Networks of PhD Students and Academic Performance: A Comparison across Countries

In this article we compare regression models obtained to predict PhD students’ academic performance in the universities of Girona (Spain) and Slovenia. Explanatory variables are characteristics of PhD student’s research group understood as an egocentered social network, background and attitudinal characteristics of the PhD students and some characteristics of the supervisors. Academic performance was measured by the weighted number of publications. Two web questionnaires were designed, one for PhD students and one for their supervisors and other research group members. Most of the variables were easily comparable across universities due to the careful translation procedure and pre-tests. When direct comparison was not possible we created comparable indicators. We used a regression model in which the country was introduced as a dummy coded variable including all possible interaction effects. The optimal transformations of the main and interaction variables are discussed. Some differences between Slovenian and Girona universities emerge. Some variables like supervisor’s performance and motivation for autonomy prior to starting the PhD have the same positive effect on the PhD student’s performance in both countries. On the other hand, variables like too close supervision by the supervisor and having children have a negative influence in both countries. However, we find differences between countries when we observe the motivation for research prior to starting the PhD which increases performance in Slovenia but not in Girona. As regards network variables, frequency of supervisor advice increases performance in Slovenia and decreases it in Girona. The negative effect in Girona could be explained by the fact that additional contacts of the PhD student with his/her supervisor might indicate a higher workload in addition to or instead of a better advice about the dissertation. The number of external student’s advice relationships and social support mean contact intensity are not significant in Girona, but they have a negative effect in Slovenia. We might explain the negative effect of external advice relationships in Slovenia by saying that a lot of external advice may actually result from a lack of the more relevant internal advice

Effect of background, attitudinal and social network variables on PhD students' academic performance : a multimethod approach. 'Efecto de las variables personales, actitudinales y de red social en el rendimiento académico de los estudiantes de doctorado : un enfoque multimétodo'.

Resumen tomado de la publicación

PhD Students’ Research Group Networks: a Qualitative Approach

This article examines the networks within the research groups where Spanish PhD students are pursuing their doctorate. Capó et al. (2007) used quantitative data to predict PhD students’ publishing performance from their background, attitudes, supervisors’ performance and research group networks. Variables related to the research group network had a negligible explanatory power on student performance once the remaining variables had been accounted for. In this article, a qualitative follow up of the same students is carried out using extreme case sampling and indepth interviews. The qualitative research shows networking as important for students. Out of the 115 aspects that students mention in the interviews as relevant to publishing in the qualitative research, 92 have to do with their supervisors, their research group or their network as a whole. Similarly, out of the 50 hindrances mentioned, 20 have to do with the networks or relations. The most commonly mentioned network-related topics are research group members pushing PhD students to publish, meeting researchers outside the research group, existence of other PhD students in the group, help with the PhD from group members, supervisor’s interest in the thesis, the possibility of discussing with experts on the PhD’s topic and frequent contact with the supervisor and research group members. Some of these characteristics were not, however, measured in the conventional quantitative social network survey

PhD Students’ Research Group Social Capital in Two Countries: A Clustering Approach with Duocentred Network Measures

The article examines the structure of the collaboration networks of research groups where Slovenian and Spanish PhD students are pursuing their doctorate. The units of analysis are student-supervisor dyads. We use duocentred networks, a novel network structure appropriate for networks which are centred around a dyad. A cluster analysis reveals three typical clusters of research groups. Those which are large and belong to several institutions are labelled under a bridging social capital label. Those which are small, centred in a single institution but have high cohesion are labelled as bonding social capital. Those which are small and with low cohesion are called weak social capital groups. Academic performance of both PhD students and supervisors are highest in bridging groups and lowest in weak groups. Other variables are also found to differ according to the type of research group. At the end, some recommendations regarding academic and research policy are drawn

Review of progress in implementing the recommendations of Sir Gareth Roberts regarding employability and career development of PhD students and research staff:A report for Research Councils UK by an independent review panel October 2010

