Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 DOCTORAL SUPERVISION IN OTHER, PRIMARILY IN NATURAL SCIENCES BAZSA György Former President of HAC; Prof. Emer. Univ. of Debrecen, EDAMBA Annual Meeting.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "1 DOCTORAL SUPERVISION IN OTHER, PRIMARILY IN NATURAL SCIENCES BAZSA György Former President of HAC; Prof. Emer. Univ. of Debrecen, EDAMBA Annual Meeting."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 DOCTORAL SUPERVISION IN OTHER, PRIMARILY IN NATURAL SCIENCES BAZSA György Former President of HAC; Prof. Emer. Univ. of Debrecen, EDAMBA Annual Meeting 3 rd September 2013, Budapest, Uni-Corvinus

2 2 Content i.Trend: Europe gradually focuses on supervision in PhD training  Ministers in the Bologna process (Bergen, London, Bucharest)  European Council – DG Research & Innovation  European University Association (Salzburg I, II; CDE; ARDE)  EDAMBA pioneering activity  International example: Biomedicine (ORPHEUS/AMSE/WFM)  National examples: UK/QAA, UK/UCL, D/QZ, DK/DTU, etc. ii.Doctoral training and PhD earning in Hungary  Legal conditions (Act, Decree): doctoral schools, core members  Hungarian Accreditation Commission’s proposal on supervision iii.Hungarian Practice of Supervision  database – efficiency of doctoral training  Questionnaire and answers for this presentation iv.Some characteristics of doctoral training in natural sciences including supervision

3 3 i.Trend: Europe gradually focuses on supervision in doctoral training Bergen communiqué (2005) – but not in the Bologna declaration Regarding doctoral education, Ministers made the following statements: Doctoral level qualifications need to be fully aligned with the EHEA overarching framework for qualifications using the outcomes-based approach. Core component of doctoral training is the advancement of knowledge through original research. The normal workload of the third cycle in most countries corresponds to 3-4 years full time. Doctoral programmes should promote interdisciplinary training and the development of transferable skills to meet the needs of the wider labour market. More doctoral candidates should be encouraged to take up research careers within the EHEA. Participants in third cycle programmes are considered both students and early stage researchers.

4 4 London communiqué (2007) We invite EUA to continue to support the sharing of experience among HEIs on the range of innovative doctoral programmes that are emerging across Europe as well as on other crucial issues such as transparent access arrangements, supervision and assessment procedures, the development of transferable skills and ways of enhancing employability. Bucharest Communiqué (2012) Taking into account the “Salzburg II recommendations” and the Principles for Innovative Doctoral Training, we will explore how to promote quality, transparency, employability and mobility in the third cycle, as the education and training of doctoral candidates has a particular role in bridging the EHEA and the European Research Area (ERA). European Council DG Research & Innovation (27 June 2011) Report of Mapping Exercise on Doctoral Training in Europe „Towards a common approach” – moderately focusing on supervision

5 5 EUA Seminar Salzburg 2005: 10 basic principles of doctoral programmes 5. The crucial role of supervision and assessment: in respect of individual doctoral candidates, arrangements for supervision and assessment should be based on transparent contractual framework of shared responsibilities between doctoral candidates, supervisors and the institution (and where appropriate including other partners). Supervision is considered a crucial part of doctoral training. It is critically important for ensuring good quality of candidates’ performance. However, conditions of supervision are often not clear and regulated, and they differ from country to country or institution to institution. There was no common agreement on questions of how supervisors are selected, who can be a supervisor, how often supervisor meets with the candidate, how many candidates the supervisor can manage and how the research progress is monitored.

6 6 EUA Seminar Salzburg 2005: 10 basic principles of doctoral programmes Some national or institutional systems seem to be more open and do not provide any rules or control of supervision. In other countries where doctoral training is organised in a structured way (e.g., in doctoral schools) supervision is more a responsibility of the institution than an individual supervisor. Some institutions prefer supervisory panels with several experts/ professors from inside and outside of the university (multiple supervisory), which was considered a good practice example. Participants agreed that universities should introduce institutional regula- tions on terms and obligations of doctoral candidates, supervisors and the institution. In addition, a signed contract (agreement) on rights and responsibilities between the three parties can be a good instrument ensuring that each party is aware of their role in the process of doctoral training.

