Doctoral Supervisor: Coach, Mentor or Master? Developing an Alternative Paradigm for Doctoral Supervision

This working paper is the second in a series of working papers presenting the on-going findings from a longitudinal research project grounded in exploring the experience of doctoral supervision and developing practice. In the first paper and phase one of this research study, Cook, Nichol and Loon (2014) explored the existing context for doctoral supervision and, drawing from literature on the problematic nature of doctoral supervision and coaching and mentoring, considered the value of drawing on coaching and mentoring models in formulating alternative paradigms for doctoral supervision. This paper reports the findings of phase one, a mixed methods study of experiences of doctoral supervision with supervisors and students in one UK university business school, from which the Collaborative Action Doctoral Supervision conceptual model emerged. The paper also introduces phase two, a collaborative action research study with doctoral supervisors and students who are applying, reflecting on and developing further this doctoral supervision model. We are aiming to answer the question of whether the use of coaching and mentoring in doctoral supervision enables the transfer and sustainability of learning from the doctoral supervision session to outside the experience and improves the quality. Is the doctoral supervisor coach, mentor or master? Key words Doctoral supervision, coaching, mentoring, collaborative action research.

A Systematic Review of Entrepreneurship Education Literature in Nigeria: Where is the Focus of Research?

Purpose- Entrepreneurship education (EEd) plays a crucial role in the development of entrepreneurs and the enhancement of entrepreneurial activities in every economy. This paper examined what Higher education Institutions (HEIs) do in learning and teaching of entrepreneurship in general and how entrepreneurship development takes place in Nigerian HEIs. The outcome from this study will enable a deeper understanding on what HEIs do EEd, with more exposure as to what the areas and focus of research is in the Nigerian context. Design/methodology/approach- The study adopted a systematic literature review approach- drawing from a computerized search of five selected data bases, using predetermined key words by the researchers. Findings: The main finding of this paper is that, related concepts like skills, intention, drive and attitude have been use in expounding discussions on the outcome of EEd, but very little has been written on entrepreneurial mind-set (EMS), of which other studies have suggested that it’s a crucial point in the journey of an entrepreneurs (Reed & Stoltz, 2011; Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA), 2012; Neneh, 2012). Furthermore, learning and teaching of entrepreneurship in Nigerian HEIs seems to be more on creating awareness (about entrepreneurship) than actual preparation for entrepreneurship (For entrepreneurship). Research limitations/implications- The paper is limited since it is based on a review of literature from a selected databases- covering a specific time span. This potentially excludes other studies outside this time span. A more comprehensive overview of these contributions would benefit from employing tools such as Google Scholar, for an overview of the sub–domains online. Originality/value – There are limited studies that focus on the issue of entrepreneurial mind-set in entrepreneurship education in Africa, specifically Nigeria. This paper and its focus in particular, have laid down pioneering ground work for research on entrepreneurial mind-set development in Nigerian entrepreneurship education.