[AISWorld] Research Supervision Dilemmas

[Heinz Dreher]

Research Supervision Dilemmas

A Special Interest Track at the 26th Bled eConference
on eInnovation: Challenges and Impacts for Individuals, Organizations and Society

June 9-13, 2013
Bled, Slovenia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bled]

Call for papers is at:
http://bledconference.org/index.php/eConference/2013/schedConf/cfp

Important dates:
Submission: February 11, 2013
Notification: March 25, 2013
Final papers: April 22, 2013

Background and goals:
>From time to time every knowledge domain is subjected to scrutiny (often by scholars within the domain itself) of its motives, modus operandi, goals, and processes. These considerations are central to future development and, hence, to research training and supervision.

Our younger generations, the students, and their supervisors too, are deeply involved in these considerations. Through our focus on “research supervision dilemmas” we endeavor to bring the issues to light. As this can be a sensitive topic we are suggesting the use of vignettes, or ‘experience scenarios’, which may be help to preserve anonymity of the actual role players and facilitate concentrated focus on the issues.

Our aim is provide an opportunity to elicit and share research supervision practices, policies, procedures, problems and issues in general.

We welcome submissions from the student perspective and the supervisor perspective, including experience reports and analyses on supervision, examination, institutional support, co-publication during the PhD, and inter-institutional comparisons.

Submissions may address the main theme, “dilemmas”. For example, a case description might be followed by an analysis of some aspect of the case or experiential report, critically appraise the possible tension or dilemma, and offer some suggestions for improvement. Thus, papers would ideally contain the following sections or elements: description; critical appraisal; improvement suggestions. Alternate related structures and ideas are welcome.

Submissions will be double-blind reviewed along with the regular conference research paper submissions.

Authors are encouraged to make submissions on any one of the following perspectives, or a combination thereof.

1) Research Output
This is the primary purpose of the research journey. For the PhD student it is a training phase to equip the researcher with knowledge and skills through doing a research project under supervision and guidance. The output is the research thesis, and publication of research articles on aspects of the research as it proceeds.

Issues:
Topic selection
Nature and scope of the thesis
Evaluation of the thesis; evaluation criteria; examination
Thesis publication
Relationship of progressive/incremental research publications to the thesis

2) Student perspective
The research student creates a project proposal, and once agreed to proceeds under supervision and advisement of the research supervisor.

Issues:
Resource planning (texts, articles, library access, ICT, ….)
Supervisor interactions (frequency; expectations; quality; …)
Co-publication
Experience scenarios or vignettes or ‘stories’ – set up a website to collect ‘stories’
Cultural imperatives
Workload
Performance
Admission process
Candidate entry qualifications and tests/examinations
Plagiarism
Student as paying client
Student as project worker versus researcher

3) Supervisor perspective
The supervisor helps the student create a viable research project that will satisfy (if carried out correctly) the award of a PhD (or the research degree in question)

Issues:
How much should the supervisor actively help or co-write?
Research output – thesis and publications
Different systems used for PhD study across universities and countries
Quality – as good as supervisor desires, or as good as student can do
Plagiarism, cheating, and fraud
Students as ‘helpers’ in building supervisors’ careers
Students as junior colleagues
Supervisor as ‘psychologist-on-couch’
Research Topic choice

4) Institution/organisation perspective
What is the motivation of the institution to award degrees?
Quality standards
Facilities & resources
Entry and enrolment standards and constraints
Supervisor accreditation
Research problem/issue selection or direction - relevance

Issues:
Good supervision – what is it?
Supervision rules
Registration & classification of supervisors
Supervisor training
Entry qualifications and tests/examinations
Admission process
Recruitment
Core pre-requisite knowledge & skill
PhD process – steps of the research project that must be satisfied at the institutional level
PhD examination process
PhD program descriptions & statistics
Terms/concepts (terminology) – across the cultures and countries

Organizing co-chairs:
Professor Doug Vogel,
City University of Hong Kong, SAR, China
isdoug at cityu.edu.hk

Professor Heinz Dreher
Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia
h.dreher at curtin.edu.au

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aisnet.org/pipermail/aisworld_lists.aisnet.org/attachments/20130109/598ea405/attachment.html>