7 7 EUA Salzburg II recommendations – 2010 2. CLUES FOR SUCCESS 2.3. Supervision As stressed in the fifth Salzburg Principle, supervision plays a crucial role. Supervision must be collective effort with clearly defined and written responsibilities of the –main supervisor, supervisory team, –doctoral candidate, –doctoral school, research group and –the institution, leaving room for the individual development of the doctoral candidate. Providing professional development to supervisors is an institutional responsibility, whether organised through formal training or informal sharing of experiences among staff. Developing a common supervision culture shared by supervisors, doctoral school leaders and doctoral candidates must be a priority for doctoral schools. Supervisors must be active researchers.

8 8 European University Association Council for Doctoral Education - founded in 2008 Objectives To enhance the quality of doctoral education in European universities by fostering debate and promoting the exchange and dissemination of good practice To encourage and support the development of institutional policies and strategies as well as the introduction of effective leadership and management practices Enhancing of Supervision: Professional Development and Assessment of Supervisors (EUA–CDE Workshop, 8–9 January 2009, Imperial College London, UK) EUA–CDE Annual Meeting - Warsaw June 2013 Anne Lee: Doctoral Supervision: are we on the right track? (Anne Lee: Successful Research Supervision)

9 9 EUA CDE – ARDE project –T. E. Jørgensen (27 Sept. 2012, Karolinska) 2/3 of the HEI-s have written regulations for PhD supervision Elements of such regulations: –maximum number of doctoral candidates per supervisor; –obligatory training for supervisors; voluntary training for supervisors; –a recommendation for a minimum number of meetings with the supervisor(s); –a requirement or recommendation for supervisory teams; –written agreements between supervisor, supervisee, institution; –procedures for dealing with supervisor-supervisee conflicts; –systematic feedback collected from doctoral candidates; and –other (specified) issues. More focused on a supervision culture than on rules and compliance –Much focus on the training of supervisors – Organisation & motivation –How to get supervisors involved – Clarity about institutional goals –Monitoring of supervisors – Setting clear expectations –Rules and guidelines – Involve the supervisors in drafting

10 10 European Doctoral Programmes Association in Management and Business Administration (EDAMBA) – a valuable pioneering series of actions since 1991 An "EDAMBA Guide to European Doctoral Programmes" has been published in 1995. The guide contains a description of the doctoral programmes of the first 28 EDAMBA members, giving detailed information on specialisation topics and the requirements for the thesis. The guide has been edited by Michel Lauraine (HEC). EDAMBA Journal 1st Thesis Competition 2003 … Supervisory practices in doctoral education (Annual Meeting 1–3 Sep 2013 at Corvinus University, Budapest)

11 11 Standards for PhD Education in Biomedicine and Health Sciences ORPHEUS/AMSE/WFME Task Force (2012) 5. SUPERVISON Each PhD student must have a principal supervisor and when relevant at least one co-supervisor to cover all aspects of the programme The number of PhD students per supervisor must be compatible with the supervisor’s workload Supervisors must be scientifically qualified and active scholars in the field concerned. Supervisors must have regular consultations with their students. The institution must ensure that training in supervision is available for all supervisors and potential supervisors. The supervisor–student relationship is the key to a successful PhD programme. There must be mutual respect, planned and agreed shared responsibility, and a contribution from both.

12 12 UK Quality Code for Higher Education – in Part B: Supervision HEIs appoint supervisors with the appropriate skills and subject knowledge to support and encourage research students, and to monitor their progress effectively. Each research student has a supervisory team containing a main supervisor who is the clearly identified point of contact. HEIs ensure that the responsibilities of research student supervisors are readily available and clearly communicated to supervisors and students. HEIs ensure that individual supervisors have sufficient time to carry out their responsibilities effectively HEIs put in place clearly defined mechanisms for monitoring and supporting research student progress, including formal and explicit reviews of progress at different stages. Research students have appropriate opportunities for developing research, personal and professional skills. HEIs put in place mechanisms to collect, review and respond as appro- priate to evaluations from those concerned with research degrees

13 13 University College London: An introduction to research student supervision Category: Advising and/or supervising research students Workshop leader(s): Professor David Bogle Course outline: This session is mandatory for all members of academic staff wishing to be appointed as supervisors at UCL as well as new members of academic staff with experience of research supervision at other institutions. It is run by the Graduate School and provides an introduction to: –University College London’s regulations and Code of Practice –Graduate School support –UCL procedures –Skills development requirements and programme –Research student log –Factors for successful supervision –Further research supervision training Please note that this is a prerequisite to enrolment on all other courses about research supervision including the session 'Effective research supervision at UCL' (one-day).