The need for improvement in the development of research careers and researchers’ training in transferable skills was highlighted in two particular recommendations (numbers 4.2 and 5.3) in the 2002 report ‘SET for success: the report of Sir Gareth Roberts’ Review - the supply of people with science, technology, engineering and mathematics skills’ (Roberts, 2002). As a consequence of that review, Research Councils UK (RCUK)1 have invested about £120 million, usually referred to as ’Roberts’ Money’, in research organisations to address this concern in all research disciplines. The last ‘Roberts’ Money’ payment will be for the period up to March 2011; it was therefore proposed to assess the progress made with taking forward these specific recommendations. An independent panel was formed by RCUK to undertake this review in 2010. The terms of reference for the panel are in Annex A. In summary, the panel was asked to review progress made and to advise RCUK and the higher education (HE) sector about future requirements for the development and training of researchers. In the course of their review, the panel considered a wide range of existing reports, interviewed key stakeholders in the HE sector and elsewhere, as well as drawing on their own knowledge and expertise. This report presents the findings of the panel’s review.

Virtual Mobility and Learning for PhD students of six European Countries: students’ programme evaluation

In this paper, the authors, as teachers of the Virtual Mobility and Learning ERASMUS Intensive Programme (VML–IP), put forward an analysis of the student’s final evaluation of the Programme as to the most important competences they have developed. In terms of methodology, this study has an exploratory and descriptive nature; hence, being based on empiric evidence. Thus, in the last face-to-face session, students were asked by the Programme’s coordination to present an overall evaluation of their experience in the VML–IP. Data were collected in loco, i.e. through the posters created by each group, as well as the video of the students’ oral presentations. They were later analysed using content analysis as data analysis technique. The results unveil that, although the main goal was fulfilled – i.e. to be able to design and implement a course on a ‘Virtual Mobility and Learning’ topic underpinned by solid theoretical background in the area –, the fact is that every group also pointed out several soft competences as a very important part of their experiences, and crucial for their development as students and future professionals.

Web Knowledge and Web Governance: WAIS PhD Research Reports

Abstract This seminar consists of two very different research reports by PhD students in WAIS. Hypertext Engineering, Fettling or Tinkering (Mark Anderson): Contributors to a public hypertext such as Wikipedia do not necessarily record their maintenance activities, but some specific hypertext features - such transclusion - could indicate deliberate editing with a mind to the hypertext’s long-term use. The MediaWiki software used to create Wikipedia supports transclusion, a deliberately hypertextual form of content creation which aids long terms consistency. This discusses the evidence of the use of hypertext transclusion in Wikipedia, and its implications for the coherence and stability of Wikipedia. Designing a Public Intervention - Towards a Sociotechnical Approach to Web Governance (Faranak Hardcastle): In this talk I introduce a critical and speculative design for a socio-technical intervention -called TATE (Transparency and Accountability Tracking Extension)- that aims to enhance transparency and accountability in Online Behavioural Tracking and Advertising mechanisms and practices.

Who is publishing in the Journal of Sociology? an analysis of author trends 1965–2008

This paper presents the author characteristics of papers published in The Australian Sociological Association (TASA) journal, the Journal of Sociology (formerly the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology) between 1965 and 2008. The aim of the paper is empirically to identify trends in authorship. The review examines all articles published in the period (excluding book reviews). The rationale of the study is to reveal trends in who publishes in the journal in terms of authors’ academic rank, gender, institution, and country. A table of those who have published the greatest number of papers is also presented. Findings show that over time the gap between the proportion of males and females publishing has closed; more PhD students and research fellows are publishing in the journal in recent decades; the highest proportion of authors consistently come from the Australian National University and The University of Queensland; and most authors are located in Australia. Information such as this can inform editorial practices and serve to inform the membership and readership on the nature of the journal.

Combining expert opinions in prior elicitation

A method of eliciting prior distributions for Bayesian models using expert knowledge is proposed. Elicitation is a widely studied problem, from a psychological perspective as well as from a statistical perspective. Here, we are interested in combining opinions from more than one expert using an explicitly model-based approach so that we may account for various sources of variation affecting elicited expert opinions. We use a hierarchical model to achieve this. We apply this approach to two problems. The first problem involves a food risk assessment problem involving modelling dose-response for Listeria monocytogenes contamination of mice. The second concerns the time taken by PhD students to submit their thesis in a particular school.

