Search

Postgraduate research candidature support, support of supervisory teams, and assistance with examination and assessment requirements are some of the crucial elements in a successful postgraduate student's study experience. While there is a large body of research on Doctoral supervision, less is available on Master's level supervision and support. Benchmarking studies that gauge the quality of higher education processes and practices, are gaining momentum as a research tool, and reflective mechanism for enhancing student experiences at higher education institutions. This paper reports on a small-scale study that used a holistic benchmarking framework at a research-intensive New Zealand university, in an effort to gauge the quality of the level of postgraduate Master's research student support and supervision. Twenty-three academics and 17 students completed the survey, which assessed key performance indicators (KPIs): student support; postgraduate candidature development; student supervision; and assessment and examination support. Both students and academics were happy with orientation and induction, but students felt more information was needed regarding possible changes to research. Overall academics and students had confidence in the level of academic research guidance. Although academics felt assessment policies and procedures were explicit, students were not always in agreement. Moreover, students thought that evaluative feedback on their experience should be gathered more frequently. The findings suggest that, in broad terms, the university in question is tracking well and meeting most of the benchmarking principles and their associated KPIs. However, both academics and students highlighted areas where the University can improve practices to better support the experience of Master's research students.

Many countries have doctoral viva examinations, mostly conducted in-person until the COVID-19 pandemic. This article explores the changing processes and experiences of doctoral vivas forced online, from the perspectives of three examiners (two Uk, one NZ) and one recent candidate (UK). It sheds light on remote viva examinations exploring experiences of examination rigour, opportunities to evidence 'doctorateness' and challenges and affordances of remoteness, home location and technology. We use autoethnography, focusing on our experiences including the personal, learning and institutional dimensions. We found virtual spaces had advantages (comfort) and disadvantages (emotional difficulties), and levels of worry were often higher, especially regarding IT. Online formats still enabled examiners to rigorously assess 'doctorateness', but duty of care is needed for candidates with anxiety exacerbated by the pandemic, or technology. Our study offers insiders' insights into the remote online viva itself with recommendations for candidates, examiners and institutions.

This study aimed to evaluate and compare approaches to learning by a longitudinal cohort of undergraduate students as they progressed from their first to third years of study in anatomy and physiology. "The Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students" (ASSIST) was completed at the beginning and end of their first year of university study, and in their final semester. At first year, a surface learning approach predominated; however, at third year, students showed a significant increase in their use of deep and strategic learning approaches compared to first year, although surface learning approaches were retained. The extent to which third-year students took both strategic and deep approaches to learning was positively correlated with their performance on assessment. As students progress through a three-year science degree, they develop deeper and more strategic learning approaches, and assessment and teaching styles probably promote these approaches to learning.

Globally there is recognition that doctoral programmes need to offer the opportunity for career pathways beyond academia, as PhD graduates are entering a range of careers. Consequently, some doctoral programmes now provide opportunities to develop a broader skill set. However, most PhD programmes in the United Kingdom and Australasia still concentrate on disciplinary knowledge and developing research skills. Moreover, the assessment has remained narrowly focused on a written thesis and an oral examination. Here we apply the notion of 'constructive alignment' to doctoral education and find that, even in terms of preparing PhD graduates for academic and research careers, the curriculum lacks opportunities to develop and assess relevant skills. The situation is even more extreme for wider careers beyond academia. To achieve alignment, we suggest providing more structured learning opportunities and personalised professional development plans with formative portfolios. If wanting true alignment in the PhD, a portfolio would be the summative assessment, but this is likely a step too far for a conservative academy.