14 14 University College London Effective research student supervision at UCL (one-day workshop) Category: Advising and/or supervising research students Workshop leader(s): John Wakeford Course outline: This full-day workshop will be of equal importance to new and more experienced supervisors and will provide participants with an overview of all the main issues faced by supervisors today. It is particularly relevant to academics at the beginning of their career but feedback from participants shows that experienced supervisors also find it a useful refresher course. Participants are asked in advance what particular aspects of supervision are of special concern, making the session interactive, with participants able to share their own experiences. German Network of 10 universities: Qualitätszirkel Promotion Shaping a Doctorate together – Guidelines for Supervisors (2012) pp. 31 http://www.graduateschools.uni- _English_Supervisors.pdf

15 15 Danish Technical University (DTU) Principal supervisor It is the responsibility of the principal supervisor to inspect that the PhD student conducts his/her studies in accordance with the determined scientific contents and that the time schedule of studies is observed. Thus the principal supervisor is responsible for: –preparation and submission of a study plan –preparation of the half-year reports –preparation of the principal supervisor’s concluding statement which forms part of the assessment as to whether the thesis is ready for submission –submission of proposal for members of the assessment committee –planning and conducting the defence session. DTU strongly recommends that the PhD student be involved in the tasks of study plan and half-year reports as part of his/her learning process.

16 16 ii. Doctoral training and PhD earning in Hungary The first Hungarian Act on HE 1993 introduced PhD degree as the only scientific degree in Hungary awarded exclusively by HE institutions. 204/2011. Act on NHE Section 16 (1) The PhD course is also a part of the education programme, which prepares candidates for obtaining a PhD during the PhD programme taken after completing the Master programme. The education period is 6 semesters. PhD programmes are standardised, consisting of a 36 month-long education period, which may be subdivided into reporting periods. (5) The doctoral council of the higher education institution has the right to organise PhD programmes and award PhDs (hereinafter doctoral procedure). The doctoral council of the institution may set up academic and art doctoral councils in each discipline, as well as in branches of science and art defined in the doctoral regulation of the higher education institution. With the exception of PhD students, every member of the doctoral council must hold an academic degree.

17 17 Doctoral Programmes and the Procedure of Obtaining a Doctorate Section 53 (1) The doctoral programme shall consist of course modules, research and reports adjusted to the unique character of the scientific discipline and needs of the student individually or in a group. Students that have obtained a Master degree are eligible to enrol in doctoral programmes. [Supervisor isn’t mentioned in the Act.] (2) The doctoral degree may be obtained within the framework of a special doctoral procedure following the PhD programme. [The person is called doctoral candidate. This is no more student status, it’s a contractual doctoral candidate–university relationship).] Individuals that do not take part in doctoral training and prepared for the degree on their own may also be PhD candidates providing that they have obtained a Master degree and fulfilled the requirements of the doctoral programme. If the doctoral candidate commences the above procedure during the period of instruction, they shall concur- rently be a PhD candidate alongside having a status as a student.

18 18 (5) Requisites for obtaining a doctoral degree: a.Fulfilment of obligations prescribed in the doctoral regulation, as well as passing the special doctoral exam evaluated by a committee comprised of at least three members; b.Two foreign languages – with the opportunity to accept the non- Hungarian sign language in the case of deaf PhD candidates and the language required to cultivate the scientific field – certified in accordance with the specifications stipulated in the doctoral regulation; c.Presentation of independent scientific work with articles, studies or through other means; the products of independent art work as a precondition for obtaining doctoral degrees in art (DLA); d.Independent implementation of the scientific or art activity measured against the requirements of the degree; presentation of a dissertation or work of art; defending achievements in a public debate.

