1997 – Trial programme started – Inaugural 2.5 day First Year Skills Workshops (FYSW) 2000 - University of Liverpool institutes compulsory training programme.

• 1997 – Trial programme started – Inaugural 2.5 day First Year Skills Workshops (FYSW)

• 2000 - University of Liverpool institutes compulsory training programme for all research students

The Impact of Compulsory Development Programmes

Enshrined in ordinance 90: to undertake successfully the Research Training Programme or obtain exemption on the grounds of suitable prior experience of accreditation.

Main proposal of this paper:

That the structured pursuit of personal and professional development is considered as integral to the doctorate as the viva and the thesis:

Professional holistic Development ‘Fully integrating appropriate skills development activities within research degreeprogrammes, so that they are not viewed and treated as an add-on or a separatestream which can be ignored, is a major challenge in most institutions.’*

*Chris Park, http://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/435/1/RedefiningTheDoctorate.pdf 2007, p.33

Thesis

Personal and professional development Viva

‘Personal and professional development for research students positively associated with submission of thesis within 4 years’ (Humphrey, et al 2012).

Interdisciplinary Awareness, Enterprise and Transferable

skills

Deep Disciplinary Skills and Expertise

Leonard-Barton, 1995

The T Shaped Researcher

‘It is now widely recognised by employers, professional bodies and research funding agencies that specialist expertise alone is not sufficient preparation either for research or a subsequent career. With this in mind, the University of Hull requires all its postgraduate research students to follow a research training programme relating both to their particular field of study and to generic skills; for example, information technology and communication skills.’ University of Hull PGTS 2010

‘It is becoming increasingly necessary for postgraduate research students to be trained in skills that extend beyond those essential to pursue their academic discipline. This reflects changing employment patterns and the closer relationships between universities and employers to train students who are able to meet the nation’s needs. Notable among these skills are: the facility to use information technologies; the ability to use time effectively and productively; the capacity to work in teams; an understanding of business principles; and the skills to present ideas effectively.’University of Liverpool Handbook 2002

Persuasive text…

PGR Training policies within the sector:

Often: ‘Recommended but optional.’More commonly: incorporated formally into M.Res programmes, CDTs etc

University of Nottingham:

• Each Faculty has differing requirements for recommended training

• All Graduate School training and Faculty Training programmes carry training points

• Participants can automatically access a certificate confirming their attendance and

points after the course

BLOCK A(ENG/SCI/MED/VET/DENT)

BLOCK B (ENG/SCI/MED/VET/DENT)

W/C 7/1/02 Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday9.00 to 9.30 WRITTEN

COMMUNICATION(Janet)

  WRITTEN COMMUNICATION(Janet)

   9.30 to 10.00   EPISTEMOLOGY

(Janet) 

10.00 to 10.30

EPISTEMOLOGY(Janet)

10.30 to 11.00

11.00 to 11.30

11.30 to 12.00

12.00 to 12.30

12.30 to 1.00 ORAL BRIEFING Richard)

  ORAL BRIEFING (Richard)

1.00 to 1.30          1.30 to 2.00     ORAL

COMM.WORKSHOP(Trish with M, J and Debbie)

    ORAL COMM. WORKSHOP (Janet with Trish, Rich and Martin)

2.00 to 2.30 TIME AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT(Janet)

  TIME AND PROJECT MAN. (Richard)

 2.30 to 3.00    3.00 to 3.30    3.30 to 4.00    4.00 to 4.30    4.30 to 5.00          

2.5 day First Year Workshop 2000 -2002

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday FridaySign In: 9.30am Review Review Review ReviewIntroductions,Hopes andConcerns,Learning contract. TheProgramme as a whole

Thinking skills Ethical Concerns in Research for the Arts   

Working with others – managing the supervisoryRelationship

Presentations  

Break Break Break Break Break  Skills audit 

Originality in research  Managing thePh.D process-Project management

 Working withOthers – role-set analysis

 PresentationsSocial lunch 

Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch LunchFeedback skills Presentation skills

Writing SkillsJournal WritingTaking notes

 PresentationPractice

 Self managementThinking, learning, working styles

 Review action plan

Break Break Break Break  Presentation skills practice

Writing skills (continued)

Networks:Creating, discovering, using the resources around you

Self-managementStress, anxiety,Time management

17.15-17.30Review

Review Review Review  

5-day First Year Skills Workshop 2002/3

Research Skills Workshops – Aims: 2006

• To increase the awareness of the skills, strategies and

processes which are required in order to successfully complete

a research degree.

