Strategies for Managing a PhD Student-Supervisors Relationship at Nigerian University

Aliyu Umar Abubakar, Ismail Suleiman, Ayuba Ibrahim Gezawa

Abstract


Besides the admission qualifications and academic intellect, a post-graduate student need to have good psychological behaviours, developed faculty of reasoning and political managing behaviour with which they can see, think and manage all kind of relationships. Almost all supervision exercises in Nigerian universities are a team. The teamwork that joined two or more supervisors with the same or different discipline and experience is difficult to manage especially for a new inexperienced supervisee to manage, due to different interests, goals, task assignments and attitude or manner of approach of the supervisors. Therefore, this paper spells out and dwelled well on some strategies for managing individual supervision relationships or collective relations with all of them. Following these strategies abated the unnecessary delay, disappointment and puzzling circumstances that academic go-slow, academic standard retardation, over-stayed student, amnesty cases for graduating half-baked students, frustrated uncompleted programs and social and economic crises among others. The paper considered all the differences we have in Nigeria in terms of location, culture, and ethnicity, religion in drawing out these strategies. Therefore grafting a policy from one university to another would not be harmful to the student or in running the program or to the university in any way unless they are lacking good personnel, means of electrical power, internet facilities, enough infrastructure, software applications, scientific aid facilities, apparatus and equipment among others. Finally, relationship management is the bedrock of all success. 


Full Text:

PDF

References


Bastalich, W. (2017), “Content and context in knowledge production: a critical review of doctoral supervision literature”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 42 No. 7, pp. 1145-1157.

Benmore, A. (2016), “Boundary management in doctoral supervision: how supervisors negotiate roles and role transitions throughout the supervisory journey”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 41 No. 7, pp. 1251-1264.

Bøgelund, P. (2015), “How Supervisors perceive PhD supervision: and how they practice it’”, International Journal of Doctoral Studies, Vol. 10, pp. 39-55.

Cyranoski, D., Gilbert, N., Ledford, H., Nayar, A. and Yahia, M. (2011), “Education: the PhD factory”, Nature News, Vol. 472 No. 7343, pp. 276-279.

Golde, C.M. (2000), “Should I stay or should I go? Student descriptions of the doctoral attrition process”, The Review of Higher Education, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 199-227.

Gould, J. (2015), “How to build a better PhD”, Nature News, Vol. 528 No. 7580, p. 22.

Hockey, J. (1994), “Establishing boundaries: problems and solutions in managing PhD supervisor’s role”, Cambridge Journal of Education, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 1-13.

Horta, H. and Santos, J.M. (2016), “The impact of publishing during the PhD on career research publication, visibility, and collaborations”, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 28-50.

Jung, J. (2018), “Learning experience and perceived competencies of doctoral students in Hong Kong”, Asia Pacific Education Review, Vol. 19, pp. 187-198

Kidman, J., Manathunga, C. and Cornforth, S. (2017), “Intercultural PhD supervision: exploring the hidden curriculum in a social science faculty doctoral programme”, Higher Education Research and Development, Vol. 36 No. 6, pp. 1208-1221.

Kimani, E.N. (2014), “Challenges in quality control for postgraduate supervision”, International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education, Vol. 1 No. 9, pp. 63-70.

Kwan, B.S.C. (2013), “Facilitating novice researchers in project publishing during the doctoral years and beyond: a Hong Kong-based study”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 207-225

Laufer, M. and Gorup, M. (2019), “The invisible others: stories of international doctoral student dropout”, Higher Education, Vol. 78, pp. 165-181.

Lee, A. (2008), “How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 267-281.

Li, S. and Seale, C. (2007), “Managing criticism in PhD supervision: a qualitative case study”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 511-526.

Lindsay, S. (2015), “What works for doctoral students in completing their thesis?”, Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 183-196.

Mainhard, T., van der Rijst, R., van Tartwijk, J. and Wubbels, T. (2009), “A model for the supervisor doctoral student relationship”, Higher Education, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 359-373.

McCallin, A. and Nayar, S. (2012), “Postgraduate research supervision: a critical review of current practice”, Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 63-74

Pasztor, A. and Wakeling, P. (2018), “All PhDs are equal but...institutional and social stratification in access to the doctorate”, British Journal of Sociology of Education, Vol. 39 No. 7, pp. 982-997.

Shin, J.C., Kim, S.J., Kim, E. and Lim, H. (2018), “Doctoral students’ satisfaction in a research-focused Korean university: socio-environmental and motivational factors”, Asia Pacific Education Review, Vol. 19, pp. 159-168

Roach, M. and Sauermann, H. (2019), “The declining interest in an academic career”, PLoS ONE, Vol. 12 No. 9, p. e0184130, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0184130.

Wisker, G. (2005), The Good Supervisor, Macmillan, Palgrave


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.