Exploration of doctoral students’ supervisory experiences in Pakistani universities
Downloads
Doctoral education and PhD completion are influenced by various factors, including student-related, institution, and supervisor. This study explores PhD scholars’ considerations in selecting supervisors and documents their experiences regarding accessibility, supervisory meetings, and feedback. PhD scholars from four universities were interviewed. The data were analyzed using the Braun and Clarke thematic analysis approach. The findings reveal that Pakistani PhD scholars meticulously select their PhD supervisor keeping in view research related factors, professional and personal factors of supervisors. Findings also show that PhD scholars emphasized alignment of research area, good fit, and accessibility for good and timely feedback particularly in cases where supervisory relationships may be characterized as toxic. PhD scholars had mixed supervisory experiences during their PhD study. Some PhD scholars deemed their supervisors as “ideal”; however, there were cases of toxic supervision. The study emphasizes the need for universities to provide academic assistance and guidelines, as well as to create a conducive environment for PhD scholars and supervisors by enhancing communication, support systems, and training opportunities. The study contributes to the understanding of these challenges and aims to provide insights for improving the doctoral education process in and beyond Pakistan.
Abbasi AH, Rehman SU, & Ali T (2022) Multi-criteria decision support system for recommendation of PhD supervisor. Foundation University Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2 (2):60-75. https://doi.org/10.33897/fujeas.v2i2.491.
Abbasi MN, Raja SA, & Satti UI (2020) Comparative analysis of research supervision practices in Universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Global Social Sciences Review V (I):438-449. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2020(v-i).45.
Abiddin NZ & Ismail A (2011) Attrition and completion issues in postgraduate studies for student development. International Review of Social Sciences and Humanities 1 (1):15-29.
Ali J, Ullah H, & Sanauddin N (2019) Postgraduate research supervision: Exploring the lived experience of Pakistani postgraduate students. FWU Journal of Social Sciences 13 (1):14-25.
Ali M, Shah AA, & Sarwar M (2021) Analysis of MPhil/PhD supervisor’s relationship development and communication competence. Global Social Sciences Review VI (I):429-438. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2021(vi-i).43.
Barnard L, Lan WY, To YM, Paton VO, & Lai SL (2009) Measuring self-regulation in online and blended learning environments. The internet and higher education 12 (1):1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.10.005.
Behr A, Giese M, Teguim Kamdjou HD, & Theune K (2020) Dropping out of university: A literature review. Review of Education 8 (2). https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3202.
Black RC (2017) Critical Assessment and Strategies for Increased Student Retention. Hershey, PA: iGi Global.
Brabazon T (2024) The pernicious PhD supervisor. Author’s Republic.
Braun V & Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology 3 (2):77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
Bryan B & Guccione K (2018) Was it worth it? A qualitative exploration into graduate perceptions of doctoral value. Higher Education Research & Development 37 (6):1124-1140. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1479378.
Cardilini APA, Risely A, & Richardson MF (2021) Supervising the PhD: Identifying common mismatches in expectations between candidate and supervisor to improve research training outcomes. Higher Education Research & Development 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.1874887.
Castelló M, McAlpine L, & Pyhältö K (2017) Spanish and UK post-PhD researchers: Writing perceptions, well-being and productivity. Higher Education Research & Development 36 (6):1108-1122. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1296412.
Charmaz K (2015) Grounded theory. In: Smith JA. Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods. London: Sage Publication.
Cheng MWT & Leung ML (2021) “I’m not the only victim…” student perceptions of exploitative supervision relation in doctoral degree. Higher Education 84: 523-540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-021-00786-5.
Cornér S, Tikkanen L, Anttila H, & Pyhältö K (2024) Personal interest, supervisory and research community support and dropout intentions among Finnish PhD candidates. Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education 15 (1):1-18. https://doi.org/10.1108/SGPE-09-2022-0062.
Datta S, Beriha GS, Patnaik B, & Mahapatra SS (2009) Use of compromise ranking method for supervisor selection: A multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) approach. Vocational and Technical Education 1 (1):007-013. https://doi.org/10.5897/ijvte.9000039.
Davis D (2019) The ideal supervisor from the candidate’s perspective: What qualities do students actually want? Journal of Further and Higher Education 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877x.2019.1669772.
