5th International Conference on Developments in Doctoral Education & Training

Briefing

Duration

5 mins 

Small Group Discussions

Duration

30 mins 

1. A

   How an HDR Writer’s Lounge is impacting the candidate experience

   Small Group Discussion

   Natasha Kitano & Kirsten Baird-Bate, Queensland University of Technology, Australia
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery 

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   For the past two years, the global pandemic has heightened the isolation often experienced by higher degree by research (HDR) students. An online HDR Writer’s Well-being Lounge (the HDR Lounge) was created as a response to a need to connect isolated and remote students and promote a positive research culture. The HDR Lounge was created specifically for those HDR students who given their unique role in the university, are separated from the undergrad cohorts. This space provides HDR students the opportunity to participate in focused writing sprints using the Pomodoro technique, reflect on their writing, and connect with their peers to discuss HDR related matters which promotes their well-being. The university sector has focused on mental health and wellbeing for some years. In fact, HDR students are known to be at a particular risk of depression and mental health problems (Levecque et al., 2017), so this HDR Lounge attempts to provide mental health support to combat these issues. This research focuses on the reasons for the creation of the HDR Lounge in an Australian university by a HDR Language and Learning educator in a graduate research centre and the reactions and reflections of a remote HDR candidate who regularly attends the Lounge. We present and discuss our perspectives on how the HDR Lounge has promoted a positive research culture despite the challenges presented by COVID-19.

   Levecque, K., Anseel, F., De Beuckelaer, A., Van der Heyden, J., & Gisle, L. (2017). Work organization and mental health problems in PhD students. Research Policy, 46(4), 868–879.

2. B

   What Covid Has Left Behind: Developing New Blended Learning Models in Doctoral Supervision

   Small Group Discussion

   Dr Alberto Lázaro, Dr Alfredo Gardel & Dr Ignacio Bravo, University of Alcalá, Spain

   Primary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery
   

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   Doctoral supervision has been hampered in numerous ways over the last two years due to social distancing and lockdowns caused by the Covid pandemic. During this period, the European funded DocEnhance project has provided a set of broad guidelines and resources to set up courses aimed at enhancing doctoral supervision, which are being piloted at several partner universities. In this paper, we look at how the University of Alcala, a mid-sized higher education institution in Spain, has addressed the challenges of this new situation in its doctoral supervision courses and the whole doctoral process. Assuming optimistically that the Covid pandemic comes to an end soon, several strategies, actions and recommendations will remain in place within the Doctoral School procedures; therefore, it is important to carefully analyse the new learning models introduced, outlining the advantages and disadvantages of online and face-to-face courses on doctoral supervision, for both senior and junior supervisors, as well as other practices in our doctoral programmes. The implementation of some pilot courses on supervision will be discussed, together with some new protocols introduced for supervisors, who need some training to manage a set of digital tools, an online data repository, project planning, video conferencing, and other features that the new future blended learning models in doctoral supervision require.

3. C

   Questioning Delivery Design — 5 fundamental questions about delivery and its impact on the learner experience.

   Small Group Discussion

   Zach Sorrells, Skillfuence Ltd., UK

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   What method of training delivery is most effective at promoting a positive research culture? How do different methods of delivery impact a candidate’s experience? What questions should we be asking when thinking about delivery design? In this paper we explore questions that are shaping how we think about delivery design when building skills development programmes.
   

   Over the last 5 years, we ​‘ve trained more than 10,000 PhD students and early career researchers. We’ve tested a range of delivery methods including lecture-style webinars, on-line workshops, self-guided learning, challenge programmes, group coaching, blended programmes and traditional in-person training. The current environment has created an opportunity for accelerated learning, leading us to ask, and begin to formulate answers around several key questions:
   

   When should we use which methods of delivery? There is no one best method of delivery. However, certain types of delivery are more effective at achieving certain outcomes. The key is to understand how to leverage different methods of delivery.
   

   How do we use technology, tools and platforms to create better learner experiences? When do you use the chat box? When do you invite people to speak? When do you use a breakout room? When should you open the conversation up? When should you close it down?
   

   How do we approach delivery design in a rapidly changing environment? It’s important to consider delivery design at the start of any programme design process. However, how do we approach this while there are still high levels of uncertainty related to the willingness to engage in different methods of delivery.
   

   How to get learners to commit to new methods of delivery? Regardless of the delivery method we choose, it’s critical that learners fully engage. Without full engagement from the learner, the programme will always fail to deliver its full potential impact.
   

   How do we measure the effectiveness of delivery design in fostering a positive learning environment? Do well accepted metrics such as ​“Net Promoter Score” give us sufficient insight into how effective any programme is at creating a positive research culture?
   

   We explore these questions in greater depth and provide insights and perspectives based on real world experiences and data gathered from 1000s of learners.
   

Break

Duration

10 mins 

Workshops

Duration

60 mins 

1. A

   Doctoral proposal writing training: a gateway to research capacity building in developing countries

   Workshop
   

   Dr Peter Samuels, Birmingham City University, UK

   Primary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery
   Secondary theme: The candidate experience

   Duration

   60 mins 

   View details

   Most countries in the world are seeking to increase their capacity of doctorally qualified researchers. This is especially true in many developing countries where this supply can be viewed as a bottleneck in the expansion of their knowledge-based economies. Developing a high quality research proposal is generally regarded as a key gateway into undertaking a successful doctoral degree. For many students, this requires improving their academic writing, especially for those writing a proposal in a non-native language, or researching a non-literary subject. Students often struggle with the creative process of selecting, refining and communicating a narrow, viable research topic along with other elements of proposal writing, such as literature reviews, methodological plans and work schedules. Proposals are also often the subject of doctoral students’ first experiences of working with their supervisors who may not be sufficiently sensitive or experienced in supporting their students’ academic writing development needs.
   

   
   

   This workshop will promote the provision of contextualised training in academic writing and research methods and the use of formative feedback to assist in doctoral proposal writing and research methods development. It will report on two Erasmus+ partnerships led by Birmingham City University, working with the University of Rwanda and the Technical University of Kenya, and the establishment of a close voluntary working relationship with NEMRA — a research capacity building network based in Uganda. These partnerships have enabled the development of highly successful intensive doctoral proposal writing training courses which have been delivered both in person and online.
   

   
   

   The participants will be invited to share their experiences of supporting newly enrolled doctoral students in proposal writing and research methods development in order to work towards more effective solutions.

2. B

   Effectively supporting an autistic PhD student through their Viva.

   Workshop

   Dr Barbara Sandland, Dr Andrea MacLeod & Neil Hall, University of Birmingham, UK

   Dr Nicholas Chown, London South Bank University, UK
   

   Primary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery
   Secondary theme: The candidate experience

   Duration

   60 mins 

   View details

   The panel draws together experts in the field of autism to discuss adaptations that can be employed, to effectively support autistic students during their PhD viva. The panel will consist of renown academic Nick Chown, author of Examining intellectual ability, not social prowess: removing barriers from the doctoral viva for autistic candidates. Alongside early career autistic academic Barbara Sandland, who has recently successfully passed the PhD viva with no modification, due to the expert support offered through the University of Birmingham. Alongside Barbara, Dr Andrea MacLeod and Neil Hall will be present to share their experiences of effective supervision and internal examination within the viva.

   The panel will spend some time at the beginning of the session introducing their work and experiences within the field of autism and viva examinations. The remaining time will be given to an open discussion with attendees. With the intention that by the end of the session all attendees will either feel empowered to nurture and develop positive research cultures within their own practice or seek appropriate adaptations to ensure their own viva is a positive experience.

