The process of the PhD: a study of the first year of doctoral study

Abstract

There has been a rapidly growing interest in the nature of learning at the postgraduate level. This interest has outpaced our knowledge and understanding of the process of postgraduate research. Recently, the Winfield Report (ESRC, 1987) drew attention to the lack of available data and published research on doctoral study. In this paper we report some of the results of a longitudinal study of research students at Reading University, begun in 1985. It is based on the findings of a questionnaire survey of second year research students carried out in October 1987, although reference is also made to other staff and student surveys we have carried out. The factors affecting progress during the first year are examined. Each stage of the work has been considered in detail and an attempt to measure the overall outcome of the first year's work has also been made. Learning takes place in response to the social environment. The problem of social isolation for research students is widely acknowledged. In this study we explore the pattern of interaction that takes place between students and their fellow students and staff in order to find whether adequate opportunities for contact within a university are provided, and to find ways of engendering collegiality. The differences we have found between students’ and supervisors’ perceptions of the functions of supervision are described. Problems arise when there are discrepancies. The results regarding the frequency and quality of supervision are reported. Arising from the study are a number of implications for doctoral selection and education. At present, insufficient attention is paid to planning and programming the work, setting and keeping to deadlines. There is much that the supervisor can do to teach the skills needed to be able to do this. Opportunities for interaction do exist but much could be done to encourage participation and to foster the sense of collegiality. There is also scope for improving the quality and quantity of supervision.