De Zoysa TSV (2008) Factors affecting the completion of post graduate degrees using distance mode. Conference Proceedings & Working Papers. Pan-Commonwealth Forum 5 (PCF5), 2008. Sri Lanka: Commonwealth of Learning (COL).
Gardner SK (2008) Student and faculty attributions of attrition in high and low-completing doctoral programs in the United States. Higher Education 58 (1):97-112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734008-9184-7.
Gelso CJ, Mallinckrodt B, & Judge AB (1996) Research training environment, attitudes toward research, and research self-efficacy: The revised Research Training Environment Scale. The Counseling Psychologist 24 (2):304-322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000096242010.
Grove J (2016) PhDs: ‘Toxic’ supervisors and ‘students from hell.’ Times Higher Education (THE). https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/phds-toxic-supervisors-and-students-from-hell.
Hadi NU & Muhammad B (2019) Factors influencing postgraduate students’ performance: A high order top down structural equation modelling approach. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice 19 (2):58-73.
Hasan M & Schwartz DG (2019) A Multi-criteria decision support system for Ph.D. supervisor selection: A hybrid approach. Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.24251/hicss.2019.220.
Hina Batool S, Ali AF, & Safdar M (2021) What Pakistani doctoral students want? A qualitative exploration of their research experiences. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication 71 (4/5):355-369. https://doi.org/10.1108/gkmc-04-2021-0074.
Holbrook KR (2022) Measuring students’ perceptions of student teaching university supervisors: Scenario-based scale development using Rasch and Guttman Facet Theory. Dissertation, Boston College, Massachusetts.
Hussain S, Naz M, Bibi S, Raza HA, Opoku HO, & Khan S (2022) Challenges faced by PH.D. scholars and supervisors during COVID-19 in Turkey and Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Medical and Health Sciences 16 (5):992-995. https://doi.org/10.53350/pjmhs22165992.
Jabre L, Bannon C, McCain JSP, & Eglit Y (2021) Ten simple rules for choosing a PhD supervisor. PLOS Computational Biology 17 (9):e1009330. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330.
Jaksztat S, Neugebauer M, & Brandt G (2021) Back out or hang on? An event history analysis of withdrawal from doctoral education in Germany. Higher Education 82 (5):937-958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-021-00683-x.
Jiranek V (2010) Potential predictors of timely completion among dissertation research students at an Australian Faculty of Sciences. International Journal of Doctoral Studies 5: 001-013. https://doi.org/10.28945/709.
Jones B (2014) Factors in postgraduate supervision that impact on the quality of research at a selected department at a university of technology. Thesis, Durban University of Technology, Durban. https://doi.org/10.51415/10321/1429.
Keskin I, Yazar T, & Oral B (2023) Postgraduate students’ perceptions of supervisor and qualifications that is sought in the supervisor selection. World Journal of Education 13 (1):45-57. https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v13n1p45.
Khan N, Muhammad N, & Idris M (2018) Comparative analysis of the scholars perception about research in public and private universities in Pakistan. Global Social Sciences Review III (II):196-211. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2018(iii-ii).13.
Litalien D & Guay F (2015) Dropout intentions in PhD studies: A comprehensive model based on interpersonal relationships and motivational resources. Contemporary Educational Psychology 41 218-231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.03.004.
Lovitts BE (2002) Leaving the Ivory Tower: The Causes and Consequences of Departure from Doctoral Study. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Mahesar PA, Jabeen F, & Pathan M (2020) Supervision of research at higher education: Perception and practices of supervisors in Karachi Pakistan. Global Regional Review V (III):247-254. https://doi.org/10.31703/grr.2020(v-iii).25.
Manathunga C (2005) Early warning signs in postgraduate research education: A different approach to ensuring timely completions. Teaching in Higher Education 10 (2):219-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/1356251042000337963.
Mandal S, Gazi KH, Salahshour S, Mondal SP, Bhattacharya P, & Saha AK (2024) Application of interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy uncertain MCDM methodology for Ph.D supervisor selection problem. Results in Control and Optimization 15: 100411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rico.2024.100411.
McCulloch A, Kumar V, van Schalkwyk S, & Wisker G (2016) Excellence in doctoral supervision: An examination of authoritative sources across four countries in search of performance higher than competence. Quality in Higher Education 22 (2):64-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2016.1144904.