Close

Briefing

Duration

5 mins 

Keynote Presentation — How international doctoral candidates encounter, adapt to and enhance research cultures

Dr Dely Elliot | Senior Lecturer, School of Education, University of Glasgow, UK

Duration

35 mins 

Keynote Discussion Panel — The Experiences of Doctoral Candidates

Duration

35 mins 

Break

Duration

10 mins 

Oral Presentations

Duration

30 mins 

1. A

   Evaluating the student experience of the Durham GCRF-CDT PhD program: Theoretical perspectives, methodology, and actionable-data informed interventions

   Oral Presentation

   Prof Douglas Halliday, Durham University, UK
   Dr Jan Meyer, Retired Professor, Australia

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery 

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   Durham University Global Challenges Centre for Doctoral Training (GCRF-CDT) was established in February 2019, committing GCRF QR funding of £2.5M to fully resource the initiative for three years. The GCRF-CDT cohort consists of 24 doctoral candidates, each a citizen of a developing nation, representing 17 nationalities. PhD projects focused on a specific global challenge aligned with one, or more, of the UN Sustainable Development Goals, often directly relevant to the candidates’ nationality. The Centre brought together, as a coherent whole, aspects of doctoral education that hitherto have not been considered core to the majority of doctoral programs. Distributed across ten academic departments within the faculties of sciences and social sciences, projects were selected from those submitted by Durham staff, and had a requirement for multidisciplinary supervisory teams reflecting the broad scope of the centre involving 55 academic supervisors that mirrored the complexity of the challenges being investigated. Supported with distance supervision, each candidate was allocated a fully funded placement with a partner university in a developing nation providing a global challenge context intended to facilitate the translation of PhD research findings into effective and lasting solutions. An essential consideration was the development of a robust evaluation framework to determine the level of success, strengths and weaknesses, and any wider impact of its practices. Integral to this framework, and reported here, is the distinctive development of an evaluation strategy exclusively focused on candidates’ experiences of undertaking ​‘research’, and one that would furthermore capture data in a form functionally capable of contributing directly, and strategically, to the ongoing enhancement of the GCRF-CDT program and the cohort experience. We describe the design and implementation of a three-phase evaluation cycle to capture variation in experiences of a set of critical issues intended to empower interventions tailored specifically to the immediate requirements of the cohort.

2. B

   Transdisciplinary Practice: being, doing and knowing: responding to complex practice cultures

   Oral Presentation

   Associate Prof Kate Maguire & Dr David Adams, Middlesex University, UK

   Primary theme: Interdisciplinarity
   Secondary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery 

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   We present a case for facilitating transdisciplinary practice (TDP) in experienced professionals through a doctoral research programme for whom the research focus is their world of work. The programme currently has 100 doctoral candidates; annual intake has doubled for 21/22 with a waiting list for 22/23. The delivery of the first stages is through sector diverse cohorts with weekly workshops alongside individual supervision. Our applicants are leading sector figures ranging from global heads of HR, to HE faculty leads, to directors of NGOs and the NHS. The domain of practice is increasingly complex. Attempts to understand and influence it by dissecting it for research may contribute to incremental change but is not adequate for rapidly changing environments on the wild frontier of the uncertain and unpredictable. Therefore our research pedagogy focuses on the doing and being of practice: how TDP not only identifies complexity more completely but surfaces its possibilities to bring about collaborative shifts in culture and epistemologies of practice. We confront the gravitational pull of classification which fuels resistance to new ideas, can exclude and marginalise people and cultures and inhibit voices and vision. The agency of the individual decision making professional as a TD practitioner-researcher mediates and negotiates between and across difference, and more ably challenges outdated norms of classification. TDP is not about the creation of knowledge but new ways of being in the world, moving beyond knowledge as a way of understanding to knowing as a way of becoming. We are currently unique in this doctoral offer and hope to encourage more H.E. institutions to develop TDP as a response to the needs of complex practice cultures.

3. C

   From project planning to resilience and wellbeing: The evolution of postgraduate skills training to create a positive research culture.

   Oral Presentation

   Dr Leonie Jones & Nicola Long, University of York, UK
   

   Primary theme: Diversity
   Secondary theme: Cohort building

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   This presentation will describe how a project planning and time-management session has evolved in response to changing student needs to incorporate discussions on wellbeing and resilience in order to promote a positive research culture.

   PhD students are especially vulnerable to mental health problems, which can significantly impact their studies. In a recent survey, 42% of PhD students agreed they thought ​“developing a mental health problem during your PhD is the norm” whilst 36% had considered ending their PhD studies because of their mental health¹. ²

   The Department of Chemistry at the University of York has a thriving postgraduate community of ~200 research students. Postgraduates join a comprehensive, cohort-based ​‘innovative Doctoral Training in Chemistry’ (iDTC) programme designed to prepare them for roles as professional research chemists. 

   A resilience, time-management and motivation session forms part of the core training that all new research postgraduate students undertake. The presentation will consider the importance of including strategies on how to deal with issues such as procrastination, poor work-life balance and Imposter Syndrome. Developing self-care and self-management strategies equips students with valuable skills, but also promotes the development of a community that supports each other. 

   Research on doctoral students’ wellbeing suggests that a combination of social and psychological factors, such as integration into the research community and perceptions of self-worth, shape students’ experiences. A doctoral student will be unable to implement project planning and key research skills if they struggle with wellbeing issues and feel isolated from the cohort. This leads to a counterproductive research environment and a negative student experience.

   By delivering the session with the Departmental Wellbeing Officer students benefit from a presentation with equal emphasis on key issues that help create a sense of belonging, academic success and a supportive research environment. 

Changeover

Duration

5 mins 

Workshops

Duration

60 mins 

1. A

   FAIL – Focussed Action Innovative Leadership : Using ​‘leadership failure lens’ to support leadership development

   Workshop

   Davina Whitnall & Dr Ursula Hurley, The University of Salford, UK

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery

   Duration

   60 mins 

   View details

   Failure is part of being human, it’s often a considered a negative but looking at it differently can open unexpected routes to success. However, the pressures of the research environment can make it difficult to take this view. Elliot and Thrash argue that for many young people, fear of failure becomes ​“a dispositional burden that they must carry with them into each new achievement situation and that affects the goals they choose to pursue” (2004, 968). By the time students reach PGR level, fear of failure is often strongly developed and can lead to intense anxiety, as well as a risk-averse approach and can be completely immobilising, halting productivity and aspirations. Furthermore it decreases any capacity for leadership that often involves confidence and being comfortable with risk taking. 

   The University of Salford has developed a ​“Leadership Failure Lens” to flip failure in a leadership context and re-frame it as opportunities for personal development and growth. In this series of case studies, we explore applications of the leadership failure lens to help researchers at different levels (PGRs through the Doctoral cycle and their supervisory teams through different approaches to supervision) by:

   • Utilising ​‘lessons learnt’ and developing confident decision making
   • Exploring the role of failure in risk taking capacity and aspiration
   • Reflecting and re-purposing, failure as a mechanism to roadmap success
   • Increase resilience

   Drawing on creative and innovative practices, we present the experience of failure as something to be valued (Naray-Davey & Hurley, 2014). The leadership failure lens demonstrates the context and usefulness of failure in developing leadership behaviours and long-term skills for resilience. Participants will have the opportunity during the session to ​‘try out’ the lens and consider it in their own institutional context and develop positive actions to take forward through a Focussed Action Innovative Leadership (FAIL) approach.

2. B

   Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: Doing what you can, where you are

   Workshop

   Rachel Van Krimpen, University of Nottingham, UK
   

   Primary theme: Diversity
   Secondary theme: The candidate experience

   Duration

   60 mins 

   View details

   Activity in equality, diversity and inclusion in postgraduate research can falter as people wait for a signal for ​‘the right thing to do’ from the top, or a specific example of ​‘what works’ in their particular area to appear. They worry about getting things wrong, and that anything they do within their small circle of influence won’t make enough of a difference to be worth it.

   This workshop will provide a forum to explore the challenges facing those trying to implement EDI initiatives in postgraduate research and to reflect on strategies to deal with those challenges. Using a case study around EDI work on PGR recruitment in the Nottingham BBSRC Doctoral Training Partnership as a starting point, the workshop will allow participants to discuss and consider:

   - Cultural, structural and personal barriers that might be in the way of their EDI work and how to approach these

   - Countering resistance from colleagues and approaches to managing such resistance

   - The value of local-level, smaller scale EDI initiatives and how these can be used to support the development and delivery of more ambitious goals

   The aim of the session is to curate a thoughtful, honest and supportive conversation around the difficult bits of ​‘doing EDI’ in the postgraduate space, and to empower participants to take ownership of doing what they can, where they are to make a difference.