• To provide a catalyst and a resource for the

transformative learning essential to the doctoral process

• Provide an experience that will enable research students

to assess, practice and demonstrate the skills required to

successfully develop within the research environment.

2010 – 2014:Three Day Workshop Structure

Fir

st Y

ear

Sec

on

d y

ear

Th

ird

Yea

r• Team Formation

• Idea Generation

• Planning

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3

• Research

• Abstract Writing

• Prepare Presentation

• Presentations

• Questions

• Peer Review

‘Performance failure’ theory

Recent study by Manu Kapur & Katerine Bielaczyc outlines notion of performance failure:

Three conditions that promote a ‘beneficial struggle’:

1. Choose problems to work on that ‘challenge but do not

frustrate.’

2. Provide learners with opportunities to explain and

elaborate on what they’re doing.

3. Give learners the chance to compare and contrast good

and bad solutions to the problems.

Self-generated ideas for research projects

Frequent opportunities for presentations plus

chairs meeting, abstract construction and

informal peer to peer discussion

Peer review, audience questions, competitive

spirit of team based workshop

Manu Kapur & Katerine Bielaczyc , ‘Designing for Productive Failure,’ Journal of the Learning Sciences, Volume 21, Issue 1, 2012

How Performance Failure in the FYDW ‘works’

Teams given open ended problem to

solve

Unable to complete or

solve problem correctly

Provokes Idea generation about the

nature of problem and what potential

solutions look like

Teams understand deeper structure of problem not simply

correct solution

Team members transfer knowledge more

effectively than passive recipients of someone

else’s expertise.

Competent in next test within

research environment

Chuck them in the deep end

Make sure they don’t drown

Congratulate them (or not) on being able to swim badly

Older, unsupported learning model…

FYDW 2013/14 Overall Evaluation:How useful was this workshop? (1 not very useful, 10 very useful)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

• 91% of PGRs scored the workshop 6-10 (useful to very useful), up 4% from last year• Of those, 72% scored the workshops between 8-10• 22% scored the workshop as 10, up 10% from last year - despite increase of 42 additional participants

Overall aim 2014:

Move participants from student mind-set to becoming a research colleague.

2004 - 2008 = 180 credits• 60 units available from central training• 90 units available for Personal Development Record

(PDR) Now called Portfolio of Activity• At least 30 units from Department or Faculty Training

Compulsory Programmes require policing!The Training Credit Unit

1 credit = 1 hour of training

• 2002 – 2004 = 90 credits

2008 – Present. ‘Credit’ re-affirmed as purely an attendance indicator for the following programme:

Annual Progression1. The Record of Supervisory meetings, to regularly record formal meetings with supervisors2. The PGR Portfolio of activity to record professional development

First Year Development Choice of workshops on campus and online option for those unable to attend the Liverpool workshops

Poster dayAnnual event in Liverpool and online option

Career DevelopmentRange of options - online course, workshops, enterprise competitions or self-selected voluntary activities or work experience.

Subject Specific TrainingTraining and requirements set by school or institute

At least 6 weeks of activity over a three year period

In the new Annual Monitoring Report

Form the supervisor has a

tick box to confirm that they have

seen their student’s PDR!

Yearly Completion of the Personal Development Record is confirmed through the Annual Monitoring Report Form…

It’s alright Patty! Year

04/05 is just a trial period.

05/06 is when it’s going to be

for realOh Thank

God!