19 19 Governmental decree 287/2012. Doctoral training could be organized only in accredited doctoral schools. A doctoral school (DS) should have at least 7 core members with a majority of full professors: highly qualified researchers of the given branch of sciences. [There are 55 such branches defined in Hungarian HE, mainly corresponding to the Frascati manual. In nine branches of (fine) arts Doctor of Liberal Arts (DLA) degree exists equivalent to PhD. There are at present 174 doctoral schools at 26 universities and at 1 college. (In two decades 23 ceased working for different reasons.)] Establishing a doctoral school is the right of the University Senate, but it requires in advance the support (earlier called accreditation) of the Hungarian Accreditation Committee (HAC) involving evaluation of the proposed at least 7 core members. HAC evaluates all DSs and their core members each 5 year (but not supervisors). The doctoral student should have a supervisor from the enrolment (nominated with the application) until submitting the Thesis. Core members must be successful supervisors. In the 174 doctoral schools there roughly 2.200 core members and further 2.000 supervisors by and large. Criteria are defined and evaluated by the doctoral schools.

20 20 Proposals (not criteria) of the Hungarian Accreditation Committee Supervision is a professional function and human responsibility in helping student’s professional and personal development. Supervisor must have a PhD degree and be an active researcher with fresh publications. Supervision is a continuous and documented joint activity including proposal of the research subject (right of the supervisor), approval of the research subject and supervisor (right of the DS), announcement on and DS’s website, admittance of the doctoral students (right of the doctoral council), guiding the student’s research, evaluation and recognition of the performance in each semester, reporting on the progress of the research to the DS, preparation of joint communiqués, conference presentations, posters, helping in writing the Thesis, recommendation of the submission of the Thesis. Limits: 6 students/supervisor, 2 supervisors/student

21 iii. Hungarian Practice of Supervision public database of ODT/HAC Doctoral programmeThesis defended Doctoral schools by institution by research field by name by number by date ceased working by doctoral school Academic staff member by name by research topic archives Thesis topic proposals by doctoral schools by research field by research topic Supervision of PhD students

22 Faculty strength: 1×PhD + 3×DSc + 5×MHAS PhD degrees awarded/year vs scientific strength of HEI faculty SZTE DE PTE BME SE SZIE BCE ELTE MIHÁLY György (HAS, 03.06.2013): PhD

23 Enrolled – 36 months completed – PhD earned Human Nat. Soc. Med. Eng. Agr. Relig. Arts MIHÁLY György (HAS, 03.06.2013): PhD: 40% 55% 38% 49% 43% 62% 31% 40%

24 30% 70% Ratio of PhD earning: 70% Natural sciences – DS 138 MIHÁLY György (HAS, 03.06.2013):

25 30% 70% Natural sciences – DS 135 Ratio of PhD earning: 70% MIHÁLY György (HAS, 03.06.2013):

26 Ratio of PhD earning: very low 3 Law Doctoral schools MIHÁLY György (HAS, 03.06.2013):

27 Ratio of PhD earning: very low 3 Business and management DSs MIHÁLY György (HAS, 03.06.2013):

28 28 A rapid survey about supervision in the doctoral schools (39 questions; 102 answers out of 174 doctoral schools). B i. Development of the partnership between doctoral student and supervisor 1. What is the content of announced themes? Name/title – Research programme – Goals to achieved 2. Are there publications in the announcement from? None – Supervisor – Others 3. Application involve the theme and supervisor. Applicant brings a theme, looks for supervisor. 4. Does the entrance exam involve discussion of the theme? Yes – No 5. Does the admittance decision include the theme and supervisor? Yes – No 1–25% *** 26–50% *** 51–75% *** 76–100%

29 29 Practice of supervision ii. 36 months of the PhD student 1. How the students start? Planning research – Reviewing literature – Planning courses 2. The credits of the semester are signed by the Supervisor – DS head 3. The signature is based on? Working co-operation – Public oral report – Written report 4. How many progress reports should the doctoral student write? 3 – 2 – 0 – 1 – (6) 5. How many course credits must the student complete? 30-40 – 10-20 – >40 6. What are requirements of the “absolutorium”? Only the 180 credits – Summary report (0%) *** 0–25% *** 26–50% *** 51–75% *** 76–100%

