experiences of phd supervision at sokoine university of agriculture f. p.lekule
TRANSCRIPT
Conception: Effects of inefficient PhD training systems
Poor teaching capacity
Inefficient PhD training systems
Few publications
Low quality of academic staff
Prolonged period from admission to completion
Low quality of PhD training
Lowreputation
Best candidates go elsewhereLower no. of PhD applicants
1.Insufficient skills for job markets
2.Lower capacity to solve society problems
3. Retarded development
Inconsistent supervision
Inefficient PhDTraining
Poor supervision
Poorly prepared students
Inadequate supervision
Poor research
methodology
Poor writing skills
Lack of clear guidelines
Low motivation/ Low benefits
Inadequate preparation at MSc level
Low access to
information
Low competence
of supervisors
Too few supervisors
Poor analytical
skills
No experience in proposal
writing
Guidelines are not clear
Inconsistent PhD
programs
Inflexible PhD format
Unclear PhD format
Guidelines are not broadly known
Ineffective mechanisms to track student
progress
Not reward/penalty
Inadequate PhD
Administration
Poor discipline of PhD
supervisors/examiners
Slow liaison procedures
External thesis examination too
slow
Poor follow up on progress/ No mechanism
Low motivation
Institutional limitations
Poor Research Support Facilities Inadequate Infrastructure, Poor maintenance,
Lack of funds, Poor culture of maintenance, Low/expired training, Difficulty to maintain
qualified staff, Poor quality support staff Insecure Finance:
Low public Scholarship, Most PhDs are donor funded, Staff Promotion based on PhD acquisition
Baseline studies: Respondents involved in the study (SUA) (%)
On going PhD students 20.9
PhD students on sandwich programme 4.5
Recent PhD graduates (< 5 yrs) 11.8
Recent PhD graduates (< 5 yrs) of sandwich prog
2.7
Academic Staff 44.5
Academic/Administrative staff 12.7
Administrative 2.7
TOTAL 100
Level of awareness of Postgraduate rules and regulations (SUA)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
PhD students Recent PhDgraduates
Academic staff Administrativestaff
Total
Respondents category
Perc
ent
of
Very poor
Poor
Good
Very Good
Sources of information of PhD rules and Regulations
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Sources of information
Perc
ent of re
spondents
Percentage of repondents
Accessibility of sources of information of the PhD rules and regulations
01020304050607080
Respondents category
Per
cent o
f res
ponden
tsVery difficult
Difficult
Easy
Very easy
Level of relevance of PhD rules and Regulations
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
PhD students Supervisors Administrators
Level of relevance
Per
cent of re
sponden
ts
Somewhat relevant
Relevant
Highly relevant
Rating of knowledge of the supervisory procedures for PhD programmes
0
1020
3040
5060
7080
90
Respondent category
%
Poor
Good
Very Good
Satisfaction with regularity of student/supervisor contact
If satisfied with the regularity of contact with student/supervisor
0
20
40
60
80
100
PhD student Recent PhDgraduates
Academicstaff
Total
Respondent category
%
Yes
No
Current situation of contribution of publication to PhD
If publication contribute to final evaluation of PhD
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
PhD student Recent PhDgraduates
Academicstaff
Total
Respondent category
%
Yes
No
Publication to contribute to final evaluation of PhD
If publication should contribute to the final evaluation of PhD
0
20
40
60
80
100
PhD student Recent PhDgraduates
Academicstaff
Total
Respondent category
%
Yes
No
If Compulsory courses should be introduced in PhD programmes
If compulsory courses should be introduced
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
PhDstudent
Recentgraduates
Academicstaff
Admin.Staff
Total
Respondent category
%
Yes
No
Outcome of the project on the University
Revision of Existing rules and regulations. Options for PhD thesis- papers or manuscript Introduction of compulsory Ph D courses for
some programmes Several PhD courses developed-voluntary 4 day training course for supervisors
Obligations of academic boards
Can we work together?
What you do is so important for the success of my work
Challenges:We can do this if: Support for the trainers in supervision is
sustained A significant proportion of the
supervisors are trained in supervision. The remaining supervisors get training
and information during the coming years.
Current Characteristics of supervisors a very diversified group. Many have had to take part or all of their education abroad Lack enough authority to foster the changes that are now
needed Too busy or are inadequately motivated to devote time to
supervision excellence Unaware of or lack clear appreciation of rules and
guidelines on supervision modalities, frequency, deadlines, milestones and examination
The results Inconsistency due to lack of effective quality
assurance. Poor or no supervision delays, prolonged studies and, at times,
avoidable failures. Waste of both human and financial
resources. Additional delays from examiners
Observations and Implications Supervisors are the primary target group Most supervisors have never received any formal
training in supervision, but rely on a mixture of experience, routine and flair.
Many tend to supervise the way their own supervisor or mentor supervised them.
Some supervisors are gifted and brilliant supervisors, others are not.
Outstanding students might perform regardless of the quality of the supervision they get but many do not
What do we want our Universities to do? Raise standards for Ph.D. education that are
internationally competitive Make our Universities an attractive study
environment for researchers from the region Attract donor-funded Ph.D. scholarships to
the university rather than at other universities
WHAT DO WE EXPECT TO ACHIEVE?
Enhance PhD training supervision to produce more consistent and quality thesis produced on time.
Minimize delays, prolonged studies, avoidable failures and waste of both human and financial resources.
Why the universities took to the project
Timeliness of the project: there was general commitment to enhance performance in PhD training
Anchoring the project at TOP university administration
Continuous participation of TOP university management in implementation
STRAPA: cooperation of TOP university managers in annual review and planning meetings
SOKOINE UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTUREFACULTY OF AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL SCIENCE
Organisation: Annual Joint STRAPA Steering Committee Meetings
SOKOINE UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTUREFACULTY OF AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL SCIENCE
PREPARE PhD-project