Close

Briefing

Duration

5 mins 

Keynote Panel Discussion — Improving Access to Doctoral Education

Dr Steven Hill | Director of Research, Research England, UK

Professor Iyiola Solanke | Co-Dean for Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI), University of Leeds, UK

Professor Imelda Whelehan | President of the Australian Council for Graduate Research, Australia

Duration

35 mins 

Changeover

Duration

5 mins 

Oral Presentations

Duration

30 mins 

1. A

   They say ​‘it is safe here’: On visibility, safety and belonging

   Oral Presentation

   Dr Yasser Kosbar, University of Sussex, UK
   

   Primary theme: Diversity
   Secondary theme: Interdisciplinarity

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   Debates on persisting inequalities in UK academia are often eclipsed by stubborn attachments to the rhetoric of multiculturalism, meritocracy, and collegiality (Morley, 1997, 2005; Emejulu, 2017). There remains a strong resistance in academia to address racial discrimination (Arday and Mirza, 2018), ableism (Kattari, 2015), gender (Morley, 2021), and class inequalities (Hey et al., 2021). Partly because whiteness is constantly imagined as ​‘futurity’ and aspiration in global higher education (Shahjahan, 2021) and partly perhaps because the performativity ‑embedded in diversity policies and frameworks- is creating new frameworks of inequalities (McCall, 2005; Nash, 2008; Cooper, 2015). Egyptian women postgraduates in the UK often find themselves at crossroads of ​‘doing and presenting’ diversity (Ahmed, 2018). Navigating academia as brown women in predominantly white spaces make access and survival a matter of constant reconciliations, sacrifices, and negotiations (Khan, 2019). Occupying gendered and racialised affective state of in-betweenness can render spatial navigations very challenging. Drawing on the evidence collected from 24 semi-structured interviews with Egyptian women who completed their postgraduate studies in the UK, this paper will explore their perspectives on diversity policies across 11 universities. The findings suggest that institutional racism and racial discrimination does not operate in a vacuum, and it is closely tied with other frameworks of exclusion such as gender, age, disability, class, and migration history. Understanding the intersectionality between these different forms and frameworks of exclusion helps universities and other higher education institutions to reframe their policies to tackle institutional racism.

2. B

   Supporting Development of Digital Literacies Among Doctoral Students in History

   Oral Presentation

   Dr Hope Williard, Library, University of Lincoln, UK
   

   Primary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery
   Secondary theme: The candidate experience

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   Digital skills are a fundamental part of PhD research in the twenty-first century: doctoral researchers produce, consume, and interact with all manner of information in online environments. This project aims to investigate how doctoral researchers in history learn to find and use digital resources in academic libraries, and how training programmes in digital skills could be improved to support lifelong learning and skills development long after the PhD is over. While digital literacy skills, defined by JISC in 2014 as ​‘capabilities which fit an individual for living, learning and working in a digital society’, are well studied in undergraduate students, other student populations, particularly research students, are comparatively neglected. Supervisors and librarians expect doctoral students to begin their research degrees with highly developed digital literacy skills, and consequently opportunities to assess, develop, and continuously improve these skills are lacking. Having supported research students in the University of Lincoln’s Doctoral School, as well as students and staff in our school of History and Heritage and School of Performing Arts, since 2017, I have noticed a persistent need for training in digital literacy skills, especially those related to finding and using information. My talk aims to explore how librarians involved in supporting doctoral researchers can lead or collaborate on auditing training programmes for doctoral researchers in order to identify gaps in digital skills training. I will also explore how doctoral researchers put their training into practice as historians, and suggest ways in which these discipline-specific lessons might be applied to humanities researchers more widely.

3. C

   The role of the cohort in fostering a positive experience for remote candidates

   Oral Presentation

   Dr Dan Bendrups, La Trobe University, Australia

   Primary theme: Cohort building
   Secondary theme: The candidate experience

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   This presentation presents findings arising from a multi-year study of doctoral candidates and supervisors involved in a transnational doctoral training partnership. In 2019, La Trobe University (Australia) and Ateneo de Manila University (Philippines) commenced a cohort of candidates in a collaborative doctoral program. The program was the result of prior relationship building between these institutions and was designed to address specific objectives for both partners. The candidates enrolled through the program commenced together, though their projects and discipline bases were different. This meant that their self-concept as a cohort was a product of their own efforts to develop a cohort identity, rather than a product of co-location in a shared research initiative. Candidates and their supervisors were interviewed twice: once at the point of candidature confirmation, and then again after a second year of candidature. These interviews focused broadly on the candidature experience. Across both rounds of interviews, candidates provided insight into the ways in which their sense of a cohort identity helped foster a positive candidature experience, particularly during the disruption caused by COVID-19. This paper present preliminary findings arising from these interviews, drawing together the participants’ observations about cohort formation, the benefits accruing from working (conceptually) as a cohort, and the specific ways in which the organically developing cohort helped to foster a positive candidature experience, scaffolding other formal sources of support.

Break

Duration

15 mins 

Oral Presentation, Small Group Discussion, Workshop

Duration

30 mins 

1. A

   Culture and community — understanding the needs of PGRs in the context of Scottish ​‘National Graduate Schools’

   Oral Presentation

   Mary Beth Kneafsey, University of Glasgow, UK
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   This presentation will reflect on an EdD project that is looking at the experience of PGRs based at the University of Glasgow but funded through one of two UKRI / Scottish Funding Council funded Scottish ​‘National Graduate Schools’. PGRs across Scotland receive funding through these mechanisms but also participate in these broad disciplinary communities. The Scottish Graduate School of Social Science (SGSSS) describes itself as facilitating ​‘funding, training and support’ for PGRs in the Social Sciences (https://www.sgsss.ac.uk/) while the Scottish Graduate School for Arts and Humanities (SGSAH) states its aim as working ​‘together to inspire researchers who are talented, caring, ethical and reflective professionals with a demonstrable commitment to generating and mobilising knowledge across a range of scholarly, professional and public communities’ (https://www.sgsah.ac.uk/about/). While these descriptions are different in tone, they are ultimately person-centred and point to the aim of supporting the development of researchers in the related disciplines. This session will look at what students in this small study say about their participation in one of these doctoral training structures and their role in supporting their doctoral journeys. How does this participation fit or align with their institutional experiences or the institutional structures with which they engage? How do these doctoral training structures contribute to disciplinary cultures, build supportive communities and/​or support the development of researcher or professional identities? How do we understand and articulate the role of culture and community in the PGR experience across such broad literal and figurative landscapes?

2. B

   Interdisciplinarity and generic doctoral pedagogy: Are they the same thing?

   Small Group Discussion

   Nigel Palmer, Australian National University, Australia
   

   Primary theme: Interdisciplinarity
   

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   This paper offers a conceptual review of interdisciplinarity as it pertains to postgraduate research. Definitions of interdisciplinarity abound. Confusion often endures, as various accounts for what is and what is not interdisciplinary research seem to overlap, and defy a consistent set of parameters. Rather than seek a consensus among these and revisit its potential implications for postgraduate research, this paper considers the proposition that for practical purposes these might converge on a relatively stable set of parameters, and that these align well with what has been described as ​‘generic doctoral pedagogy’. This term first appeared in the 2014 book edited by Carter and Laurs, which investigated the relationship between the generic and the discipline-specific through the lens of postgraduate research program support initiatives. This paper revisits these questions from a program administration perspective in light of contemporary global developments in doctoral education.

