The experience of disagreement between students and supervisors in PhD education: a qualitative study

BackgroundPhD supervision is mostly individual and disagreement between supervisors and PhD students is a seldom-discussed topic at universities. The present study aimed to describe the experience of disagreement between PhD students and supervisors.MethodsNine supervisors and seven PhD students from Sweden and England were interviewed using a video recorder. The recorded material was analysed using inductive content analysis.ResultsDisagreements in PhD education can be described with the overarching theme: the nature of the disagreements changes over time. Five categories emerged to describe the variations of the experiences: involvement in important decisions, supervisors not being up-to-date, dubious advice from supervisors, mediating between supervisors, and interpersonal relationships.ConclusionsThere is a gradual shift in competence where PhD students may excel supervisors in subject knowledge. Early disagreements may indicate immaturity of the student while disagreements later may indicate that the student is maturing making their own decisions. Consequently, disagreements may need to be addressed differently depending on when they occur. Addressing them inappropriately might slow the progressions and result in higher attrition rate among PhD students. The five categories may be elements in future PhD supervisor training programs and should be further evaluated for their importance and impact on PhD education.

[1]  G. Handal,et al.  Optimal use of feedback in research supervision with master and doctoral students , 2005 .

[2]  B. Lundman,et al.  Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. , 2004, Nurse education today.

[3]  Marian Petre,et al.  The unwritten rules of PhD research , 2004 .

[4]  A. Wadee,et al.  Effective PhD supervision and mentorship : a workbook based on experiences from South Africa and the Netherlands : South Africa-Netherlands Research Programme on Alternatives in Development (SANPAD) , 2006 .

[5]  Stefan Bruckner,et al.  PhD Education Through Apprenticeship , 2011, Eurographics.

[6]  K. Krippendorff.  Krippendorff, Klaus, Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1980. , 1980 .

[7]  C. Halse,et al.  The learning alliance: ethics in doctoral supervision , 2012 .

[8]  John Hockey,et al.  Establishing Boundaries: problems and solutions in managing the PhD supervisor's role , 1994 .

[9]  R. Burgess.  The Research Foundations of Graduate Education , 1996 .

[10]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[11]  P. Atkinson,et al.  Supervising the doctorate : a guide to success , 2004 .

[12]  Helvi Kyngäs,et al.  The qualitative content analysis process. , 2008, Journal of advanced nursing.

[13]  Janne Malfroy,et al.  Retheorizing doctoral supervision as professional work , 2010 .

[14]  Christine Halse,et al.  ‘Becoming a supervisor’: the impact of doctoral supervision on supervisors' learning , 2011 .

[15]  D Parkinson,et al.  A GUIDE TO SUCCESS , 2004 .

[16]  L. McAlpine,et al.  ‘Untold’ doctoral stories: can we move beyond cultural narratives of neglect? , 2012 .

[17]  Catherine Manathunga,et al.  The development of research supervision: “Turning the light on a private space” , 2005 .

[18]  The Emergence of the American University , 1966 .

[19]  B Downe-Wamboldt,et al.  Content analysis: method, applications, and issues. , 1992, Health care for women international.

[20]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology , 1980 .

[21]  Madeleine Atkins,et al.  Effective Teaching in Higher Education , 1989 .

[22]  Susan K. Gardner,et al.  Contrasting the Socialization Experiences of Doctoral Students in High- and Low-Completing Departments: A Qualitative Analysis of Disciplinary Contexts at One Institution , 2010 .