International Doctoral Students

In doctoral programs, supervisory feedback serves as a central mechanism for academic development, guiding students towards producing a thesis that meets the scholarly standards required for successful examination. However, the process of interpreting and applying this feedback is not straightforward. The language of feedbacktone, clarity, and specificityplays a significant role in how students engage with supervisors' comments. For candidates, particularly those navigating complex research projects at the master's or doctoral level, understanding and responding effectively to feedback are both cognitive and emotional tasks that demand strategic thinking, resilience, and communication skills. This study draws on insights from five doctoral candidates in addressing written supervision feedback during their candidature. Using a qualitative research design, an online questionnaire was administered to evaluate each candidate's experience. The common themes identified in this study include (1) divergence between feedback expectations and reality, (2) managing anxiety, (3) challenges in addressing feedback, and (4) the structure of written feedback. Discussions bring to light the common strategies used by the five doctoral candidates in addressing feedback, and factors that motivated them while working on written feedback.

Living in transition while studying teacher education leads to multiple challenges for doctoral students as they situate themselves in the intersections with new sociocultural environments. The navigation process affects their personal and professional self-formation in constructing and reconstructing their multiple identities-making. In this paper, we, two Vietnamese female teachers, examine our life experience transitioning from Vietnamese to Canadian culture while pursuing our doctoral studies. The collaborative autobiography allows us to reflect, retell and relive our stories since we arrived in Canada. Through deconstructing our stories, we were amazed at the resonances of our tensions in new life-making experiences and perspective transformation in learning and conducting research. We hope our experiences are promising to shorten the gap in understanding experiences of those doctoral students composing life in similar education landscapes, which helps ease their difficulties a...

Aim/Purpose This phenomenological study investigates cross-cultural relationships between international doctoral students and their academic advisors in Turkish universi-ties. Background Through in-depth interviews with 12 international doctoral students from di-verse backgrounds in Istanbul and Ankara, this paper explores how Turkish ac-ademia’s blend of hierarchical structures and interpersonal warmth influences advising dynamics. Methodology Phenomenological design using semi-structured interviews with 12 international doctoral students from various countries and disciplines studying in Türkiye. Contribution Advances understanding of international doctoral education by examining non-Western academic contexts and revealing how cultural-educational frameworks shape advisor-student relationships. Findings Major findings include: (i) meaning-making processes involve transformation of expectations and identity formation, (ii) challenges encompass communication difficulties and academic expectation misalignments, (iii) effective coping strate-gies include peer networks and proactive skill development, (iv) successful ad-vising relationships transcend cultural accommodation to create intellectual syn-ergies beneficial for both parties. Recommendations for Practitioners Engage in mutual cultural learning, establish trust through consistent communi-cation, and adopt transformative guidance approaches that balance hierarchical respect with collaboration. Recommendations for Researchers Explore longitudinal outcomes, examine institutional support policies, and de-velop frameworks for cross-cultural mentoring beyond Western models.

Careering past the doctorate: supporting the career progression of doctoral students The importance of coffee: Peer mentoring to support PGRs and ECRs in art and design Diagnosing and enhancing research cultures to maximise the potential of researchers Cultivating interdisciplinary researcher communities: The Crucible effect Adoption of eInfrastructure: frontline experiences of researchers: a model for researcher development 32 Why do fewer postgraduates disclose a disability and how can we work to change this? Vitae,

This review of the health of Modern Foreign Languages (MFL) in English higher education was commissioned by HEFCE in response to concerns about falling numbers and funding provision. It surveys current trends and makes recommendations to ensure the long-term sustainability and vitality of MFL provision.

The authors would like to thank the postgraduate students and university staff who participated in the research for sharing their experiences and insights with us, and for the staff in the 43 universities who supported the study and kindly gave their time and expertise in administering the student survey and staff consultation. Our thanks also go to Deborah Beck at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills for her support and management of the research; and to the research steering group for their guidance:

View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk provided by Queensland University of Technology ePrints Archive Resource for supervisors -i Support for this Fellowship has been provided by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council, an initiative of the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd.

This paper reports on research that examined the academic resources and language materials a group of mainly Indonesian international Non Native English Speaking Background Masters and Research Higher Degrees students received prior to the commencement of their degrees in Australia. Contrary to the researchers' expectations, expectations which are also often emphasized in the literature pertaining to this issue, the data pertaining to post-commencement reflections suggest that academic English language competency was not always or mainly identified by respondents as the main challenge these students faced in transition. In terms of academic orientation, for many of the respondents, issues linked to their transition that related as much to navigating a new culture of inquiry as it did to a new language of inquiry were as much if not more significant than the issue of (academic) English.

