1. THE UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI CASE SUPERVISOR TRAINING: HOW WE STARTED AND HOW WE ARE DOING IT. Prof R.G. Wahome

2. University reorganization  Internal evaluation – self assessment  Strategic planning  Performance contracting  New structures

3. Initiation (time of proposal writing)  College ambition to excel in PhD training  Increase the number  Shorten the completion period  Increase the number of publications  Problem statement and data collected to write proposal

4. Conception: Effects of inefficient PhD training systems Poor teaching capacity Inefficient PhD training systems Few publications Low quality of academic staff Prolonged period from admission to completion Low quality of PhD training Low reputation Best candidates go elsewhere Lower no. of PhD applicants 1.Insufficient skills for job markets 2.Lower capacity to solve society problems 3.Retarded development Prof. R.G. Wahome, rgwahome@uonbi.ac.ke,rgwahomegmail.com

5. Inconsistent supervision Inefficient PhD Training Poor supervision Poorly prepared students Inadequate supervision Poor research methodology Poor writing skills Lack of clear guidelines Low motivation/ Low benefits Inadequate preparation at MSc level Low access to information Low competence of supervisors Too few supervisors Poor analytical skills No experience in proposal writing Prof. R.G. Wahome, rgwahome@uonbi.ac.ke,rgwahomegmail.com

6. Guidelines are not clear Inconsistent PhD programs Inflexible PhD format Unclear PhD format Guidelines are not broadly known Ineffective mechanisms to track student progress Prof. R.G. Wahome, rgwahome@uonbi.ac.ke,rgwahomegmail.com

7. Not reward/penalty Inadequate PhD Administration Poor discipline of PhD supervisors/examiners Slow liaison procedures External thesis examination too slow Poor follow up on progress/ No mechanism Low motivation Prof. R.G. Wahome, rgwahome@uonbi.ac.ke,rgwahomegmail.com

8. Problems beyond the scope of this project  Poor Research Support Facilities  Inadequate Infrastructure, Poor maintenance, Lack of funds, Poor culture of maintenance,  Low/expired training, Difficulty to maintain qualified staff, Poor quality support staff  Insecure Finance:  Low public Scholarship, Most PhDs are donor funded, Staff Promotion based on PhD is under funded

9. The university hierarchy – anchoring activity at the top  Senior management (VC- Deputies-Principals)  College administration (Principal-Deans- Chairmen)  Faculty administration (Deans- Chairmen)  Department administration (Chairmen)  Members of academic staff

10. Baseline survey results Have you been engaged in any programmes to improve PhD training at this university? Appointment of supervisors is a transparent process

11. College academic board briefing Can we work together? What you do is so important for the success of my work

12. We can do this if:  Support for the trainers in supervision is sustained  A significant proportion of the supervisors are trained in supervision.  The remaining supervisors gets training and information during the coming years.

13. Current Characteristics of supervisors  a very diversified group.  Many have had to take part or all of their education abroad  Lack enough authority to foster the changes that are now needed  Too busy or are inadequately motivated to devote time to supervision excellence  Unaware of or lack clear appreciation of rules and guidelines on supervision modalities, frequency, deadlines, milestones and examination

14. The results  Inconsistency due to lack of effective quality assurance.  Poor or no supervision  delays, prolonged studies and, at times, avoidable failures.  Waste of both human and financial resources.  Additional delays from examiners

15. Observations and Implications  Supervisors are the primary target group  Most supervisors have never received any formal training in supervision, but rely on a mixture of experience, routine and flair.  Many tend to supervise the way their own supervisor or mentor supervised them.  Some supervisors are gifted and brilliant supervisors, others are not.  Outstanding students might perform regardless of the quality of the supervision they get but many do not

16. The Goal of the training is to  Raise standards for Ph.D. education at UoN and that are internationally competitive  Make the University an attractive study environment for researchers from the Region  Attract donor-funded Ph.D. scholarships to the university rather than at other universities

17. The Objectives of this training are to  Enhance PhD training supervision to produce more consistent and quality thesis produced on time.  Minimize delays, prolonged studies, avoidable failures and waste of both human and financial resources.

18. The order of this training  We present some information on learning techniques at PhD level  We upgrade our comprehension on rules and regulations governing PhD training  We deliberate on tools and techniques for supervision  We find ways to boost flagging morale for supervision  We consider some ethical issues regarding supervision  We do this through plenty of brainstorming and discussing and learning together

19. Re-awakening of the rules  Existing rules found to be generally good.  Only minor touches/adjustments required  Majority of supervisors discovered that they had a most superficial knowledge of the rules and their importance  AWAKENED INTEREST TO LEARN THE RULES AND TO APPLY THEM

20. Initial trainings  Opening /closing/ceremonies: VC/DVC/Principals/ director BPS  Speech content  Follow-up on promises made on speech

21. Where to get funding and how much?  Venue costs  Conference package  Facilitator costs

22. Driving on to other colleges

23. Ownership of the project The Universities’ commitment manifested in continuous injections of cash to supplement project funds and for staff to attend joint meetings in East Africa. Project outputs taken up by administration: key is review of statutes, tracking of student performance and training in supervision The European partner LIFE-UC anchored at the Vice- Chancellors office In EA U

24. Why the university took to the project  Timeliness of the project: there was general committment to enhance performance in PhD training  Anchoring the project at TOP university administration  Continuous participation of TOP university management in implementation  STRAPA: cooperation of TOP university managers in annual review and planning meetings

25. SHUKRANI