Meerah TSM (2010) Readiness of preparing postgraduate students in pursuit of their doctoral programme. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 9: 184-188.
Momeni M, Samimi B, Afshari MA, Maleki MH, & Mohammadi J (2011) Selection process of supervisor for doctoral dissertation using Analytical Network Process (ANP): An Iranian study. Journal of Management and Strategy 2 (2). https://doi.org/10.5430/jms.v2n2p63.
Moss SE & Mahmoudi M (2021) STEM the bullying: An empirical investigation of abusive supervision academic science. EClinicalMedicine 40: 101121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101121.
Orellana M, Darder A, Pérez A, & Salinas J (2016) Improving Doctoral Success by Matching PhD Students with Supervisors. International Journal of Doctoral Studies 11: 087-103. https://doi.org/10.28945/3404.
Phan HP (2023) Narratives of ‘delayed success’: A life course perspective on understanding Vietnamese international students’ decisions to drop out of PhD programmes. Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00992-9.
Polkinghorne M, Taylor J, Knight F, & Stewart N (2023) Doctoral supervision: A best practice review. Encyclopedia 3 (1):46-59. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia3010004.
Pyhältö K & Keskinen J (2012) Doctoral students’ sense of relational agency in their scholarly communities. International Journal of Higher Education 1 (2):136-149.
Rafi MS & Moghees A (2022) Writing challenges, causes, and strategies to facilitate the doctoral dissertation‐writing process: A qualitative analysis. International Social Science Journal 73 (247):139-156. https://doi.org/10.1111/issj.12367.
Riaz M (2020) Research guidance experiences, expectations and perceived learning outcomes of university students in Pakistan. Pakistan Social Sciences Review 4 (II):436-448. https://doi.org/10.35484/pssr.2020(4-ii)35.
Saleem T & Mehmood N (2018) Assessing the quality of supervision experiences in the different research stages at postgraduate level. Journal of Education and Educational Development 5 (2):8-27.
Sarwar M, Shah AA, & Akram M (2018) Identifying factors of research delay at postgraduate level. Journal of Educational Research 21 (2):1027-9776.
Schlosser LZ & Gelso CJ (2005) The advisory working alliance inventory--Advisor version: Scale development and validation. Journal of Counseling Psychology 52 (4):650. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0167.52.4.650.
Sverdlik A, Hall NC, McAlpine L, & Hubbard K (2018) The PhD experience: A review of the factors influencing doctoral students’ completion, achievement, and well-being. International Journal of Doctoral Studies 13: 361-388. https://doi.org/10.28945/4113.
Vilkinas T (2005) The supervisor’s role as manager of the PhD journey. In: Supervising Postgraduate Research: Contexts and Processes, Theories and Practices. Melbourne: RMIT University Press. 163-177. https://search.informit.org/doi/abs/10.3316/informit.034041845701897.
Waheed SA, Gilani N, & Khan TA (2022) Does research background matter? Supervisory experiences with a thesis and non-thesis post-graduate students. International Journal of Innovation in Teaching and Learning (IJITL) 8 (1):33-52. https://doi.org/10.35993/ijitl.v8i1.2315.
Wamala R, Ocaya B, & Oonyu JC (2012) Extended candidature and non-completion of a Ph.D. at Makerere University, Uganda. Contemporary Issues in Education Research 5 (3):175-184.
Wang J (2024) The pernicious PhD supervisor by Tara Brabazon. Teaching & Learning Inquiry 12: 1-4. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.12.14.
Wareing S (2009) Disciplines, discourse and Orientalism: The implications for postgraduate certificates in learning and teaching in higher education. Studies in Higher Education 34 (8):917-928. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070902929519.
Wollast R, Boudrenghien G, Van der Linden N, Galand B, Roland N, Devos C, & Frenay M (2018)Who are the doctoral students who drop out? Factors associated with the rate of doctoral degree completion in universities. International Journal of Higher Education 7 (4):143-156.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright of this journal is possession of Editorial Board and Journal Manager, by the knowledge of the author, while the moral right of the publication belongs to the author.
The formal legal aspect of journal publication accessibility refers to Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA), implies that publication can be used for non-commercial purposes in its original form (cannot be modified).
Every publication (printed/electronic) are open access for educational purposes, research, and library. Other than the aims mentioned above, the editorial board is not responsible for copyright violation.