The traditional apprenticeship model for PhD education involves supervisors mentoring students through a substantive research project and ultimately into academia. Although about half of PhD graduates enter careers beyond academia, this apprenticeship model, with a narrow focus on thesis research has continued to dominate in many countries. While there are variations in terms of coursework requirements, the main assessment continues to be on the PhD thesis, and, in most countries, an oral defense of this thesis. The aims of this working paper are firstly to critique the dominant models of PhD education by using the lens of ‘success’, and secondly to consider an alternative model of PhD education. A PhD program may be deemed successful if it leads to high employment rates, high satisfaction with types of employment, and graduates who are well equipped for being in the world – in work and in society. Through examining these indicators of success, I argue that the North American and British PhD models may be failing, and suggest an alternative model based on ‘constructive alignment’, in which the graduate outcomes are well aligned with teaching and learning methods, and the assessment regime. This alternative model is still based on an apprenticeship approach but requires PhD programs to be tailored to the individual and their desired career pathway, so that alongside and through their research, they can develop a holistic set of graduate attributes – for ‘doctorateness’, for possible careers, and for global citizenship. This model has implications not only for the learning opportunities available to PhD students, but also for how we assess PhDs. Universities may need to develop programs to better support the career planning and professional development of PhD students. A portfolio or digital badge assessment approach, whether summative or formative, would allow PhD graduates to demonstrate the depth and breadth of knowledge and skills they have acquired through doctoral study, and better equip them for their chosen career pathway.

In this article, we sought a relation between orientation to higher education and curricular experiences, and elucidated the nature of transformative curricular experiences. Twenty-four graduates from humanities and science degrees in the year 2000 were interviewed approximately five years later to obtain their retrospective views on the purpose of higher education, as well as their undergraduate experiences of teaching and learning. Drawing on phenomenographic principles, four orientations to higher education were generated. Four participant cases are analyzed, representing each orientation to higher education. In the "gaining a qualification" orientation, graduates valued being told what to learn, as well as learning practical skills. For the "preparation for a job" orientation, graduates wanted lecturers who were good at conveying information, but they also valued project work, having some autonomy over learning and practical applications. In the "developing skills and learning how to think" orientation, graduates valued being challenged and learning in groups, but also wanted to learn professional skills. In the "growing as an individual" orientation, graduates valued being challenged, gaining different perspectives, developing critical thinking, learning about theory, interacting with lecturers, research, and study for its own sake. Some curricular experiences transformed thinking about the purpose of higher education, including learning through discussion in small groups, authentic learning tasks including inquiry-based assignments, exercises in developing critical thinking, opportunities to interact with teachers, opportunities to develop practical skills, experiencing different cultures and personal growth through lifestyle and social experiences. Our research has implications for advising students, as well as for teachers aiming to encourage a deep approach to learning.

Stress during doctoral study is common; however, its presence is of concern to students as it has a deleterious impact on well-being and performance, and to the university which has a duty of care to students and the desire to promote a supportive research environment. This article reports on the qualitative findings from an online survey that sought to identify students' experiences related to stress during the early-stage doctoral study. All newly enrolled PhD students at the University of Otago (New Zealand) received invitations to participate and respond to two questions related to stress during the early-stage doctoral study. In total, 152 survey responses were acquired from 352 first-year PhD students (response rate 43.2%). Nine main areas of concern were identified from an inductive thematic analysis of participants' responses. Key stressors were time pressure, uncertainty about doctoral processes, sense of belonging in scholarly communities, and financial pressures. Some findings are contrary to previous research with novel perceptions on the student--supervisor relationship, different financial issues, and transition stresses contrary to previous research; this may reflect the changed academic landscape of doctoral studies. Findings provide insight into potential support strategies to better support early-stage PhD students.

We explored the relationships between social contexts and factors that promoted and inhibited curriculum change at two universities. Thirty interviews were analysed using a general inductive approach to identify factors and forces in three social contexts (lecturer, departmental, and institutional). Curriculum change was characterised by six forces: ownership, resources, identity, leadership, students, and quality assurance, each composed of factors that differed in their direction (enabling or inhibiting) and/or intensity (strong or weak). Academic developers should find the approach and lessons learned useful for planning interventions and identifying where they may encounter resistance or enablers in the process of change.