• The changing academic viewpoint on impact • Some challenges confronted • The emerging picture of impact Impact is a commonly used term but in the research context it is gaining more importance. It is most often assumed that the meaning of impact is clearly understood and interpreted in the same way by researchers, funding bodies, policy-makers and the public, but we might consider whether this is the case. Before you read any further you might want to jot down what you understand by impact in the context of research so that you can compare it to the definitions provided here.

With unprecedented numbers of international students and rapidly increasing international partnerships between institutions, it is timely for Anglophone universities to consider whether their current responses to internationalisation take full advantage of the opportunities for interculturalism offered by these developments and truly reflect globalised perspectives.

The European Commission supports the EUI through the European Union budget. This publication reflects the views only of the author(s), and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. This report responds to the changing nature of doctoral education and the need to engage in a reflection and reform process, especially during times of economic downturn when public university funding comes under increasing threat. It is based on a project that was initiated by the European University Institute (EUI) in late 2015 to provide a neutral forum for discussion. A distinguished Task Force of eminent professors from across Europe carried out the mandate to identify 'good practice' in doctoral education. As general discussions on the doctorate tend to pay main attention to medicine and STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects, this project was to focus specifically on doctoral education in the social sciences (broadly understood). This focus also distinguishes the present project from much important work that has been done by the European University Association (EUA), the largest representative body of higher education at a European level which seeks to promote European policies, networking opportunities, and the visibility of European universities more generally. The compilation of good practice in the present report has no regulatory function, as it was assessed and collected by active academics and not policymakers; but it is expected to be of use as a first necessary mapping of good practice in doctoral education in social sciences. Science PhDs accounted for the largest share of new doctoral graduates (24%), followed by new doctorate holders in social sciences, business and law (21%); OECD (2014).

Support for this Fellowship has been provided by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council, an initiative of the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd. This work is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 Australia Licence. Under this Licence you are free to copy, distribute, display and perform the work and to make derivative works. Attribution: You must attribute the work to the original authors and include the following statement: Support for the original work was provided by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd, an initiative of the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

Based on Oxford's English dictionaries, a leader is a person that heads an organization or group, whereas a manager is an administrator of an organization or group (Oxford Languages, 2023). The definitions sound somewhat similar, but there is a difference. Managers take charge of situations or groups to achieve specific goals. They know how to run their systems smoothly, delegate tasks, and work toward efficiency. Leaders, on the other hand, motivate people to work toward goals. They have a growth mindset that focuses on what people can do to help everyone work together toward goals using innovation (Indeed Editorial Team, 2021; Morgan, 2022). When we look at famous leaders such as Joan of Arc (France), Rosa Parks (U.S.A.), Lech Wałesa (Poland), and Nelson Mandela (South Africa), some of the characteristics they are known for include their passion, willingness to take risks, continual engagement to learn, communication skills, and courage (Steenkamp, 2022). Moreover, good leaders empower, adapt, delegate, and serve (Sheninger & Murray, 2017). There is much to consider. However, by breaking down different areas where we can make an impact, we can start to figure out how to build ourselves as stronger leaders. The acronym LEADERS can serve as a reminder about what good leaders do: Learn, Empower, Adapt, Delegate, Engage, Reflect, and Serve (Sheninger & Murray, 2017). Areas to consider may include helping educators or staff achieve their performance goals, leading groups toward outcomes, guiding conference committees, and assisting faculty with their scholarship. The following sections of this chapter provide some insight into different ways to help lead while making sure to consider the characteristics of successful leaders, taking into account the very important issues of social-emotional learning, wellbeing, and trust, which is what, in the end, will help people feel cared for, connected, and supported. Embracing the topics of social-emotional learning (

The study aims to explore which factors influence international students’ decision to pursue doctoral studies in Canada. Drawing on the push-pull model and the mechanism of educational decision making, this study uses semi-structured interviews to gather data and explores themes such as political and economic forces, institutional factors, social background and experience, and individual motivation in students’ decision making. Our study identifies multiple factors at the individual, institutional, and country levels that influence students’ decision making, including students’ past experiences, funding, faculty members, and immigration policies. Moreover, it finds that the factors vary by students’ regions of origin and disciplines of study. Our findings, focused on international doctoral students in Canada, add to the ongoing conversation about  student mobility and add nuances on international students’ decision-making process in times of shifting landscape of higher education in...

