The Research Higher Degree Supervision Development Program. Report to The University of Sydney Research and Research Training Committee of Academic Board

Abstract

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. The Research Higher Degree Supervision Development Program underwent a major revision in 2006 to take account of the changed policy context and the University’s requirements for supervisor registration. 2. Since the establishment of the Academic Board’s Policy on RHD Training Supervision, a large number of supervisors have engaged with the Program and these numbers increase on a weekly basis. 3. The number of modules studied in a faculty is statistically related to improvements in students’ satisfaction with supervision as measured on the SREQ. 4. There has been a substantial increase in completions and a decrease in the time taken to complete the Program since the introduction of the Academic Board’s Policy on RHD Training Supervision. 5. Participants who complete the Program report higher levels of satisfaction than those who do not. 6. Completing supervisors tend to find the workload appropriate, indicate that they achieve the outcomes of the modules and generally find the feedback helpful. 7. Optional workshops are generally considered helpful. 8. There is evidence that supervisors develop skills, competencies and confidence in supervision by studying the modules. If they complete the Program, they also demonstrate they have achieved the University’s criteria for good practice in supervision. 9. Training for students in good practice in supervision is desirable. This is in line with other Universities and is a way of addressing poor practice by senior established supervisors. Faculty issues 10. There is wide variability in numbers of enrolments, modules completed and attitudes towards the Program and its workload in different faculties. 11. Misperceptions about the source of the information in the Program and the scholarly basis on which feedback is provided exist in some faculties. 12. The Program is designed to be supported/supplemented by local initiatives. It appears that this does not happen in some faculties. Policy issues 13. There is faculty variability in the extent to which Academic Board Policy on RHD Training Supervision is adhered to. In some faculties there is a well established register of supervisors with a well known process for admission to the register. In other faculties there is no register. 14. Misperceptions still exist in some faculties about who owns the Program, the nature and source of the Policy and the location of supervisor registers. 15. Some areas where University policy requires clarification have been identified.