PHD Supervision Good Practice Guide
PHD Supervision Good Practice Guide
PHD Supervision Good Practice Guide
SEPTEMBER 2017
Student selection
In order to have a lively and vibrant postgraduate research community it is essential to recruit and
select high quality students who have the aptitude to complete a strong PhD in the required time
period.
The University Code of Practice on Research Students (Section 2) requires that:
(e) Applicants should normally possess at least a first degree (normally of an Upper Second Class
honours standard or above), although some discipline areas require a Masters level degree.
(f) Applicants resident in the UK should normally be asked to attend for an interview.
(g) In making a decision on an applicant, schools should consider not only the academic and
research ability of the candidate, but also the feasibility of the research project proposal in
terms of:
the academic standard of the research proposed;
the clarity of the aims and objectives;
any equipment/special facilities that may be required, and any associated
additional cost;
the availability of appropriate supervisory expertise and experience;
the length of time that the research may take (in the light of the minimum and
maximum lengths of registration).
(h) For candidates whose first language is not English, the normal entry requirement is a score of
7.0 on the IELTS Test, although some schools and departments may accept a score of 6.5.
The Dean of Postgraduate Research Studies can approve exceptional cases for admission
where students have not attained the required score.
(i) All processes for student selection should be conducted in a fair and transparent way, in line
with the University’s Equality & Diversity Policy.
Suggestions
It is important that more than one member of staff is involved in selection interviews.
When interviewing, ask questions to probe for specific examples of appropriate attributes like
these:
o Ability to grasp concepts and reason analytically
1 http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/files/qualitysupport/cop_resstudents.pdf
Induction
The first few days and weeks of a PhD programme can have a lasting effect on students’ perceptions of
their overall ‘PhD experience’. It is essential therefore that students undergo a very positive ‘induction
process’.
Within the University, induction is carried at both a central and local level. It is important for students to
take part in both types of event. You (and others in your school) should ensure that there are no
significant department / school events for new PGR students that clash with the timing of the
University induction / welcome events (run by the Graduate School and held near the start of each
term), and you should check that your new students will be attending these.
At a local level, the University Code of Practice on Research Students (Section 3) requires that schools
should organise an induction for their new students at the start of the Autumn Term, other individual
induction arrangements will be needed for students starting at different times of year and for some
part-time students and those ‘studying at a distance’. The following items should be covered:
Facilities and resources available to research students;
Student Welfare information, including information for students with disabilities or special
needs;
Relevant skills training programmes;
Opportunities to interact with other research students and staff, both within the school and
elsewhere;
Relevant Health and Safety and ethics information.
Suggestions
Local induction events would normally be organised by School / Department Directors of PGR
Studies.
You should ensure that students do participate in local induction programmes, and follow-up
with them on any unanswered issues or questions.
In addition to the formal induction topics listed above, a personal local induction can be very
helpful and might include:
2 http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/FILES/graduateschool/pgrinterviewgoodpracticeguide.pdf
3 http://www.reading.ac.uk/graduateschool/training-and-development/gs-reading-researcher-development-
programme.aspx
Supervisory meetings
There are various different types of supervisory meeting, including face-to-face, email exchanges,
Skype, and other forms of digital communication. At the outset, supervisors and students should agree
on the appropriate frequency and nature of meetings and other communications. Students must
appreciate what is a reasonable expectation in terms of access to supervisors’ time, and supervisors
must ensure that they will have enough contact with students to allow the appropriate level of guidance
and knowledge about student progress.
It is University policy that each student should have a minimum of two supervisors. It is therefore
important for there to be clarity on which supervisors will participate in which type of meeting, and who
the student should contact in relation to different types of query or concern.
The frequency and pattern of supervisory meetings may alter throughout the student’s research
programme, depending on the particular stage reached. Supervisors and students should agree a
minimum number of meetings each term and for vacation periods. We would recommend that
meetings are held at least monthly, with regular email contact between these. The University Code of
Practice recommends that, normally, the minimum number of meetings should be ten per annum, and
that there should be more meetings initially. The majority of negative feedback that students provide
about their supervision (through the annual Evaluation of Supervisory Arrangements survey, and PRES)
relates to supervisors having insufficient time available for their students due to other workload
pressures.
Supervisory styles
Different supervisors inevitably have different styles. However, the same supervisor may need to adapt
his or her personal style to suit the needs of particular students.
Suggestions
Decide on the right style for you and your student;
Find an appropriate balance between heavy-handed dominance and hands-off neglect;
Consider questions such as;
o How much should you push your views as opposed to giving them freedom to learn
from their mistakes?
o How much should you do for them?