3. C

   Using the ​‘carrier bag’ approach to stories to build group cohorts on professional doctoral programmes

   Workshop (Please note that this session will continue until 11:35)
   

   Dr Jane O’Connor & Dr Tony Armstrong, Birmingham City University, UK
   

   Hai Pham Thi Thanh & Huy Nguyen Hoang Doan, Vietnam National University, Vietnam

   Tan Huynh & Hanh Luu, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, Vietnam

   Primary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery
   Secondary theme: Diversity

   
   

   Duration

   60 mins 

   View details

   This workshop introduces an innovative approach to establishing and building relationships on professional doctorate programmes based on the late novelist Ursula Le Guin’s ​‘Carrier Bag Theory of Fiction’ (2019). This approach has been successfully used by the presenters in both EdD introductory sessions and as an early workshop on an international professional doctorate development project involving academic supervisors from UK, Vietnam, Indonesia and China. Le Guin argues that the most important and illuminating stories are often found in the metaphorical carrier bags of experience filled with memories of the past that we all carry with us — our ​‘bag of stars’ (2019, p.37) as she terms it. Her ​‘carrier bag theory’ encourages us to rummage in these bags to find the ​‘untold’ stories. These are the stories that are not always about winning and making linear progress towards goals, but that are about the objects, ideas and experiences that we gather along the way and that can tell a different story about being human, about struggling, learning, nurturing and helping one another.

   In the carrier bag workshop participants share stories about their own experiences of doing a doctorate using a bag of everyday objects which remind them of their time as students. The exercise gives the group an opportunity to begin to get to know each other and to appreciate the complexity and challenge that completing a doctorate whilst working and balancing other personal and family responsibilities entails. Drawing on humanist pedagogical approaches which value the inner world of the learner (Khatib et al, 2013) and taking inspiration from previous arts based approaches to identity work for education students and practitioners (Kendall et al 2016) the carrier bag approach reinforces the importance of making space for story-tellings about the self from the outset of professional doctorate programmes.

   Workshop participants will be asked to bring a bag containing 1–3 objects that remind them of the time when they were studying for their own doctorate.

   References

   Kendall, Alex and Gibson, M. and Himsworth, C. and Palmer, K. and Perkins, H. 2016. Listening to old wives’ tales: small stories and the (re)making and (re)telling of research in HE/FE practitioner education. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 21 (1–2). pp. 116–136.

   Khatib, M., Sarem, S. N., & Hamidi, H. 2013. Humanistic Education: Concerns, Implications and Applications. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 4(1), pp. 45 – 51.

   Le Guin. U. 2019. The Carrier Bag Theory of Fiction. Ignota.

Changeover

Duration

5 mins 

Oral Presentations

Duration

30 mins 

1. A

   *CANCELLED* Embracing change in Doctoral Programmes as part of a School’s shift in Research Culture

   Oral Presentation

   Dr Judie Gannon & Dr Sarah Quinton, Oxford Brookes University, UK
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   *Please note this this session has been cancelled. Apologies for any inconvenience*
   
   In this session, we will explore our approaches to developing a research culture as part of the continuing improvements in our doctoral programmes (Lee and Bongardt, 2021) and as a response to ongoing PRES feedback. This enhancement of a research culture entails revisiting doctoral supervision practices, supervisor support and training, cohort building, and doctoral programme developments, as well as situating doctoral programmes provision within a Business School under new leadership during a period of significant social, political and economic changes (Grant, 2021). 

   We identify how we have tried to harness the learning developed in online programme delivery and supervision during Covid-19, and how we may leverage insights across our institution to articulate a research culture embracing a more dynamic environment of doctoral provision. In this session, we will work with the audience to chart the factors at the micro, meso, and macro levels, which can help and hinder our understanding, management and delivery of contemporary taught professional and traditional doctorate programmes in a Business School attempting to embed a new research culture.

   We outline the value of building on existing resources and tackling disciplinary silos sensitively to induce change across programme teams, leading towards a clearer research culture. We also articulate the opportunities and challenges of engaging experienced supervisors, early career researchers, doctoral students, and alumni from all backgrounds in realising the changes in research culture they want to see. Finally, we examine what this means for handling contrasting views from within the wider institution and the ways alliances can be built to enact changes in doctoral programme provision as a response to the established concerns regarding research culture.

2. B

   Supervisor pedagogy, relationships and challenges

   Oral Presentation

   Prof Tom Woodin, UCL, UK
   

   Primary theme: Interdisciplinarity
   Secondary theme: The candidate experience

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   This presentation is based upon research, carried out with Sue Taylor, that investigated good supervisory practice at the UCL Institute of Education where a wide range of disciplines intersect with one another. It explores how supervisors develop relationships with their postgraduate research degree students, the challenges they faced, how these were overcome as well as additional support that would be beneficial. We circulated 10 closed and 10 open questions as a survey via Opinio to all listed supervisors at IOE. A response rate of 26% was achieved following three follow-up reminders. 

   A range of practical issues were raised including different perceptions of co-supervision, the upgrade, workload and differences between the EdD and PhD. Supervisors expressed a need to develop a critical distance. Learning from mistakes and watching other people were commonly expressed although they also tended to discount formal learning which may of course reflect the fact that academics can do this relatively quickly. Learning across cultural difference was also identified although individual cases could also defy simplistic assumptions about such differences. 

   Each of these issues provided clues to deeper understanding and connected to contrasting motivations; to lifecourse and cultural factors; and to competing conceptual meanings. Personal identities and experiences informed the supervisory relationship and workplace networks. Informal support was a great benefit to those with access to it. The supervisory relationship emerged as in need of continual re-negotiation, with tensions sometimes arising at these points of change. Blending friendly relationships with a structured programme in which fostering independence and autonomy was identified as a central issue. This reflected a hankering after a sense of belonging and community which could be located in past and present and future.

Close

Discussion Session B

Briefing

Duration

5 mins 

Small Group Discussions

Duration

30 mins 

1. A

   Peer support through online community of practice in the post- global pandemic era: A case study of doctoral students-led writing groups across three London universities

   Small Group Discussion

   Valentina Yee Kwan Chan, King’s College London, King’s Business School, UK
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Diversity

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   The journey of a doctoral student can be lonely (Gundara, 1997; Owler, 2010), especially for the international, part-time (Deem & Brehony, 2000) and distanced-learning students (Wisker, Robinson, & Shacham, 2007). The Covid-19 global pandemic in 2020 has intensified these issues as many doctoral students went back to their home countries to continue with their studies or moved outside the cities of their institutions to save costs. As a result, many doctoral student communities have been dispersed with much less students showing up on campus even when the lockdown restrictions have been lifted. 

   Peer support is considered an effective solution to mitigate students’ feeling of isolation, with evidence of enhancing students’ personal and professional development, and facilitating engagement with the academic communities (Samimy, Kim, Lee, & Kasan, 2011). Growing evidence have shown that peer support, as a form of communities of practice, is critical for the success of doctoral programmes (Boud & Lee, 2005; Wisker et al., 2007).

   The concept of communities of practice (Lave & Wenger’s, 1999) refers to any group included in joint activities who also reproduce the community, learning is an essential element of any community of practice.

   Based on Wenger’s definition of communities of practice, this case study analyses two on-going doctoral students-led online writing groups, across multiple faculties in King’s College London, Imperial College London and Queen Mary University of London, initiated in 2021, to understand the benefits of students-led online communities regarding their PhD journeys and to explore the opportunities to use online communities of practice to promotes positive research cultures in higher education.

   Reflexivity of the project leader as a current doctoral student, a former faculty member, and an industry practitioner will be included in the discussion. 

   Keywords: doctoral education, online communities, communities of practices, peer support, peer tutoring, student engagement, diversity, inclusion, student voice

   References:

   Boud, D., & Lee, A. (2005). ​‘Peer Learning’ as pedagogic discourse for research education. Studies in Higher Education, 30, 501–516.

   Deem, R., & Brehony, K. J. (2000). Doctoral students’ access to research cultures-are some more unequal than others? Studies in Higher Education, 25, 149–165.

   Gundara, J. (1997). Intercultural issues and doctoral studies. In N. Graves, & V. Varma (Eds.), Working for a doctorate: A guide for the humanities and social sciences (pp. 131–151). London: Routledge.

   Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1999) Legitimate peripheral participation in communities of practice, in: R. McCormack & C. Poechter (Eds) Learning and knowledge (London, Paul Chapman Publishing), 10.

   Mason, A. & Jarmila, H. (2019). Students Supporting Students on the PhD Journey: An Evaluation of a Mentoring Scheme for International Doctoral Students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 56(1):88–98.