To determine the logistics, benefits, and challenges of developing and implementing an international undergraduate research network, the authors analyzed the Matariki Undergraduate Research Network (MURN). MURN attempted to connect undergraduate students from four countries across two years, with 21 and 23 students respectively. Using mixed methods, the authors explored faculty and student experiences of MURN. Although MURN worked well at the local level, it had limited success at a global level. Teaching across time zones and academic-year differences posed the biggest challenges. Students and faculty reported a range of benefits typical of engagement with undergraduate research but noted weak international connections. A credit-bearing program with partners in similar time zones and academic-year systems, as well as a requirement for collaborative projects across institutions, are recommended.

This exploratory study determined PhD completions at a research-intensive university in New Zealand and considered factors affecting PhD completions. Completion data were calculated for PhD cohorts at the University of Otago from 2000 to 2012 (n = 2770) and survival models determined whether gender, enrolment status, age at admission, citizenship, scholarship status and academic field influenced completion. The impact of the doctoral programme and the research environment was also considered. Across all cohorts, 83% submitted their thesis for examination (17% withdrawal). The median submission time was 3.4 years for full-timers, with a median completion time (to award of degree) of 4.1 years. Survival modelling showed that completion can be enhanced by having mainly full-time candidates, but also allowing periods of part-time enrolment near submission, recruiting a large international cohort, and providing three year scholarships. Health science candidates had the highest submission percentages, while commerce candidates submitted in the fastest times. There were only minor or negligible effects of gender and age at admission. Other factors contributing to high submission rates included recruiting quality candidates, close monitoring during candidature, provision of research training, a vibrant research culture, a personal performance coach, high-quality supervision and funding incentives for candidates who submit in under four years.

This article weighs in on the developing discourse on AI's role in higher education research through a structured dialogue between two diametrically opposed academics. Utilising a dialectical framework, the discourse transcends surface-level debates to grapple with ethical, methodological, and epistemological questions that are often overlooked, but are paramount to the field's integrity. Russell advocates for AI as an indispensable tool for academic research, while Rachel raises critical questions about AI's potential to undermine the very essence of academic inquiry. Through this disputation, the article reveals the complex tensions between efficiency and ethical concerns, between innovation and integrity. Rather than offer facile solutions, it exposes the intricate challenges and invites the reader to consider the broader implications for academic research practice. The article serves as a catalyst for a more rigorous, nuanced dialogue, aiming to shift the discourse from the technological to the ethical and epistemological. It is an imperative read for anyone committed to understanding the transformational potential and pitfalls of AI in higher education research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With increasing focus on the outcomes of doctoral education, especially regarding employability, we aimed to explore how PhD graduates from humanities and social sciences (HASS), and science disciplines perceived the development of a holistic set of graduate attributes during their doctoral study and the application of these attributes in the workplace. We analysed 136 survey responses and interviews with 21 PhD graduates from one NZ and two US universities. We found that overall, PhD graduates are satisfied with their development as researchers, but had concerns regarding the development of some transferrable skills and attributes. Graduates from the three universities perceived the application of attributes in the workplace similarly. Comparisons of graduate attribute application to their development revealed the following areas requiring better support: teamwork, communication, project management, entrepreneurship, and networking. While development of affective attributes related to global citizenship was lower than expected, graduates perceived these were not always required in the workplace. Universities should consider how their doctoral training programmes can promote a more holistic development of desirable skills and attributes. We provide a possible categorisation to evaluate attainment of desirable attributes for PhD graduates, to ensure researchers and institutions are targeting key attributes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Plagiarism is a concept that is difficult to define. Although most higher education institutions have policies aimed at minimising and addressing student plagiarism, little research has examined the ways in which plagiarism is discursively constructed in university policy documents, or the connections and disconnections between institutional and student understandings of plagiarism in higher education. This article reports on a study that explored students' understandings of plagiarism in relation to institutional plagiarism discourses at a New Zealand university. The qualitative study involved interviews with 21 undergraduate students, and analysis of University plagiarism policy documents. The University policy documents revealed moral and regulatory discourses. In the interviews, students predominantly drew on ethico-legal discourses, which reflected the discourses in the policy documents. However, the students also drew on (un)fairness discourses, confusion discourses, and, to a lesser extent, learning discourses. Notably, learning discourses were absent in the University policy. Our findings revealed tensions between the ways plagiarism was framed in institutional policy documents, and students' understandings of plagiarism and academic writing. We suggest that, in order to support students' acquisition of academic writing skills, plagiarism should be framed in relation to "learning to write," rather than as a moral issue.

