal actions against the institution. This can lead to lengthy and costly legal battles, damaging the institution’s image and draining resources that could be allocated to research and education.
2. Faculty Retention: Consistent reports of inadequate supervision may result in faculty members choosing to leave the institution, seeking environments where their research mentorship is valued and supported. High faculty turnover negatively impacts institutional stability and continuity.
3. Diminished Collaboration: A reputation for poor supervision practices can discourage collaborative efforts between the institution and external partners. Organisations and industry leaders may hesitate to engage in research collaborations due to concerns about the quality of supervision provided by the institution.

While Ph.D. students comparing notes on their supervision experiences can bring benefits such as identifying areas for improvement and supporting one another, it is essential to acknowledge the potential dangers and reputational risks for the institution involved. Negative perceptions, reduced competitiveness, legal consequences, faculty retention challenges, and diminished collaboration opportunities are among the risks that institutions should proactively address to ensure a positive and supportive research environment for their doctoral students.

Ethics requirements for a Ph.D. candidate

Both the supervisor and the student may share some level of responsibility, but it ultimately depends on their respective roles and actions when it comes to ethical requirements. As Ph.D. candidates, individuals are expected to uphold ethical standards and adhere to the requirements set by the university. If a student knowingly and deliberately ignores that, they bear significant responsibility for their actions. It’s important to note that the allocation of fault can vary depending on the specific circumstances of the case. Investigations and disciplinary processes are typically conducted by universities to assess the situation thoroughly and assign responsibility accordingly. However, Ph.D. supervisors have a duty to provide guidance, mentorship, and oversight to their students. They should ensure that their students understand and adhere to ethical standards. If a supervisor fails to provide adequate supervision, fails to detect or address unethical behavior, or even encourages or condones such behavior, they must share some responsibility.

Universities have a responsibility to establish clear ethical guidelines and ensure that both students and supervisors are aware of them. They should provide training and support to students and supervisors and have mechanisms in place to address ethical violations. If a university fails to provide adequate guidance or does not take appropriate action to prevent or address unethical behavior, it may also bear some responsibility.

Nurturing Meaningful Relationships

Central to humanizing doctoral supervision is the establishment of meaningful relationships between supervisors and students. A strong mentor-mentee bond built on trust, respect, and effective communication lays the foundation for productive and supportive supervision. Regular meetings, active listening, and providing constructive feedback are essential components of cultivating these relationships. By recognizing students as individuals with unique strengths, weaknesses, and aspirations, supervisors can tailor their guidance to meet their specific needs.

Promoting Collaboration and Autonomy

Humanizing doctoral supervision also involves fostering a collaborative and inclusive research culture. Encouraging interdisciplinary interactions, facilitating networking opportunities, and promoting peer-to-peer collaboration can stimulate creativity and enhance the quality of research. By creating a supportive academic community, supervisors empower students to take ownership of their research, explore innovative ideas, and develop a sense of autonomy in their work. Collaboration and shared learning also provide opportunities for doctoral candidates to gain diverse perspectives and develop important interpersonal skills.