   Owler, K. (2010). A problem to be managed? Completing a PhD in the Arts and Humanities. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 9, 289–304.

   Samimy, K., Kim, S., Ah Lee, J., & Kasai, M. (2011). A participative inquiry in a TESOL program: Development of three NNES graduate students’ legitimate peripheral participation to fuller participation. The Modern Language Journal, 95, 558–574.

   Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of practice (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).

   Wisker, G., Robinson, G., & Shacham, M. (2007). Postgraduate research success: Communities of practice involving cohorts, guardian supervisors and online communities. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44, 301–320.

2. B

   Writing the Path to Success: Virtual Writing Sessions to Support Doctoral Student Progress

   Small Group Discussion

   Jordan Dolfi, Dr Laura Maldonado, Dr James Bartlett & Dr Michelle Bartlett, North Carolina State University, USA
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   This qualitative case study focuses on a student success initiative to support doctoral student progress and completion within an education department at an R1 university in the United States. During the COVID-19 pandemic shut-down, the program launched a virtual writing accountability series to support student progress while working from home. Across the disciplines, writing groups have been found to successfully support doctoral students in their successful preparation on the journey to become scholars (Aitchison, 2010; Aitchison & Lee, 2006; Maher et al., 2008). Specifically, writing groups have been found to provide graduate students with relief from the feeling of isolation (Ferguson, 2009) and anxiety or fear (Lee & Boud, 2003) that may accompany online learning and/​or the dissertation writing process.
   

   
   

   Social capital theory provided a foundation for the development and delivery of the writing session series. Tyndall, Forbes, Avery, & Powell (2019) note that the social capital developed through group writing sessions for doctoral nursing students not only impacted their doctoral work, but also showed potential for the experience to continue to serve the students as they became new faculty members with research and writing expectations. 
   

   
   

   This research explores the experiences of those who participated in these optional sessions, specifically looking at their perspectives on the impact of the sessions on their writing productivity and sense of community within the program. Preliminary findings from interviews of participating students indicate that the writing sessions had a positive impact on participants’ consistency and time devoted to writing, productivity, and, to a lesser degree, sense of community with other participants. Detailed discussion of the writing session structure and research findings will be included and may be of interest to doctoral program faculty who are looking for new or innovative ways to support doctoral student research and degree completion.

3. C

   Examination of what contributes to ​“best practice” in doctoral supervisory relationships: a content analysis of supervisory relationship studies from 1990 to 2021

   Small Group Discussion

   Carol Johansson, University College London, UK
   

   Primary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery
   Secondary theme: The candidate experience

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   With the growing numbers of Ph.D and Professional Doctorates offered by universities the doctoral supervisory relationship has been under increased scrutiny evidenced by the growth in academic studies dedicated to that aspect of the doctoral journey. This systematic literature review is based on the evidence drawn from a review of scholarly studies (n=217) examining the relationship between postgraduate research students and supervisors in doctoral studies. The studies included traditional Ph. D programmes and practice-based (Ed. D) doctorates. In order to synthesize evidence from existing studies and identify gaps this systematic literature review used studies between the years 1990 to 2021. 

   A content analysis was used to synthesize the evidence by categorizing the 217 scholarly studies in multiple groupings including the year of study, type of Ph. D programme and discipline, country of origin of the study, the research methodology used, the predominant themes studied, and identification of current or proposed supervisory relationship models. The growing importance of the doctoral supervisory relationship is evidenced by the study output by year: 1990–1999 (n=4%); 2000–2010 (n=27%); and 2011–2021 (n=70%).

   The implication for future research is evidenced by these figures. The majority of the studies analysed (96%) identify the supervisory relationship as the most important and critical to a candidate’s success in the doctoral journey. The studies overwhelmingly recommend the optimal form of supervision consists of supervisory teams, panels and committees. Many studies analysed suggest that the least preferable supervisory relationship model is the apprentice model or garden variety models (one-to-one supervision). What this seems to suggest is that those models in the context of supervision of PhD doctoral research students may in part be antiquated and rife with potential problems. 

   The results highlight the need for further research on the supervisory relationship pedagogy in the identification of supervisory relationship best practices and in contrast the pitfalls of one-on-one apprenticeship-styles models. Based on the growing continuing interest in the supervisory relationship (2011–2021 (n=70%) further research may benefit the doctoral community.

4. D

   Reflections on personal development within a Professional Doctorate: what development framework is appropriate?

   Small Group Discussion

   Dr Andy Borrie, University of Derby, UK
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   In my career I have worked concurrently in academia and professional practice in sport. Having completed a professional doctorate I am now engaged in designing and delivering on DProf programmes. My experiences have led me to question whether current academic personal development frameworks are relevant for DProf learners. Current frameworks, such as the Vitae Researcher Development Framework (RDF), focuses almost exclusively on the development of the student as a researcher. However, my experience suggests that many DProf learners are not undertaking their doctoral journey with the aim of becoming researchers. 

   My own DProf experience highlighted the disconnect between personal ambition and the RDF. My DProf goal was aimed at bridging a gap between theory and practice with the aim of impacting widely on practitioners. I knew that to achieve this outcome I needed to be ​‘multi-lingual’. I had to be able to speak the language of both practice and research and be able to effectively translate between the two. 

   The ​‘Engagement’ domain of the RDF is the one that was ostensibly most relevant to my ambition. However, within it the idea of ​‘professional practice’ is not mentioned. The framework makes limited mention of presenting to ​‘non-expert audiences’ and using ​‘non-academic’ publication outlets but the primary thrust is about researcher engaging with researcher. In contrast, I believe that to be an effective ​‘translator’ requires specific skills. You have to learn to listen to the evolution of professional language, to keep adjusting your message to maintain cultural relevance, to simplify ideas without losing coherence or accuracy. None of these ​‘skills’ were touched upon in the framework guiding my DProf journey ergo it did not develop me in relation to my ambition. 

   I suggest that academia needs to rethink its personal development frameworks to address the needs of a widening population of doctoral students.

Break

Duration

10 mins 

Workshops

Duration

60 mins 

1. A

   The ​‘10minute – 5minute’ Game. A ​‘Quasi-Realistic’ Structure for Practising Team Work Skills

   Workshop

   Dr Kevin Parker, KKI Associates, UK
   

   Primary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery
   Secondary theme: Interdisciplinarity

   Duration

   60 mins 

   View details

   While employers regard ​‘team working’ as an important skill, most forms of team based working have been greatly restricted during the pandemic. Typical ways of inculcating team skills include Group exercises, and ​‘Team-building Workshops’. Many students criticize these for being trivial and unrealistic. Broadly, the ​‘right everyone, let’s build a tower from pasta’ team building approach does not reflect how typical business (or academic) teams operate. 

   The author has devised a Project Management Game using a ​‘10 minute, five minute’ format. Teams of 4–5 are given 6–8 tasks to accomplish. The game is divided into 10 minute ​‘work periods’ where each participant works on a single task, and ​‘meetings’ of 5 minutes where participants share their progress and co-ordinate with each other. There is no communication between students in the ​‘works periods’ and no work can be done during the ​‘meetings’. Tasks are ​‘dependent’ on other tasks and require careful scheduling at the ​‘Meetings’. Individual tasks can be designed to appeal to different personality types (introvert/​extravert), and Belbin Team Role Archetypes (Shaper, Completer-Finisher, etc). 

   The game can be operated at 2 levels of difficulty/​complexity: ​‘Introductory’, with typically 4–5 rounds of work periods/​meetings, usually lasting around an hour; and ​‘Specialist’ with activities based on specific disciplines, which usually last 2–2.5 hours. The introductory game features generic tasks such as completing a Sudoku, and making a paper aeroplane. A specialist game might mimic an international research project, where regular progress meetings are held. In both forms of the game, participants have a ​‘budget’ to manage through its duration (Monopoly money in the ​‘Introductory’ version).

   After the game, a facilitator can lead participants into concepts like preferred team roles, effective communication strategies, as well as the ​‘hard skills’ of budgets and GANTT charts. It can also be pointed out that many employers use similar games at ​‘Assessment Centres’ as part of their recruitment process.