Difficulties with the training requirement…

Arguments for the Compulsory Training of research students:

• That’s what a PhD means at the University of Liverpool

• It will make the research councils take notice of us as an

institution

• It will enable changes in the culture of the institution

• It will help to maintain and improve completion rates

• It will improve the skills base of all research students

• It will improve their employability

• Stakeholders suggest very strongly that we should do it…

Pedagogic arguments for compulsory training

• Doctoral candidature has changed – there is more to understand

• The research environment has changed – it’s an interconnected world

• The expectations of stakeholders have changed – their demands impact on the

research and those that conduct it

• Not just technical knowledge but:

• ‘Know how’ and ‘can do’

• Personal practice and practical activities

• The ability to network

• Sense of strategy – a ‘big picture’

Shift from skills to behaviour, attributes and application

Cumming’s argument (2010) for a ‘holistic conception of doctoral education.’ • ‘…a broader and more holistic conception of doctoral

education.’• ‘Premise [is] that doctoral experience can no longer be depicted

narrowly, (apprenticeship, induction or Socialisation).’• ‘Doctoral candidates interact with a diverse range of individuals

from within and beyond the academy, engage in creative mixes of education, training, research, work and career development.’

• Rather than view these activities as discrete ‘silos’ – where established boundaries, epistemologies and cultures are maintained – the term ‘doctoral interface’ is used to capture the multifaceted nature of doctoral work and to highlight points of intersection.

• Individuals are embedded in a socio-cultural-historical context [not…] independent

actors positioned in relation to a contextual backdrop.

• Consequently, practice – as distinct from individuals or their environments – becomes

the primary unit of analysis.

• holistic conception of

doctoral education -

integrative model of

doctoral enterprise.

• doctoral practices and

arrangements deemed

mutually constituted and

continuously evolving.*

Applying Cumming’s Holistic Perspective

Jim Cumming, Doctoral enterprise: a holistic conception of evolving practices and arrangements: Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 35, No. 1, February 2010, 25–39. Society for Research into Higher Education

• If rigid boundaries between education, training, research, work

and career development at doctoral level maintained, ‘then

fragmentation, duplication and overlap are likely result.’

• Doctoral environment (PGRs and supervisors) now subject to –

continuous professional learning and KE activity

• ‘…[M]ain argument [is] that a broader and more holistic

perspective increases capacity for new thinking and acting in this

field.’**Cumming p. 37.

Cummings Main Argument

• Integrated training programmes set the agenda for Professional Holistic Development.

• Requires colleagues to full take on board employment destinations for doctoral researchers:

Need for a Holistic Approach – Principle drop-out reasons (Thesis Whisperer*):

Most often mentioned:• Bullying or disinterested supervisors• Loss of interest in the research / Lack of internal motivation (essentially drift)• Don’t want to be an academic anymore - no point in continuing. Worry that PhD might

make them ‘unemployable’. Mentioned less often were:• Being asked to do extra work to make the project ‘submittable’ (sometimes tied to lack of

good formative feedback along the way, but not always).• Mounting debt (interestingly, in the two institutions I have worked, this is the most often

stated reason for leaving a research degree, perhaps because it’s the most impersonal).• Not family / relationship / carer responsibility friendly• Desire to change disciplines/ topic, but difficulty in doing so• Failed lab work• Stress / exhaustion / mental health issues – like depression

*Thesis whisperer: http://thesiswhisperer.com/2014/03/26/why-do-people-quit-the-phd/

Summary• U of Liverpool model is light touch compulsory

• non-certificated – integral part of the PhD

• adaptable for different subject areas

• light on its feet (also cheap)

• Emphasises community learner and development approach –

sharing of problems and solutions – attacks ‘pluralistic ignorance’

• Social infrastructure formation – creates community

• Incorporates holistic understanding of PGR environment and

doctoral interfaces – what a PhD ‘means’

Summary (continued)

• Holistic approach addresses

stakeholder concerns and employer

needs

• Re-envisions the doctorate for

collaborative, externally focussed

research ventures

• Changed expectations – PGRs and

supervisors

• Agent for cultural change

Conclusions• Difficult for PGRs and supervisors to unconsciously avoid the

‘training prerogative.’• All institutions pay attention to the training agenda but for some it’s

lip service• For others it is a compulsory activity – if not across institutions then

within CDTs etc• Liverpool Programme seen as contributing to PGR retention and

good completion rates – Last week I genuinely thought about dropping out, am now much more motivated to see this through. Thanks :)

• BUT – training programmes and Graduate Schools must engage with the complexity and holistic conception of ‘what it means to do a PhD.’