This thesis is a case study that employs an abductive approach that proceeds to the likeliest possible explanation based on a set of incomplete observations. It combines contemporary autoethnographic and more traditional inductive and deductive case study methods to gain a more holistic, but still only partial, understanding of a complex, dynamic and often deeply personal experience. The research questions student sojourners' key challenges when acculturalising into the UK business and management programmes and, as graduates reacculturalising 'back home' into management type roles with a specific focus on critical thinking experience. The study takes an exploratory approach to understand the personal lived complexity of the sojourner's journey and the challenges they encounter when returning to their home culture and workplace (referred to here as re-acculturation). The research draws on two methods framed within a contemporary case-study approach, the first employing interviews on research participants. The second is an autoethnographic lens that turns the academic gaze inwards to that of the doctoral researcher conducting this study.

This Report on the Professional Doctorate (PD) in the UK was commissioned by the UKCGE to inform debate on the design, validation, audit and relevance of PDs to the needs and aspirations of the doctoral candidate, the requirements of Universities, the industrial and professional employers and society at large. In each chapter the design, development and policy issues relating to PD programmes are reviewed. The first Chapter reflects upon the key contextual developments and current issues for the PD in general. Issues include: comparison between the PD and the traditional PhD; the confusion caused by the burgeoning number of PD titles; the ongoing debate on the use (or not) of credit for the research components of doctorates; the issues raised by the emergence in the USA of so-called 'course-work only' professional doctorates, not necessarily based on research outcomes; and the societal and economic impact of the successful PD graduate in the Knowledge Economy. The conceptual basis and core delivery issues of the 'generic' third-generation 'Doctor of Professional Studies' are explored in the Chapter 2, together with an assessment of the role of the researching practitioner. The EdD is deconstructed in Chapter 3 from a philosophical perspective, with an assessment of the nature of the EdD and the essential features of philosophically sound structures underpinning it. The scope and design factors of the EngD are discussed in Chapter 4, together with the key factors involved in securing industrial and Research Council sponsorship to underpin the research programme, while recognising the prerequisite that industrial partners appreciate the relevance of the research focus and the need to contribute towards it.

Share-copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format Adapt-remix, transform, and build upon the material The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms Attribution-You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use Non-Commercial-You may not use the material for commercial purposes ShareAlike-If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original No additional restrictions-You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits. Open Access Policy This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Does good journalism sell? This question has bugged me throughout the four decades I have been a journalist, media entrepreneur and development worker. It germinated as I started out on the Hastings Observer (on the south coast of the UK), where I completed my NCTJ proficiency test (National Council for the Training of Journalists) in 1987. The paper was one of the first in Britain to abandon “hot metal” presses, and the backdrop to my indentureship was Rupert Murdoch’s battle with the print unions over the introduction of similar technology. Mr Murdoch’s papers made money, but at what cost to the quality of their journalism? At the Hastings Observer, a code of ethics was hardwired into our contracts, my editor defended me when my stories riled advertisers, and I was always paid at the end of the month. But did my stories help sell the paper?

Young people have a mute button when they feel unheard. Approach them as drivers of change and attempt to understand why can't we hear them. Understand what they have to say. Will their words matter to publishers? Do they care to be heard? Have they given up on us-the media? Publisher, leave ego at the door. Project 3 Women in Journalism and civil society Enable through dialogue: Listen, understand, interpret, measure, suggest and create content with impact using evidence-based analysis, repeat! Experiment using collaborative cross field journalism.

Doctoral education in Australia was originally based largely on the UK
system and lends itself to arrangements where PhD candidates1 can be
readily mentored in research publication. Most PhD programs in Australia
are funded for 3–4 years to conduct a major research project and do not
include formal coursework or qualifying exams; the outcomes of the
research projects are increasingly presented in a thesis-by-publication for-
mat (Guerin, 2016; Jackson, 2013). Although team/joint supervision is
now mandated by the vast majority of universities, it is common for one
primary or principal supervisor (rather than an advisory committee) to
work regularly one-on-one and more intensively with the PhD candidate
than the other team members do. It is this main supervisor who is well
placed to mentor new researchers in research publication processes and
practices.
The following chapter offers a reflection on the experience of prepar-
ing a thesis by publication from the perspectives of a doctoral candidate
(Ruby) and her supervisor (Cally). This case study explores the context of
a PhD program in the social sciences (in the discipline of Education), where
the thesis-by-publication format is less common than in hard sciences. By
writing the central chapters of the thesis as journal articles or book chap-
ters and submitting them for peer review, PhD candidates like Ruby can
be supported while learning how academic publication operates. Together
we consider what has worked well in this process, and what we would do
differently in future, aiming to offer helpful insights to others embarking
on a similar path.
Ruby is a young Vietnamese female student enrolled as an international
PhD candidate, whose previous university and postgraduate education
had been undertaken in Japan. Ruby is enrolled as an international stu-
dent with Cally (an Anglo-Australian supervisor), providing opportunities
for us both to experience elements of a cultural shift while developing mutual understanding of what we bring to the project. Six months into
the research we were obliged to move to entirely remote supervision when
Cally took a new job at a university in a distant city.
The particularities of our situation encourage us to notice the nuances
of our journey, as well as the more general principles that are relevant to
other researchers. Co-authoring this chapter is the next development in this
process of mentorship; rather than constituting part of the formal thesis, it
provides a means to reflect on the meta-process of our shared journey.
We start by outlining the context for conceptualizing supervising a thesis
by publication as mentoring for publication, then offer our reflections on
this process. Our aim here is to articulate the satisfactions and the chal-
lenges of this process—our fears and frustrations, our moments of triumph,
and the learning associated with these experiences. Finally, we make some
recommendations for others embarking on a similar approach to doctoral
education and scholarly publication mentorship.