2. B

   Venture Scientists: educating PhD Students in commercialising their deep tech projects

   Workshop

   Prof Philip Treleaven, University College London, UK
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience

   Duration

   60 mins 

   View details

   Today, a tsunami of tech innovation is sweeping the world driven by the digital revolution, economic realignment and Covid. Understanding how to inspire young PhDs in becoming venture scientists is increasingly important.

   Notably PhD students and young professionals are now pursuing commercialisation in parallel with their deep tech research in universities, government labs and companies. In perspective, this entrepreneurship can be seen as a natural progression from pure research in the 60s, applied research in the 70s, to collaborative research between industry and academia in the 80s-90s, and on to enterprise research; researcher-led exploitation.

   PhD students and researchers are an amazing innovation talent pool:

    Company intrapreneurship – companies and public sector bodies are using collaborative student research projects to explore emerging technologies. Institutions benefit from low-risk and inexpensive proof-of-concepts; the students from practical training and job offers.

    Student entrepreneurship – students are pursuing research projects that are impactful and might underpin valuable future tech start-ups.

   In summary, students and young researchers are inspired by ​“learning by doing”, and potential commercial or social impact.

   This presentation discusses how to create Innovation Ecosystems and encourage PhD Venture Scientists. We focus on ventures underpinned by digital technologies, with examples from UCL Computer Science and its 1,000 talented students.

Close

Briefing

Duration

5 mins 

Small Group Discussions

Duration

30 mins 

1. A

   Redesigning for Distance Learning — the Perils of changing Doctoral programme format

   Small Group Discussion

   Dr Judie Gannon, Oxford Brookes University, UK
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   This session will explore the range of resources programme leaders can draw upon when considering the move to online taught doctoral programme provision. It examines the wider political, economic, social and environmental factors, which may encourage programme teams to move towards online provision but also the existing sector and institutional guidance, which may caution such moves. While there is widespread adoption of online or distance learning provision at undergraduate and postgraduate taught levels, provision has been more limited across doctoral programmes. This is despite evidence that professional, taught doctorates in a distance learning format offer the flexibility and rigour required by professionals, their organisations and fields of practice. 

   By drawing on the limited literature (Combe, 2005; Deshpande, 2017; Huet and Casanova, 2021; Suhonen and Sutinen, 2014) and wider association resources, such as those from the UKCGE, EDAMBA and the QAA, the session will involve a worked example of the issues considered in a move to a distance learning format. An update on the programme’s development will be offered at the session, alongside a request for insights from conference participants. 

   Combe, C. (2005), ​“Developing and implementing an online doctoral programme”, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 118- 127 https://doi.org/10.1108/095135…

   Deshpande, A., 2017. Faculty Best Practices to Support Students in the ​‘Virtual Doctoral Land’. Higher Education for the Future 4, 12–30. doi:10.1177/2347631116681211

   Huet, I., & Casanova, D. (2021). Exploring the professional development of online and distance doctoral supervisors. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 58(4), 430–440.

   Suhonen, J., & Sutinen, E. (2014). The four pillar model-Analysing the sustainability of online doctoral programmes. TechTrends, 58(4), 81–88.

2. B

   Adapt and flourish: How do doctoral supervisors shape the experiences of part-time, Postgraduate researchers?

   Small Group Discussion

   Shelley O’Connor & Dr Scott Foster, Liverpool John Moores University, UK
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Cohort building

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   Part-time and mature entrants are an often-overlooked representation of doctoral students, that find themselves less secure in the capability to develop appropriate learning opportunities and navigate the doctoral journey, despite being adult learners with a broad range of educational and career experience (Turner & McAlpine, 2011). For a PGR to thrive in their institutions, supervisors should be flexible and receptive to the needs of their students, and this must be mirrored by respective institutional structures and frameworks.

   Institutions often attempt to create a culture in which sustained long working hours are accepted (Metcalfe et al., 2018). As a result, this change to learning and working independently often contributes towards the feeling of being an imposter whilst adding to the uncertainty within a complex working environment. (Gardner, 2007; Turner & McAlpine, 2011). Fung, Southcott and Siu (2017) in their cross-institutional study explored mature students’ motives for embarking on doctoral study and self-reported experiences of this and challenges they face. Four themes emerged from the study: taking risks, willpower, financial obligations, and a work-life balance. Other factors included adapting to academic language, navigating the unwritten rules, and demanding supervisors. 

   Circumnavigating the different departments can be a labyrinth for doctoral supervisors who are underestimated as guides through conflicting institutional policy, that may hinder efforts to undertake effective supervision (Masek and Alias, 2020). 

   A scoping review was conducted using Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework, to review existing literature and to examine the supervisory relationship of part-time doctoral students, followed up with a more detailed data collection. Research implications suggest the findings may be important for University policy, practice, theory, and subsequent research. 

   This presentation seeks to explore the challenges faced by part-time, mature doctoral students and their experiences of the supervisory relationship.

3. C

   Framework for the Collaborative Design and Assessment of an Effective PhD Placement.

   Small Group Discussion

   Laura O Donovan & Prof Irene Sheridan, MTU, Ireland
   Science Foundation Ireland

   Primary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery
   Secondary theme: Interdisciplinarity

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   Given that an increasing number of PhD graduates now work outside of academia, innovative doctoral programmes are including more non-academic placement opportunities for experiential learning and development of transferable skills. The quality of learning, experience and skills developed from placements vary significantly depending on a multitude of factors, hence the importance of comprehensive and structured planning to clearly identify goals, and to prompt, structure, and evidence learning thus exploiting all potential benefits for each candidate. 

   This research analysed international best practice, national policy and the distinct university, doctoral candidate and host organisation requirements, and developed an innovative comprehensive and adaptable framework to support the collaborative design, implementation, assessment, and evaluation of PhD placements within industry or with an international collaborator for the Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) ADVANCE Centre for Research Training (CRT) PhD programme.

   This research presents the diverse benefits of and strategies for developing and employing reflective practice as a tool for learning and assessment. Reflective practice provides a structure to activate contemplation on the desired goals for learning from the placement, enhance learning from experience during the placement and amalgamate understanding of the overall learning and skills developed from the placement experience. 

   The framework supports collaboration between the doctoral candidate, academic supervisor, and host organisation in designing the placement, taking into consideration the complexity of funding sources, research outcomes, placement objectives and potential IP issues. Importantly this framework identifies each PhD candidates’ learning outcomes, and the skills and attributes targeted through the placement in the context of their overall doctoral development plan while facilitating ongoing reflection and assessment of same. 

   This innovative framework was developed in collaboration with five universities and a large proportion of the programmes’ academic supervisors and doctoral candidates and is currently being implemented in Ireland.

4. D

   Building meaningful postgraduate research communities and the role of the Doctoral College

   Small Group Discussion

   Natalie Stewart, Dr Fiona Knight & Dr Julia Taylor, Bournemouth University, UK
   

   Primary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery
   Secondary theme: Cohort building

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   Bournemouth University (BU) has relatively small numbers of postgraduate research students (PGRs), comprising 3% of the total student body. We benefit from having a dedicated, institutional wide Doctoral College but despite this, we still experience challenges in building momentum, critical mass and longevity of cohort building initiatives for this unique student group. 

   The recent ESRC and EPSRC Doctoral Education Reviews (2021) indicate there is a clear direction of travel, across the sector, towards ensuring PGRs complete their doctoral degrees with skills in collaborative working across disciplines. 

   Cohorts of PGRs, in this respect, can provide crucial peer support and create communities of practice which enhance student experience and encourage timely completion. However, fostering an effective community can be challenging. This is reflected annually in the Advance HE PRES with research culture recording the lowest rate of satisfaction in PGR experience. The research community stimulating PGRs’ work does not score highly but this only serves to highlight its centrality to the PGR experience. Development of cohesive and supportive communities for PGRs could have a substantial positive impact on feedback in this area. Furthermore, it is increasingly apparent that a strong cohort and supportive community can also play a positive role in supporting PGR mental health and wellbeing. 

