RMIT Survey of Postgraduate Supervisors

The Research and Development Section of RMIT undertook this survey in November/December 2000. It had two aims. First, to find out about the experience of postgraduate supervision of RMIT staff; what they value as well as what they find frustrating. Second we wanted to evaluate the Supervisor Training and Development Program.

The survey was sent to all academic staff undertaking postgraduate supervision N = 630. It was completed and returned by around a third of these staff N= 212. There was no significant between faculty variation in the nature of responses. The analysis presented below is consequently for staff across all faculties. [*][*]

The voice of the supervisors in this survey is consistent and compelling. They say that their role as a supervisor is a most treasured one but that they are seriously hampered in their effectiveness by lack of time and lack of resources. They also comment that they have experienced an increase in ‘bureaucratic procedures’ surrounding the supervisory process and they see these eating away at an already limited time allowance. Over 90% of respondents talked about lack of time and a further 85% emphasised the lack of facilities. Excessive bureaucratic processes were mentioned by over 50%. More timetabled time for supervision and more or better resources are the main improvements staff say should be made by the University and by the Faculties.

The concern about a lack of time was also evident in staff’s comments about the Supervisor Training and Development Program. Staff said that they had no time to attend the program. This was the biggest single comment made in this section of the survey, N = 60%. Of those who did attend the biggest perceived advantage of the program was the time out to discuss and reflect on issue N = 20%. When staff commented on what they thought should be included in the program in 2001, over 60% emphasised that future programs should offer the opportunity to discuss and learn about the new challenges facing supervisors, for example, getting candidates efficiently and effectively through their studies with an increase in overseas students and with new and different types of research to be managed.

Detailed results are given below.

What are the best things about being a supervisor of post-graduate students?

‘Working with my postgraduate students is the last remaining time and space I have to be a scholar and being a scholar is what I do best. I value it tremendously’.

(Experienced supervisor, Applied Science)

The development of students as researchers (mentioned by 70%)
Working with bright and enthusiastic students (mentioned by 65%)
The development of self as a scholar (mentioned by 60%)
The development of knowledge (mentioned by 50%)
The building of professional expertise and relationships (mentioned by 40%)

Working with challenging intellectual problems (25%)
Keeping up to date with the field (25%)
Working closely with candidates through a sustained intellectual process (20%)
Having serious purpose that leads to worthwhile outcomes (10%)
Working as an effective team (10%)

What are the major frustrations of being a supervisor of postgraduate students?

Developing knowledge, helping candidates to develop as researchers and thinkers takes above all time and sustained effort. At RMIT time is not allowed and time is the essential ingredient.

(Experienced supervisor, Applied Science)

Everything is run on a shoestring. It used to be hard enough to find your own materials and be your own administrative and technical support and mend your own faulty equipment but now you are given neither the resources nor the time.

(Experienced supervisor, Life Sciences)

Lack of time to work with candidates (mentioned by over 90%)
Lack of funding: for materials, equipment, personnel support, seeding grants, scholarships, travel, conference attendance (mentioned by over 85%)
Excessive bureaucratic processes (mentioned by 50%)
Students with poor English communication skills (mentioned by 20%)
Lack of IT support (mentioned by 10%)
Lack of a research culture (mentioned by 10%)
Difficult students – unmotivated, angry or frustrated, lacking ability. (mentioned by 10%)
Lack of experience as a supervisor (Mentioned by 5%)

What could the University do to help you in your role as a supervisor?

We have to be given the time and that is the most precious commodity in the universe...It won’t happen if its left to the faculties and departments. It has to be seriously addressed from the centre.

(Experienced supervisor, Constructed Environment)

Plenty of money comes in for supervision but little of it feeds the grass roots, the time on task, student with supervisor... that has to change. Less money must go the centre and more must come to the source of the activity.

(Experienced supervisor, Engineering)

Provide better research resources and infrastructure (60% of responses)
Ensure Faculties provide staff with time for supervision (50% of responses)
Cut the bureaucracy (30%)
Provide up to date handbook and advise around regulations and procedures and keep this stable for a few years (20%)
Offer more guidance and support for supervisors and administrators (10%)
Provide financial incentives for progression and completion (5%)
Provide skills classes for students, writing skills in particular (5%)

What can the Faculty do to help you in your role as a supervisor?

Time to supervise has to be built into our work plans and timetables at the moment it is seen as a privilege to supervise and that mentality has got to go.

(Experienced supervisor, Art and Design)

You can’t build a research culture out of nothing with no resources and no time. The Faculty and staff have to be partners in that....but the way it works is that we are just expected to do it.

(Experienced supervisor, Applied Science)

Give timetabled time for supervision (50%)
Provide support and finance to help build a research culture (50%)
Provide more support staff – lab support and admin support (40%)
Cut unnecessary administration (25%)
Offer skills classes for students to handle technical equipment and skills (5%)
Demonstrate the valuing of post-graduate students through giving time and support and showing interest (5%)

Registration and attendance at workshop series – 6 individual sessions

Comments made by staff who did not attend as well as those who did attend sessions.

Number of staff registered to attendN= 107

Staff registered for all the sessionsN = 25

Registered for the majority of sessionsN = 20

Registered for more than one session.N = 34

Attendances were significantly lower than registrations.

Known attendances over seriesN = 178

Attended regularly over the six workshopsN = 15

What aspect of the series did you find most valuable

We can read up hints and advice but the valuable thing about a series like this is it forces you to take time out and stop and think rather than fly by the seat of our pants all the time.

(Experienced supervisor, Constructed Environment)

Opportunity to take time out and talk supervisors from other disciplines 20%
Good ideas from other supervisors 10%
Some useful information 10%

What was not valuable

It becomes a vicious circle. We complain about lack of time and you organise things that take up more of our time – with no attention to what might be a suitable time. (Experienced supervisor, Engineering)

No time to attend the program60%

Inappropriate timing50%

No sessions on Bundoora Campus20%

What should the sessions include

We are being challenged in so many ways ...new research methods, dealing with more students and more overseas students and often at a distance. We need help with this (Experienced supervisor, Business)

New and different challenges for research supervisors and candidates 60%
Opportunities to see how research culture is built 20%
Some simple practical advice 5%

Additional Comments

It is gratifying to have my opinions sought even though I am frankly sceptical that anything will result from my taking the time to give my views.

(Experienced supervisor, Engineering)

Please attend to what has been said10%

Recommendations

University to recommend that Faculties give supervisors a percentage of timetable time to undertake supervisor tasks.
That a percentage of timetable time also be given to the development and training of supervisors.
Faculties to report to RGS on percentage of timetable time (including training time)giving to supervisors.
Processes surrounding documenting and reporting be kept to a minimum. Processes to be reviewed by Faculties with a view to cutting unnecessary administration and reporting by supervisors.
Review to be undertaken of the amount of funding per student that goes to faculties.
Processes, once sorted, remain in place for a minimum of three years.
Supervisor development and Training Program to provide time-out for discussion and reflection as well as provide strategies and guidelines.
Training program also to attend to the new challenges facing supervisors.
Training program to be undertaken on both campuses at a time convenient to a maximum of staff.
Review to be undertaken annually and changes in perceptions of supervisors reported and monitored

Elaine Martin

Office of the PVC,

R&D Section,

HD/HL: Supervision: PG Survey Report – Elaine Martin 10/02/18

[*] Percentages given are of those staff completing the survey.

[*] Comments made by 50% or more of respondents are presented in bold.