This study explores the structures and strategies which shape doctoral
education in 2021 in the UK and Irish higher education institutions.
It presents a broad overview of trends in national and international
doctoral policy, national and international postgraduate population data
and the findings of the 2021 survey.

Considerable research has investigated Chinese students' intercultural insights in different national contexts, where culture is understood as coterminous with nationality/regionality. However, few have explored the more micro-political aspects of Chinese doctoral students' narrative experiences in national settings, within a more cultural framework. This article seeks to take such an approach through a reflexive narrative account of the first author's experiences as a Chinese doctoral student in Australia. To do so, we draw upon Bhabha's notion of 'in-between space', and work by Gill on intercultural adjustment. We show how the first author's doctoral journey was characterised by a sense of 'in-betweenness' at the micro-political level, including in relation to the cultural boundary crossing associated with having to change fields of study and supervisors. This narrative provides a nuanced account of an international student's experiences and reflects the usefulness of examining the particularity of international doctoral students' learning experiences at a much more fine-grained level, via a more intercultural lens.

Recent changes in research council policy and postgraduate funding have seen the beginnings of a fundamental reconfiguration in how some PhD students are recruited and trained. This report is a work-in-progress review of early student evaluation data from a single doctoral training partnership (DTP) within this new doctoral training landscape. It gives a broad overview of historical and contemporary challenges in researcher development before summarising the results of evaluation data from the first year of the BBSRC DTP. It goes on to discuss how these preliminary findings might be followed up and what they might hint at in terms of the model's potential to influence researcher development in the future.

In the 2009 Survey, Institution 2 responded that the skills training programme was highly dependent on Roberts Funding. How, if at all, has this shortfall in funding been compensated for? Roberts Funding was not recurrent but the University has prioritised PGR for investment. The creation of a bespoke (socio-educational) space for PGR students has been a significant capital investment. This allows study across discipline areas and the aim is to foster both formal, and informal, interdisciplinary conversations. The space allows for communal areas and social interaction but also space for the delivery of bespoke delivery to PGR students which currently comprises offerings from Careers, Library and Doctoral Skills training. The PGR support team, based in the same space, also offer drop-in sessions and bespoke submission of thesis training to enhance our delivery to PGR students and make effective use of the PGR space. The University also invested over £5000 in DVD training materials produced by the UK Council for Graduate Education. These cover areas such as: An introduction to the UK doctorate, Managing your Supervisor, A guide to a good transfer/progression to PhD A guide to a good VIVA. CASE STUDY 3 Case Study of Institution 3: exploring further the issues emerging from Structural Changes in Doctoral Education Survey, Spring 2015 Thank you for agreeing to take part in a small case study to explore further the structural changes at Institution 3. The questions are specific to the University's responses to the 2015 survey and the responses given to a similar survey conducted by UKCGE in 2009. Both have been attached for your reference.