This article uses findings from a project on engagement with graduate outcomes across higher education institutions in New Zealand to produce a toolkit for implementing graduate attributes in geography curricula. Key facets include strong leadership; academic developers to facilitate conversations about graduate attributes and teaching towards them; ownership of the process by the teachers; the development of a contextualized set of graduate attributes for the geography degree; curriculum mapping to promote alignment between graduate attributes, learning outcomes and assessment tasks; incorporating high-impact educational experiences and signature pedagogies to foster graduate attributes; the use of evaluative data to inform continual enhancements; and allowing at least five years for curriculum renewal to occur.

In this article we explore how examiners assess a thesis that includes published work. An online survey was used to gather data on approaches to assessing publication-based theses (PBTs). The respondents were 62 supervisors who had experience examining PBTs across a range of disciplines at a research-intensive university in New Zealand. Nearly half of the respondents had examined 'hybrid' theses with papers inserted as chapters, 41% had examined theses with publications appended and 14% had examined PhDs by publication (i.e. papers alone). Twenty-nine per cent of examiners used their own extended set of criteria to assess PBTs, 48% found them easier to assess but 26% wanted more guidance. Our analysis also indicated that 86% of the examiners were highly influenced by publications in top-ranked journals and international peer-reviewed journals. Among the concerns of the examiners was the intellectual input of the candidate in any multi-authored publication, as well as the coherence of the thesis. We recommend the need for clearer guidelines for doctoral candidates, supervisors and examiners managing PBTs.

Globally there is recognition that doctoral programmes need to offer the opportunity for career pathways beyond academia, as PhD graduates are entering a range of careers. Consequently, some doctoral programmes now provide opportunities to develop a broader skill set. However, most PhD programmes in the United Kingdom and Australasia still concentrate on disciplinary knowledge and developing research skills. Moreover, the assessment has remained narrowly focused on a written thesis and an oral examination. Here we apply the notion of 'constructive alignment' to doctoral education and find that, even in terms of preparing PhD graduates for academic and research careers, the curriculum lacks opportunities to develop and assess relevant skills. The situation is even more extreme for wider careers beyond academia. To achieve alignment, we suggest providing more structured learning opportunities and personalised professional development plans with formative portfolios. If wanting true alignment in the PhD, a portfolio would be the summative assessment, but this is likely a step too far for a conservative academy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Stress during doctoral study is common; however, its presence is of concern to students as it has a deleterious impact on well-being and performance, and to the university which has a duty of care to students and the desire to promote a supportive research environment. This article reports on the qualitative findings from an online survey that sought to identify students' experiences related to stress during the early-stage doctoral study. All newly enrolled PhD students at the University of Otago (New Zealand) received invitations to participate and respond to two questions related to stress during the early-stage doctoral study. In total, 152 survey responses were acquired from 352 first-year PhD students (response rate 43.2%). Nine main areas of concern were identified from an inductive thematic analysis of participants' responses. Key stressors were time pressure, uncertainty about doctoral processes, sense of belonging in scholarly communities, and financial pressures. Some findings are contrary to previous research with novel perceptions on the student–supervisor relationship, different financial issues, and transition stresses contrary to previous research; this may reflect the changed academic landscape of doctoral studies. Findings provide insight into potential support strategies to better support early-stage PhD students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]