30 30 Practice of supervision iii. 36 months of the supervisor’s activity: supervisor … 1. … suggests courses to the student: Each semester – 3 years complete block – (Not at all) 2. … writes substantive review about the student: 0 – 1 – (2) – (3) – (6) times 3. … is allowed to propose termination of doctoral status (scholarship) if … Yes – No 4. … could have a limited number of PhD students at the same time: 6 – 3 5. … has an active role in the defence process (introduction, scoring): No – Yes (0%) *** 1–25% *** 26–50% *** 51–75% *** 76–100%

31 31 Practice of supervision iv. 36 common months of doctoral student and supervisor 1. Do they prepare jointly? The research program – A literature review – (Nothing) 2. How often do they consult? Each … Ss: Month – Semester – (Week) Hs: Week – Month – Semester 3. In which way do they consult? Personally – E-mail – Phone – Skype – Correspondence 4. On average, how many active forum appearances expected outside DS? 5 – 3 – 1 – >5 5. Is it expected to assist writing and publishing in the first 2 years? Yes – No (0%) *** 1–25% *** 26–50% *** 51–75% *** 76–100% Ss: soft science *** Hs: hard science

32 32 Practice of supervision v. Preparation of the dissertation 1. In which year is the frame of the thesis formulated? Ss: Third – Second – Later Hs: Third – Second – Later 2. Does the student prepare a literature summary prior to the dissertation? Yes – (No) 3. Does the DS require any publication before thesis writing? Published – Accepted – Submitted 4. Is a preliminary assessment and presen- tation of the dissertation obligatory? Yes – No 5. Is a supporting opinion of the supervisor a precondition of thesis submission? Ss: Yes – No Hs: Yes – No (0%) *** 1–25% *** 26–50% *** 51–75% *** 76–100%

33 Practice of supervision vi. Activities of the Doctoral School 1. What is the basis of accepting a supervisor? Application – Referral – (Competition) 2. Are the announced themes approved annually by the DS based on new publications of the supervisor? Yes – No 3. Does the DS announce courses on research methodology and ethics? Yes – No 4. Does the DS organise methodological, ethical preparation for supervisors? No – Yes 5. Does the DS evaluate annually the prog- ress of the students with the supervisors? Ss: Yes – No Hs: Yes – No 6. Does the DS asking feedback from the students systematically? SS: Yes – No Hs: No – Yes (0%) *** 1–25% *** 26–50% *** 51–75% *** 76–100%

34 34 Practice of supervision vi. Activities of the Doctoral School 7. Does the DS evaluate regularly the quality and effectiveness of supervisors? No – Yes 8. Does the DS organize so-called doctoral student conferences? Alone – In cooperation – Not at al 9. Has the DS its own publishing forum, for example doctoral student journal? Ss: No – Yes Hs: No – Yes 10. Has the DS active international coope- ration for helping students’ development? Yes – No 11. How many postgraduate scholarships were provided from third sources? >10 – 7-10 – 4-6 – 1-3 – 0 12. Did the DS report or inform any organisation? Doctoral Council – HAC – (Senate) 13. Have the DSs of the branch of sciences domestic cooperation forum? Occassional – Regular – No (0%) *** 1–25% *** 26–50% *** 51–75% *** 76–100%

35 35 A very short summary of supervisor – doctoral student relation: Stronger contact  shorter training  higher efficiency.

36 36 iv. Some characteristics of doctoral training in natural sciences including supervision Common interest and efforts of doctoral student and supervisor in good results (outcomes for presentations and publications). Successful supervisors are productive researchers & vice versa. Almost daily contact between student and supervisor. Doctoral student frequently requires and gets practical or theoretical advices/help from the supervisor. Supervisors and students of the group/school often co-operate. Progress in research appears immediately and stimulates. Even small intermediate results inspire and orientate student. Natural sciences are global in nature – with many motivating aspects for doctoral students. Competitive atmosphere of international natural science community enforces fast achievements. Excellent new results may bring national, even international fame („world priority” feeling) for young scientists.

37 37 I wish you success in analysing the practice and in improving the quality of doctoral training including supervision. Thank you for the invitation and for your kind attention!

Download ppt "1 DOCTORAL SUPERVISION IN OTHER, PRIMARILY IN NATURAL SCIENCES BAZSA György Former President of HAC; Prof. Emer. Univ. of Debrecen, EDAMBA Annual Meeting."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google