including indigenous knowledges in an "ecology of knowledges". Fundamental to this ecology of knowledges is the ability for researchers at all levels to exchange ideas and to find, share and grow new knowledges. A necessary means of doing this-and a third principle in the recommendations-is a worldwide circulation of scholars to ensure a more balanced distribution of talent around the globe. Particularly at doctoral and early career researcher level it is noted that this community needs to acquire not only traditional academic research competencies and the breadth of professional skills but also the ability (and the opportunity) to work and function in multinational teams and multinational settings. This reminds us of what Flores and Nerad (2012) refer to as a 'global village', which is needed to support the development of the next generation of researchers. Or, as the Hannover Recommendations put it, these skills and activities are necessary to develop the "original, responsible and ethical thinkers" (4) who can meet the complex challenges our world faces in the 21st century. Researcher mobility is a key activity in realising Flores and Nerad's vision at the start of the decade and the objectives for improved doctoral education and a more inclusive and respectful research environment worldwide that is set out by the Hannover experts at the end. We note that this particularly positive construct of the value to researchers and to research of a 'circulation of scholars' is distinct from other discourses that focus on the negative consequences of the unidirectional permanent flows of researchers from the Global South to the Global North, first explored as 'brain drain' in the seventies (Bhagwati & Hamada, 1974; McCullock & Yellen, 1977), following the Royal Society report that measured the exodus of British scientists to the USA and Canada (Royal Society, 1963). While the geopolitics of academic capitalism that privileges English and theoretical orientations from North America and Europe unquestionably persist, understandings of mobility have moved on to explore the complexity of types and timings of flow (Bekhradnia & Sastry, 2005; Meyer, 2001; Universities UK, 2007). The picture of academic mobility summarised in the next section describes complex temporary flows of researchers around the globe as they progress through their career and new poles for doctoral training emerging outside of the North Atlantic nexus that has historically trained and retained many researchers from around the world. Academic mobility in numbers The numbers of researchers at all career stages who are internationally mobile are well documented. For instance, the Changing Academic Profession (CAP) Survey that was first administered in the early nineties and was followed up in 2007/2008 provided benchmark data from 19 countries 3 around the world. The survey reported from a completed effective sample of 800 at both 'junior' and 'senior' 3 The countries participating in this research were Canada, the USA,

Recent changes in research council policy and postgraduate funding have seen the beginnings of a fundamental reconfiguration in how some PhD students are recruited and trained. This report is a work-in-progress review of early student evaluation data from a single doctoral training partnership (DTP) within this new doctoral training landscape. It gives a broad overview of historical and contemporary challenges in researcher development before summarising the results of evaluation data from the first year of the BBSRC DTP. It goes on to discuss how these preliminary findings might be followed up and what they might hint at in terms of the model's potential to influence researcher development in the future.

This chapter gives an overview of contemporary policy discourse around the doctorate, specifically looking at the question of impact in terms of the impact of education at a doctoral level on the knowledge economy. We start by providing an insight into policy drivers which have and continue to influence doctoral training programmes, models of doctorate, funder priorities and funding opportunities. We move on to explore the tension between policy and practice in doctoral education in the area of impact which stems from an aspiration in research and education policy to call for and evidence impact on the economy and a noticeable absence of data to prove it. We go on to summarise examples in the UK of initiatives that have been designed to enhance the impact of the 'traditional' PhD on business, industry and third sector and then focus on key developments in professional doctorates, exploring the lingering uncertainties and unresolved anxieties about definition, value and fit of the professional doctorate, and-by extension-the evolving PhD. The chapter aims to support ECRs to gain an understanding of policy and practice in doctoral education. This will help you to think about how you (co)-develop and (co)-design impactful doctoral projects which lead to high-quality research with impact for publication. It will give you the necessary context to shape enhanced funding applications for doctoral studentships which more easily fit funders' evolving agenda. It will also-hopefully-inspire you to challenge the current academic discourse which often struggles to define, locate and value newer evolutions of the traditional form of doctorates-such as the professional doctoratewhere knowledge is more explicitly generated in the context of its application and impact is central to the research for supervisor and doctoral candidate. Doctoral education, the knowledge economy and the impact gap As ECRs, you will, no doubt, be thinking about trying to secure early experience on supervisory teams, building up your numbers of timely submissions and completions, undertaking supervisor training on a range of issues, from administrative paper trails and research degree regulations to the pedagogy of supervision and how best to support doctoral researchers to undertake one of the single most demanding projects of their life. Ensuring that you are research active, and developing an excellent research track record, go without saying as effective ways to be invited onto supervisory teams and to have the opportunity to hone your supervisory skills and to learn from others with more experience. Depending upon your institution, there may be ringfenced funding for your own studentship, on a topic that is central to your research interests and expertise. You may also work in an area where you are able to attract high-quality self-funded doctoral candidates. However, despite these opportunities being available to some, for the majority of ECRs, securing a doctoral researcher (or more) is a necessary but challenging item on the to-do list. This is central to producing high-quality research outputs with impact for the Research Excellence Framework or the equivalent research audit exercise in your own national context. An understanding of the changing policy landscape around the impact of education to a doctoral level, evolving funder expectations, emerging doctoral funding models and the challenges and opportunities of working closely with business, industry or third sector is

is a professor/dean emerita of communications at the University of Kentucky in Lexington. She has served as an administrator, professor and researcher in mass and international communications at several universities, including the University of Kentucky where she was founding dean of the College of Communications in 1977. Carol Oukrop, director/professor emerita, taught journalism and mass communications at Kansas State University in Manhattan for 33 years, serving as director of the A.Q. Miller School of Journalism and Mass Communications 1986-1997. She was also on the Women's Studies faculty at Kansas State. Both authors retired from their universities in 2002. Katharine Sarikakis is a Senior Lecturer at Coventry University in England. Her research interests are in the field of global communications and policy, gender and citizenship as well as issues of equality in doctoral education.