Be sensitive to how students respond to your style and be prepared to adjust it, if appropriate
(see below);
Seek help from more experienced colleagues if you have any concerns.
It is important to remember that the same style will not suit all types of student. You need to be
sensitive to different types of student, their different motivations for doing a PhD, and their different
needs and constraints. For example:
A full-time UK student aged 25 (with no dependants);
A full-time International student, (with a spouse and children);
A full-time member of academic staff who is new to research;
A research assistant who is registered for a PhD whilst being employed as an RA;
Year 2
‘Getting nowhere syndrome’ – boredom with the routine of research;
Interested – really involved and having the confidence to solve problems;
Frustrated – time constraints impact on capacity to follow all areas of interest.
Year 3
Independent – less reliance on supervisor for knowledge of field;
Job to be finished – the thesis becomes a task;
Stressed!
Supporting writing
According to Delamont et al, 2004, there are two golden rules to share with your students
Write early and write often:
o The more you write the easier it gets;
o If you write every day it becomes a habit;
o Tiny bits of writing soon add up to something substantial;
o The longer you leave it unwritten, the worse the task becomes.
Monitoring progress
It is important that students’ progress is regularly monitored to help ensure timely completion and
provide necessary support.
For PhD students, the University Code of Practice on Research Students (Section 6) requires that:
(a) Schools or departments are responsible for monitoring the progress of research students, via
an agreed ‘monitoring team’. It is a requirement that all research students should have their
progress formally assessed at least on an annual basis. However, we strongly recommend that
this is supplemented by more informal interim checks on progress, which enable schools to pick
up potential issues at an earlier stage, and for students to be provided with appropriate
feedback.
(b) In the first year, the annual review should normally take place during the third term of
registration and should comprise consideration of at least a separate written report from both
the student and their supervisor. Students should also make at least two oral presentations of
their work during the course of their programme. If a student fails to submit a written report
within two weeks of the due date, and no extension has been agreed, they will be sent a warning
letter from the Head of School to inform them that if they do not submit a report within three
weeks (a total of five weeks from the original due date), they will be subject to the University’s
procedures for Academic Engagement and Fitness to Study.
(c) During the second year of registration (or part-time equivalent) and normally no later than the
fifth term of registration, the school ‘monitoring team’ should consider the evidence for
Confirmation of Registration. A decision will be made on the basis of at least a written report
from the student providing evidence of their research ability; students will normally be
interviewed in person by the ‘monitoring team’ as part of the assessment progress. A written
report should also be made by the student’s supervisor/s, who will not be present when this
decision is made.
(d) Where the confirmation process has resulted in a student not being assigned to the degree
programme which he or she sought, they may appeal against that decision.
Some of these points will also apply to monitoring progress on other research programmes.
A full guide to monitoring and assessing research student progress is available at:
http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/files/graduateschool/pgrmonitoringguide.pdf
Paid employment
We know that around 40% of our PGR students are in paid employment whilst studying. Worryingly,
around one-third of these report working for more than 30 hours per week. It is important to maintain
an oversight of time that students spend in paid employment, or other activities, that might have a
negative impact on their studies. We are also aware that a small number of supervisors require their
students to undertake personal work on behalf of the supervisor (e.g. proof reading a draft monograph
written by the supervisor, or helping with their editorial duties). Students should only be asked to
engage in such tasks if they will benefit their PhD studies in a tangible way.
Examination preparation
As already noted, the University Code of Practice on Research Students (Section 4a) requires that:
Students should decide when he or she wishes to submit within the prescribed period of
registration, taking due account of the supervisor’s opinion, and informing the Examinations
Office;
Shortly before submission of their thesis, students should inform their supervisor(s) of any
special circumstances which they believe may have adversely affected their research;
They should also show their supervisor(s) the final draft of their thesis before submission;
When a thesis is submitted, supervisors should send a written report to the examiners via the
Examinations Office.
The Rules for Submission are available at:
http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/files/graduateschool/pgrrulesforthesessubmission.pdf
The Guide for Examiners for Higher Degrees by Thesis is available at:
http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/files/graduateschool/pgrexaminersguidephd.pdf
A Good Practice Guide for Examiners of PhDs and other Research Degree Programmes is
available at:
http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/FILES/graduateschool/PhDExaminers_Goodpracticeguide.pdf
4http://www.reading.ac.uk/graduateschool/currentstudents/gs-
etheseshome.aspx?#WhatIsElectronicDeposition
Reference
Delamont, s., Atkinson, P, & Parry, O. (2004). Supervising the Doctorate: A Guide to Success. 2nd Ed.
Maidenhead. Open University Press