Q&A our people in focus : Dr Gunther Paul

Born in Germany, Dr Paul moved to Australia in 2009 to join UniSA’s Mawson Institute. He is currently the Director of ErgoLab, a research facility dedicated to enhancing the field of ergonomics – where products are designed to better fit the people that use them. Dr Paul plays a major role in ergonomic studies from automotive design, to assistive technologies for the elderly and disabled. He currently supervises several PhD students and regularly consults to industry.

Holistic blended design studio model : potential implication in education of Iran

Iran as a developing country faces many considerable shortages of both physical learning environment and inefficient budget to resolve this shortage. Today, Iran needs a $28 billion budget to add 23,000 schools to the existing 120,000 schools to be able to omit two shifts schools [1], [2]. Moreover, the standard learning space is 6-8 square meter per student, while this rate for big cities in Iran is about one square meter per student [1]. This decrease the time students spend in schools. In addition, the education approach in k-12 and higher education is still teacher-centered based and needs to be contemporized with educational, cultural, and technological changes.

Shut up & write!

This case-study exemplifies a ‘writing movement’, which is currently occurring in various parts of Australia through the support of social media. A concept emerging from the café scene in San Francisco, ‘Shut Up and Write!’ is a meetup group that brings writers together at a specific time and place to write side by side, thus making writing practice, social. This concept has been applied to the academic environment and our case-study explores the positive outcomes in two locations: RMIT University and QUT. We believe that this informal learning practice can be implemented to assist research students in developing academic skills. DESCRIPTION: Please describe your practice as a case study, including its context; challenge addressed; its aims; what it is; and how it supports creative practice PhD students or supervisors. Additional information may include: the outcomes; key factors or principles that contribute to its effectiveness; anticipated impact/evidence of impact. Research students spend the majority of their time outside of formal learning environments. Doctoral candidates enter their degree with a range of experience, knowledge and needs, making it difficult to provide writing assistance in a structured manner. Using a less structured approach to provide writing assistance has been trialled with promising results (Boud, Cohen, & Sampson, 2001; Stracke, 2010; Devenish et al, 2009). Although, semi structured approaches have been developed and examined, informal learning opportunities have received minimal attention. The primary difference of Shut Up and Write! to other writing practices, is that individuals do not engage in any structured activity and they do not share the outcomes of the writing. The purpose of Shut Up and Write! is to transform writing practice from a solitary experience, to a social one. Shut Up and Write! typically takes place outside of formal learning environments, in public spaces such as a café. The structure of Shut Up and Write! sessions is simple: participants meet at a specific time and place, chat for a few minutes, then they Shut Up and Write for a predetermined amount of time. Critical to the success of the sessions, is that there is no critiquing of the writing, and there is no competition or formal exercises. Our case-study examines the experience of two meetup groups at RMIT University and QUT through narrative accounts from participants. These accounts reveal that participants have learned: • Writing/productivity techniques; • Social/cloud software; • Aspects of the PhD; and • ‘Mundane’ dimensions of academic practice. In addition to this, activities such as Shut Up and Write! promote peer to peer bonding, knowledge exchange, and informal learning within the higher degree research experience. This case-study extends the initial work presented by the authors in collaboration with Dr. Inger Mewburn at QPR2012 – Quality in Postgraduate Research Conference, 2012.

Developing a framework for work integrated research higher degree studies in an Australian engineering context

The umbrella of Australian research higher degree (RHD) offerings has broadened from the traditional MPhil/PhD programmes to include a range of professional masters and doctoral degrees. This article reports on the experiences of three PhD students, engaged in an informally managed industry partnered research programme, described in this article as the work integrated research higher degree (WIRHD). Their learning process shares the attributes from both the traditional PhD programme and professional doctorates. However, because of the blended nature of the learning contexts, candidates engaged in the WIRHD programme must address a wider range of issues than those following the traditional RHD pathway. An exploratory case study approach was adopted with the view to develop an integrative framework to explain the various contexts that influence the learning experience of WIRHD candidates, as well as a structured approach to guide this contemporary form of industry partnered WIRHD process.