   BU does not have large cohort-based doctoral training centres (DTCs) or programmes (DTPs). However, our Doctoral College encourages cohort building activities, including developing PGR clusters around supervisors, research centres, departments, and wider. These foster a secure sense of belonging at multiple levels in environments and groups that stimulate research and facilitate networking. Nevertheless, without traditional cohort-based intakes, we aspire to build momentum in developing cohorts, and benchmark our PGR support and experience with the best in the sector. 

   During this discussion session, we encourage attendees to explore implementations of successful, meaningful cohort building initiatives.

Break

Duration

10 mins 

Workshops

Duration

60 mins 

1. A

   Cohort Building and How to Future-Proof your Doctoral Training

   Workshop

   Alison Gray, Skillfluence, UK
   

   Primary theme: Cohort building
   

   Duration

   60 mins 

   View details

   In the last 2 years we’ve all learned to take everything we can online, and that includes doctoral training and building cohorts.

   But what happens now?

   In this highly interactive workshop, we’ll provide initial data-based insights on engagement levels of doctoral candidates during online and in person transferable skills training. We’ll use this data as discussion points for breakout groups to discuss the benefits and challenges of online and in person formats and stakeholder requirements for transferable skills training.

   Attendees will have the chance to share their experiences from the last 2 years of online delivery compared with your likely previous experience with mostly in person training. We can then use these shared insights and discussion to inform future decision making on programme formats and cohort development.

   Participants will leave the session better equipped to make decisions on the right format (online, in person, blended) for Doctoral Training programmes in the future. Consider the best format for different types of training programmes and gain insights based on learnings to improve the skills development journey of candidates. Share perspectives, gain fresh ideas, make new connections and leave feeling energised about future possibilities

2. B

   Academic Citizenship Programme – Developing leadership, confidence and cohorts

   Workshop

   Davina Whitnall & Dr Stephen Ling, The University of Salford, UK
   

   Primary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery
   Secondary theme: The candidate experience

   Duration

   60 mins 

   View details

   The Academic Citizenship programme (ACP) helps PhD researchers transition into an academic role after completing their doctorate through specific training and development activities to take alongside the research programme. The aim is for PG researchers to be employment ready and a ​‘ready to start’ academic on successful completion of the doctorate. As well as providing skills, the programme provides support to help participants to articulate their skills and experience successfully. 

   As well as providing skills, the programme provides support to help participants articulate their knowledge, abilities and experiences effectively. Successful participants are eligible to apply for Associate Fellowship of the Higher Education Academy (HEA) with the first submission fully funded by the Doctoral School.

   The ACP utilises a cohort approach as a Community of Practice (CoP) to help PhD researcher on the programme:

   • Accurately identify their development needs, particularly the difference between competency and confidence 
   • Facilitate working across disciplines to co-create and produce learning interventions
   • Develop and enhance their teaching practice through the creation of an ACP portfolio 
   • Evidence and produce convincing narratives about their skills and abilities to support onward development and employability

   The proposed workshop explores the challenges and successes of this approach, drawing on examples and co-created projects such as ​‘decolonising research and supporting the BAME community,’ developing PGR community-case projects through ​‘Peer-to-peer support’ and examples of outputs such as ​‘Shared research methods at Summer Schools.’ There will be the opportunity to connect to the ACP cohort and encourage interinstitutional connection between participants and their PGR cohorts during the session and afterwards.

Close

Briefing

Duration

5 mins 

Keynote Discussion — Interdisciplinary doctorates: challenges for recruitment, training and assessment

Dr Douglas Halliday | co-chair of ICDDET

Dr Gill Houston | co-chair of ICDDET

Chaired by Dr Owen Gower | Director, UKCGE

Duration

35 mins 

Changeover

Duration

5 mins 

Oral Presentations

Duration

30 mins 

1. A

   Research Culture and Research Supervision: Impact on the doctoral experience and candidate wellbeing

   Oral Presentation

   Amy Zile, Dr Bryony Porter, Prof Kenda Crozier & Prof Kristy Sanderson, University of East Anglia, UK
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   Background: Research culture and supervision has substantial impact on the doctoral candidate experience (PRES, 2021). Doctoral candidates (DC’s) are less likely to seek support for their mental health (Waight and Giordano, 2018), despite concerns that a high number of DC’s may experience mental health challenges, and potentially be at higher risk for suicide (Hazell, Berry, Niven and Mackenzie, 2021) 

   Aims: To understand DC experiences of research culture in relation to work life balance, the supervisory experience, mental health and wellbeing and seeking support. 

   Method: An online survey was administered to a self-selecting sample of UK university students in April-June 2021, open to any degree level or discipline. Questions asked about mental health and wellbeing, experiences of supervision, and seeking support for mental health both formally and informally, using validated questionnaires where available. Preliminary results will be presented from ongoing qualitative interviews with DC’s where the topics of research culture and supervision are explored in more depth. 

   Results: 228 students completed the survey including 73 DC’s. 45 reported experiencing mental health challenges, 42 of which had informally disclosed to their supervisors (27 had formally disclosed to the university). Whilst some DC’s (N = 24) reported a positive research culture, where they could strive for a good work life balance and have open discussions with colleagues and peers about stress, distress and mental health, other DC’s did not (N = 28). DC’s reported stigma and judgement from supervisors highlighting inaccessibility and unsuitability of university support services. Free text responses suggested disparity in culture and relationships. 

   Conclusions: DC’s who had discussed their mental health with supervisors had more negative experiences than positive or mixed experiences. Doctoral colleges and universities should work to ensure a positive research culture and supervisory experience for all.

2. B

   Critical work to promote our research culture: Development and pilot of a research culture survey at a Scottish University.

   Oral Presentation

   Dr Ruby Roberts, Prof Nick Fyfe, Prof Rhona Flin, Dr Emma Gillibrand, Prof Andrew Lamb & Jane Williams, Robert Gordon University, UK
   

   Primary theme: Interdisciplinarity
   Secondary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   Developing a positive working environment and culture is essential for researchers, and consequently for conducting valuable, high-quality research. Researchers, including doctoral candidates, frequently report research culture (RC) in PRES as poor, with several high-profile reports raising concerns about researchers feeling undervalued, pressured to publish, and isolated. In response to these significant challenges, and to understand researchers’ experiences of RC to inform tangible change, several RC surveys have been conducted by large sector organisations (e.g., Wellcome Trust) and individual universities. However, there does not appear to be a widely adopted RC measure, with variation in content and length.

   As part of ongoing activities to foster a positive research culture at our university, a preliminary RC questionnaire was designed. The University of Glasgow’s RC questionnaire was adapted in conjunction with the identification and development of eleven research culture dimensions outlined in key sector reports and the relevant organisational culture literatures. These dimensions were represented by 34 survey questions and included leadership, collaboration, recognition, wellbeing, research context and research value as well as equality, diversity, and inclusion. Qualitative questions were also included to provide a rich insight into current RC perceptions.

   The initial online RC survey was piloted across twelve schools, with 177 respondents completing the survey (November 2021). The survey was anonymous and distributed to with research active staff, including all PGR supervisors. With an overall response rate of 70%, this clearly communicated the appetite for change and willingness of staff to be involved in the improvement of our RC. Whilst the results indicate that considerable work will be required to make significant progress, the data provide a valuable benchmark from which to improve and insights into priority areas to address. Preliminary findings, including how the data will be used to direct RC priorities and actions, will be discussed.