Introduction: The mystery/transparency balance in supervisory feedback With the pressures to produce timely and disciplined thesis texts, there is now an increase in regulatory measures and greater focus on explicating research/writing practices through "skills" training for students and supervisors. While universities stipulate what constitutes "scholarly" knowledge and the appropriate form in which the thesis should be presented, they are silent about the creative (and more mysterious) dimensions involved in its production. They are also silent about the ambiguities involved in any relationship, let alone one involving the asymmetrical power relations characterising supervision. The intersubjective nature of supervisory practice therefore causes uneasiness for those who value certainty and predictability. In an effort to regulate this volatility the current institutional focus strives to demystify student-supervisor relations by promoting an ethos of transparency, equality and openness. This newer focus, as set out in institutional policy documents and in particular at the site institution's "Code of Practice," 1 urges the recognition of clear communication, reasonable and harmonious conduct, straightforward transmissions from advisor to advisee, choice, autonomy, joint clarification of the candidate's and the supervisor's expectations of the process of supervision, and the efficient and punctual achievement of milestones. Transparency, privileges accountability, planning, explicit communication, truthfulness and objectivity, as well as faith in the affective elements of trust and honesty. Such hopefulness is also symptomatic of the technical-rational view of communication and a notion of social relations that assumes a highly generalised student and reasonable and rational supervision. Further, the current n e o-l i b e r a l 2 orthodoxy holds that supervision is a cooperative effort between rational, organised, well informed (thoroughly orderly) speaking equals. In stressing transparency and rational collegiality without addressing the limits of what can be made explicit and how reciprocal accountability can be achieved in asymmetrical relationships, the current orthodoxy reaches for what it cannot obtain and masks its own limits. In essence, an emphasis on either transparency or mystery alone is problematic: while one risks masking the politics of knowledge-production, the other may exaggerate them. I stress here that both transparency and mystery enable knowledge production and that both have limitations. On the part of students the desire for transparency is fuelled by anxiety about the research/writing and/or the examination process. On the part of supervisors it derives from various models of "good" supervision and their own desires to see a thesis through to successful completion. Transparency is integral to reassuring students and reducing uncertainty and anxiety about the process. But when it positions research/writing as a rational process to be negotiated and managed, it oversimplifies, even denies, the less tangible aspects of the process. This may lead us to seek facile 1 Codes of Practice for supervision are now widely used in Australia, New Zealand and the UK as a risk management strategy. These documents offer guidelines for appropriate behaviour and specify responsibilities to define 'proper' practice for supervisors and candidates (Grant, 2005b). 2 The neo-liberal discourse positions supervision as a contract, and the student as a consumer of services. Under it, the student is an autonomous chooser who negotiates the terms of supervision, and his or her supervisor is a provider of services.

ALT JOURNAL NUMBER 5: SPRING 2009 19 This project investigates how doctoral students make 'learning leaps' to recognise and cross conceptual and skills thresholds in their research and ways in which they can be best supported to do so. It responds to current national ...

Introduction
This workshop is intended for supervisors preparing their students for viva-voce examination. Practical issues such as timing in the lead up to submission, selecting examiners, thesis preparation and mock viva, will inform discussions about managing the viva-voce on the day. Informing this workshop also are aspects of examiner expectations of a doctoral thesis, setting assessment/modification outcomes, understanding the Independent Chair role. Please be prepared to discuss and contribute example to the workshop.

This workshop is dedicated to facilitating a high-quality student experience as a Post-Graduate Researcher at UCLan. The content and discussions are as relevant to students at any point of their PGR journey, as it is to supervisors, new or experienced. The workshop is born from and contributes to live ongoing research, so please visit the link and complete the UCLan Student-Supervisor Expectations Questionnaire before attending this session to gain the most from it. We look forward to meeting you.

The decision by economic migrants to leave their country of origin for the purpose of employment and to improve quality of life is generally regarded as an investment decision. Real or expected income differentials between the source and the host country and the possibilities of being employed in each influence the decision to migrate. Economic migrants also respond to non-pecuniary factors, such as climate, environmental amenities, and life cycle variables. This paper examines how labor market regulations may influence work migration to the United States. The hypothesis is that the negative effects of excessive labor market regulations on income reported by Fullerton et al. (2007) and Licerio et al. (2010) will increase migration to countries with more flexible and less restrictive regulatory labor markets. Data from the Doing Business 2010 report describing labor market conditions in several countries and territories during 2010 are employed to describe labor market restrictiveness in 168 countries. Four models are specified to measure the effects of labor market restrictiveness on migration. Deviance Information Criterion (DIC) estimates are utilized to select the best specification for modeling migration to the United States. Empirical results confirm many of the hypotheses, but some of the outcomes are relatively weak.

Background and context i This report evaluates the Higher Education Funding Council for England's Postgraduate Support Scheme 2015/16 (PSS2). The scheme was launched in December 2014, following an announcement of £50M funding in the Chancellor of the Exchequer's 2014 Autumn Statement to address concerns about funding for taught postgraduate (PGT) programmes for UK/European Union (EU) graduates. Some 10,000 awards of £10,000 each were available, with institutional allocations determined formulaically. Each award comprised a 50% contribution from the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and 50% from the individual higher education institution (HEI) in which the award was offered. Awards were available at eligible HEFCE-funded institutions for UK/EU-domiciled graduates graduating from a first-degree in 2015 who had paid tuition fees at the higher rate (>£6,000 per annum) and enrolling on a PGT master's programme of one or two years' duration. Award holders were required to be from a group evidentially underrepresented at PGT level, as determined by awarding institutions. ii Our evaluation of PSS2 is based on site visits to ten case-study institutions, involving interviews with staff and students. The case studies included institutions of different location, size and mission. Institutions which had recruited successfully and less successfully under PSS2 were included, as well as one institution which had declined funding. In addition, we conducted an online survey of all institutions allocated PSS2 funding, reviewed analysis of Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) student record data for 2014/15 and 2015/16 about PGT prepared by HEFCE, and analysed HEFCE data about allocation of awards. Key findings iii Overall, about three-quarters (≈7,300) of the total available awards were allocated to students. Most institutions were able to match-fund awards and the majority had launched their scheme by March 2015. While PSS2 ran relatively smoothly, its one-off nature helped in this; ongoing match funding and administration might prove more challenging. Fifty institutions dispensed 90% or more of their allocated studentships, with the rest achieving a lower success rate (69) or declining funding altogether (12). Those declining funding felt PSS2 did not align with their institutional strategy or expected to be unsuccessful in recruitment.

Background and context i This report evaluates the Higher Education Funding Council for England's Postgraduate Support Scheme 2015/16 (PSS2). The scheme was launched in December 2014, following an announcement of £50M funding in the Chancellor of the Exchequer's 2014 Autumn Statement to address concerns about funding for taught postgraduate (PGT) programmes for UK/European Union (EU) graduates. Some 10,000 awards of £10,000 each were available, with institutional allocations determined formulaically. Each award comprised a 50% contribution from the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and 50% from the individual higher education institution (HEI) in which the award was offered. Awards were available at eligible HEFCE-funded institutions for UK/EU-domiciled graduates graduating from a first-degree in 2015 who had paid tuition fees at the higher rate (>£6,000 per annum) and enrolling on a PGT master's programme of one or two years' duration. Award holders were required to be from a group evidentially underrepresented at PGT level, as determined by awarding institutions. ii Our evaluation of PSS2 is based on site visits to ten case-study institutions, involving interviews with staff and students. The case studies included institutions of different location, size and mission. Institutions which had recruited successfully and less successfully under PSS2 were included, as well as one institution which had declined funding. In addition, we conducted an online survey of all institutions allocated PSS2 funding, reviewed analysis of Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) student record data for 2014/15 and 2015/16 about PGT prepared by HEFCE, and analysed HEFCE data about allocation of awards. Key findings iii Overall, about three-quarters (≈7,300) of the total available awards were allocated to students. Most institutions were able to match-fund awards and the majority had launched their scheme by March 2015. While PSS2 ran relatively smoothly, its one-off nature helped in this; ongoing match funding and administration might prove more challenging. Fifty institutions dispensed 90% or more of their allocated studentships, with the rest achieving a lower success rate (69) or declining funding altogether (12). Those declining funding felt PSS2 did not align with their institutional strategy or expected to be unsuccessful in recruitment.

One hundred nine women faculty in psychology departments at small colleges through the United States responded to a survey about the benefits and challenges of establishing a career at a primarily undergraduate institution with an enrollment of 3,000 or fewer students. Participants reported high teaching and service loads, which made it difficult for them to spend time on their research and writing. Descriptions of campus climate were variablefrom supportive to very unsupportive of feminist teaching and scholarship. Despite the challenges, the majority of the participants had no regrets about their career paths. Advice to new women psychology faculty at small colleges is presented.