3. C

   Promoting mental health and wellbeing in doctoral researchers through co-designed inductions: Initial insights into implementation

   Oral Presentation

   Dr Patricia Jackman, Rebecca Sanderson, Lisa Jacobs, Lauren Blackwell & Pilar Pousada Solino, University of Lincoln, UK
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Diversity

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   In recent years, there is increasing concern in the higher education sector for doctoral researchers’ mental health and wellbeing. In response to calls for the development of prevention strategies to address this issue, this talk will present actionable strategies that could be implemented into induction programmes to support doctoral researcher mental health and wellbeing, and thus promote positive research cultures. Initially, we will outline the method and present findings from a co-design study that generated evidence to inform the design of inductions to support mental health and wellbeing in doctoral researchers (Jackman et al., 2021). Recognising the value of working in partnership with end-users and stakeholders in the design of health-promoting interventions, our findings were generated through a 9‑month collaboration with 47 doctoral researchers from 24 institutions and 13 stakeholders from one university, with data collected via focus groups and follow-up surveys. After conducting thematic analysis and making further refinements based on feedback from participants, the recommended strategies were organised into five themes: peer connections; supervisor relationships; information and resources; student services advice and support; and training and development. After presenting the study findings, we will explain how actionable strategies within the five principles recommended in our research have been implemented. Furthermore, given the emphasis placed on positioning equality, diversity, and inclusion at the heart of inductions for doctoral researchers in our research, we will discuss strategies employed to support often isolated communities within the doctoral researcher population, including the provision of accessible online training and blended approaches to career development opportunities to support peer connections. Our talk will conclude by providing considerations for the design of inductions and strategies to support the mental health and wellbeing of doctoral researchers from the outset of their studies.

Break

Duration

15 mins 

Oral Presentations

Duration

30 mins 

1. A

   Diversity and inclusion: Key to expanding thought, access and opportunities for future scholars

   Oral Presentation

   Dr Rick Zoucha, Duquesne University, USA
   

   Primary theme: Diversity
   Secondary theme: The candidate experience

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   Diversity and inclusion in higher education and workforce is a philosophy resulting in a commitment that can lead to expanding differences in thoughts, actions and the development of future doctorly prepared scholars. The current numbers of doctoral students in nursing and other disciplines may not match the current demographics in the United States and other countries. For instance, the comparison of PhD graduates in nursing in the last 10 years with the percent of the African American population — 13.4% with 863 graduates, Hispanic — 18.5% with 298 graduates and the White non-Hispanic population — 60.3% with 4419 graduates. It is predicted by 2045 the US will become ​“minority white”. However, with the current low numbers there will be a continued need to recruit diverse nurses to PhD programs. It is imperative in nursing and other disciplines to recruit to PhD programs to assure the preparation of future scholars and practice related scientist. 

   Historically, there have been attempts at recruitment of diverse students to doctoral programs as well as recruitment of diverse faculty to serve as teachers and supervisors of students’ scholarly work. The future will require doctoral programs to expand their view of diversity and inclusion. This means embracing and valuing the views of people who are culturally, racially, and sexually diverse as a form of empowerment for all involved. This will mean mutual engagement, bold and innovative ideas about the changing norm. 

   Where to start? It is important to start by reaching out and listening, connecting with organization that represent diverse groups and form formal and informal partnerships. It is important to create open and culturally friendly safe spaces and environments for both perspective students and faculty. This presentation will offer a brief historical perspective, ideas about creating relationships and forming and committing to culturally friendly spaces.

2. B

   Enhancing agency through student-staff partnership: a student’s experience of the culture in a professional doctoral programme

   Oral Presentation

   Laura Blackburn, Dr Larissa Kempenaar & Dr Sivaramkumar Shanmugam, Glasgow Caledonian University, UK
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Cohort building

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   Recent Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES) highlighted research culture as a factor reducing students’ overall satisfaction with COVID-19 pandemic impacting matters further. Another factor relates to students’ perceived ability to control actions and resulting consequences, known in psychology literature as agency. Time constraints observed within doctorate studies, often reliant on funding, may contribute to this decline in agency. Recent PRES indicates students’ need for increased support from supervising academic staff, especially in professional development. Enhanced professional development support and opportunity has the power to build student agency and foster a positive doctoral environment.

   This presentation will focus on one pre-registration Doctorate of Physiotherapy (DPT) student’s experience transitioning from masters modules to doctoral studies at Glasgow Caledonian University. The programme followed two distinct stages. The first involved the accelerated teaching and assessment of pre-registration physiotherapy modules and the second involved doctorate modules for professional development and advanced research enquiry. Both stages differed significantly in content, teaching styles, student-staff relationships, power dynamics, student agency, and community of practice. The doctorate teaching staff held a different approach to teaching compared to the pre-registration modules. Staff aimed to develop ​‘doctorateness’ by facilitating a higher level of thinking and behaving, which fosters agency, transformative processes, adaptability, and doctoral identity.

   This reflective presentation highlights the student experience of the transition detailed above from the demanding workload of the masters modules, with a fast pace and accompanying high levels of stress, to the relaxed doctoral culture. This difference in experience resulted from determined efforts of the programme team to foster a flourishing community of practice by both changing traditional student-staff relationships and focusing on student professional development. This reflection will include the student experience of partnering with staff to influence and shape the culture with shared values, behaviours, and expectations as a community.

Changeover

Duration

5 mins 

Oral Presentations

Duration

30 mins 

1. A

   How to create a positive research culture through industrially-driven research

   Oral Presentation

   Linden Fradet & Ben Webster, National Physical Laboratory, UK
   

   Primary theme: The candidate experience
   Secondary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   The impact of the pandemic on the Postgraduate sector is well documented and acutely felt; loss of practical skills, low motivation and levels of engagement being cited as only the tip of the iceberg. Whilst some universities experienced reduced contact with students and a lack of resources to deliver training, you would think the Postgraduate Institute for Measurement Science (PGI), with its dispersed geographical model (students registered at 35 UK universities) would have been more exposed than most. But why then has our student and supervisor engagement increased, number of training events doubled and attendance been better than ever?

   Perhaps it’s the model of the PGI which fosters partnerships with industry to bridge the skills gap and create connections to lead a future workforce into employment. Or perhaps the three-way engagement between NPL, academia, and industry provides an additional platform and support for students during this challenging period. Or could it be that training from the PGI includes a Supervision Charter which calls on strong engagement, peer to peer support and a sense of ​‘we are in this together’ among the cohort? 

   The pandemic has tested our resilience and flexibility, and the PGI engagement model has adapted — our training and cohort events are delivered mostly on-line and the PGI cohort (current size of 206 ) has seen a 3 fold increase in engagement, greater interaction during the sessions and anecdotal reports of added value. Working closely with PGI Student Ambassadors and Supervisors has made the difference, importantly shifting the focus of training onto immediate needs and demonstrating the impact created by the PGI. 

   This presentation will show how adapting the PGI model impacted the cohort and Supervisor experience and will highlight how the creative use of limited resources, enhanced through collaboration, can address student needs in a post-pandemic world.

2. B

   Enjoying the fruits of our collective labours: The unexpected benefits of a structured doctoral training programme

   Oral Presentation

   Dr Elizabeth Scanlon, Sheffield Hallam University, UK
   Dr Heather Sears, Coventry University, UK
   Dr Anna Seabourne, University of Huddersfield, UK
   Llinos Spargo, University of South Wales, UK
   Jennie Eldridge, University Alliance, UK

   Primary theme: Cohort building
   Secondary theme: Innovative approaches to delivery

   Duration

   30 mins 

   View details

   In 2015 a group of universities came together to develop and deliver a structured doctoral training programme outside of the standard UK funders DTP schemes. The aim was to develop critical mass and share resources to support postgraduate researchers. The Doctoral Training Alliance, coordinated by University Alliance, has now been running for six years with 20 participating universities, four themed programmes and c250 PGRs benefiting from being part of a national cohort of interdisciplinary researchers.

   The programme is coordinated by University Alliance staff who work in close collaboration with key professional services staff in partner universities. This network is key to the running of the programme and has enabled us to form a cohort of like-minded professionals working to support the cohorts of postgraduate researchers. Working together is a core strength of the programme and provides the opportunity to share practice and experience as well as offer peer-to-peer professional development.

   One of the many positive results of being part of a professional network has been a successful bid to the QAA Collaborative Enhancement Project scheme to develop web-based materials to help postgraduate researchers prepare for their viva examination, resulting in a resource which will be available across the sector.

   The project team will briefly outline the structure and operation of the Doctoral Training Alliance before reflecting on the unexpected benefits of the collaboration.

Changeover

Duration

5 mins 

Closing Conference Summary

Duration

15 mins 

Close