The policy states: "to be eligible for submission to the post-2014 REF, authors' final peer-reviewed manuscripts must have been deposited in an institutional or subject repository on acceptance for publication. Deposited material should be discoverable, and free to read and download, for anyone with an internet connection." 2 Although HEFCE's is a green policy, for a number of reasons many researchers can nevertheless be expected to comply by means of gold OA (If, for instance, the research was funded by RCUK). The point is that the choice is theirs.

During the Autumn of 2021, Interchange Research conducted interviews with directors and other staff of the current 23 Wellcome Trust PhD programmes. All directors were invited to interview, and we were able to arrange interviews with directors of 18 programmes. These were mostly one-on-one interviews, but sometimes two or more directors participated and sometimes programme managers or administrators were brought in too. Interviews lasted one hour. The interviews were transcribed, and a thematic analysis was conducted in order to arrive at an overview of the main topics and themes, as well as some of the outlying topics and themes. Sometimes absences are also mentioned

The outcome of international education attracts increasing interests among scholars in the perceived employability and education-to-work transition. Yet, there is a lack of empirical studies focusing on understanding international students’ perceived employability and the strategies to improve their employability. The purpose of this study is to explore the perceived employability and its factors (e.g. demographic factors, educational factors, work-related factors, language and U.S. experience factors, and family factors) among international students in the U.S. Also, the study examines how gender moderates the relationships between perceived employability and other factors. A survey was conducted among international students at a midwestern public university in the U.S. and 138 participants’ responses were included in the data analysis. The result shows that international students are confident in their employability. Interestingly, compared to female international students, the ad...

Doctoral education, like all higher education, is undergoing change due to the influence of virtual technologies. The research was undertaken at two U.S. universities located in the Midwest, in order to collaborate to shape innovative pedagogies for doctoral students. Recently the researchers have been investigating the concept of creativity as it is experienced by those involved with doctoral education. This paper describes and analyzes the lived experience of doctoral students and their perspectives on creative thinking and virtual learning environments. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to examine doctoral students' perspectives on creativity and learning in virtual environments. The research was used in order to better understand how to encourage and support creative thinking by doctoral students and to ascertain to what extent creative thinking is, or can be, fostered in virtual environments. In addition, the researchers also examined how creativity is currently thought about and practiced in virtual environments by doctoral students. Virtual Environments and Creative Thinking In higher education, creativity has become a central issue By as industry entrepreneurs and scientists alike have emphasized the need for individuals in society who are independent thinkers, innovative and self-directed. As Sternberg (2010) pointed out these qualities require that higher education classrooms "teach creativity, not memorization." With large numbers of students enrolling in online courses, (Allen & Seaman, 2010), virtual environments need to be examined for fostering creativity. In the last ten years, courses in higher education have increasingly included a virtual component (blended courses) or have been taught completely online (Hollenbeck, 2005). As a result, significant advances have been made in the area of online pedagogies and learning. However, it is also true that the question of whether or not such online course offerings represent quality (Dellana, 2000) and in addition whether or not they foster creative thinking remains partially answered. Despite the increasing numbers of online courses, the research regarding online education has largely been on the categories of student perceptions, student learning, the differences between online and face-to-face education and on the benefits or problems of online education (Powell, 2007). Since the role of creativity in doctoral education has been considered key to the higher education experience (Jackson et.al., 2006), it is important

The survey instrument was designed, and the survey itself conducted and analyzed, by Academica Group. Academica's insights and advice were invaluable, and their flexibility throughout the process has been greatly appreciated. Finally, we would like to recognize the efforts of Dr. Sunny Marche. As Chair of the National Postdoctoral Stakeholder Group, Dr. Marche was a consistent advocate on behalf of Canadian postdoctoral scholars. His strong endorsement at the 2011 Canadian Postdoctoral Policy and Administration Meeting was instrumental in making this survey a reality. The Canadian Association of Postdoctoral Scholars/L'Association Canadienne de Stagiaires Postdoctoraux CAPS-ACSP is the national voice of Canadian postdocs. It works towards clarifying the role of postdocs in Canada, advocates for equitable treatment of postdocs, and represents the interests of postdocs at federal and provincial levels. CAPS-ACSP exists as a volunteer committee of postdoctoral scholars with an elected executive representing institutions across the country. Mitacs Mitacs is a not-for-profit organization that supports national innovation by coordinating collaborative industryuniversity research projects involving graduate students and postdoctoral fellows. Since 1999, Mitacs has been promoting academic-industrial research and development (R&D) while supporting the development of future researchers. Mitacs has developed a proactive and successful approach to supporting innovation, both directly through collaborative R&D and indirectly through long-term development of skilled human capital.