Global Anthological Journal of Action Learning

Volume 2. Issue 2. 1998

http://www.imc.org.uk/imc/news/articles/f2f-roundup1.html

Doctoral Action Research Blossoms

but how can we design, supervise and publish it well?

Summary of grass roots debate held on Saturday,

24th April 1999, at APC, Cape Town, South Africa.

Anne Christie

Taking part in the discussion: Molly Ainslie, David Beadle, Malcolm Bennison, Joseph Bray, Anne Christie, Bryan Shaw, Ortrun Zuber-Skerritt.

Problems faced by Doctoral Associates

The short discussion began with a look at difficulties faced by Doctoral students and the main reasons why some students do not complete their Doctoral research. Isolation was highlighted as a contributing factor to failure, summed up neatly by Ortrun Zuber-Skerritt who used the phrase "the lonely researcher". It was also suggested that in some cases, inadequate supervision was to blame, while at times the expectation appeared to be that students should already KNOW how to work on their own.

Other barriers include; lack of confidence, students misunderstanding the role of the supervisor and poorly defined research topics. Malcolm Bennison explained that the definition of the research topic was crucial and that it was important to decide on a good area of research. Expanding on this issue, the group agreed that management could be a difficult area to define as, unlike some scientific research, there was not always a clear end to research or clear answers. Research could go on indefinitely if not handled properly. It is crucial to narrow down research questions - to make them more specific. David Beadle considered whether science students face different problems than arts students. One benefit of filling in forms before embarking on Doctoral research can be that Associates focus in on what they are trying to achieve, indeed group discussions on the chosen titles can also help people focus on their research topic. Workshops of this type can be very valuable, but Bryan Shaw concluded that often Doctoral students are reluctant to share ideas with others working on different topics. They do not always see the value of such collaboration. At a time when drop out rates among Doctoral researchers is high, solutions have to be considered.

It was felt that it is vital to get interaction within Sets going at an early stage, with workshops arranged sooner rather than later. A good rapport between Associates should be fostered in a friendly environment.

Working to a schedule

Looking at the problems of students not completing on time, it was stated that one UK university had taken drastic measures to encourage Doctoral researchers to bring their work to a close within a set time. Basically, it is "complete within four years or you fail." The point was also raised that attitudes to completing could be linked to cultural differences in certain cases. It was agreed that Associates are under mounting pressure these days and Malcolm wondered if time constraints may somehow devalue research.

Understanding the aims of research

Ortrun pointed out that Doctoral students could benefit from explaining the thinking behind their research to non-academics. This can be a useful exercise. Laymen often have a direct way of questioning and the researcher may gain valuable insight into his/her own work. If they are capable of discussing their aims in plain English, researchers will prove they have a clear understanding of what lies ahead.

While defining a research topic, Malcolm Bennison said we should consider the question "What is the worth of the study; can the knowledge gained be used?" He went on to say however, that Supervisors should take care not to dampen the enthusiasm of students.

The role of the supervisor

David Beadle suggested that Supervisors too can learn a lot from workshops and Ortrun went on to describe workshops where Supervisors are able to pose questions but not give advice. Everyone found this concept interesting. Supervisors as well as Associates ought to be clear of the role they play and regular training for Supervisors as an integral part of programmes, keeps Supervisors on track and up to date.

Publishing outcomes

The demand to get work published can increase the workload of Associates, but the effort should be worthwhile. Most agreed that Associates should aim to publish regularly as they go through the programme, not just at the end. While traditional refereed journals were recognized as being valuable to authors, online journals were also cited as worthwhile vehicles. Joseph Bray outlined the benefits offered by online publishers. New authors today have many opportunities to get their work in print and online journals provide a forum for them to cut their teeth, gain confidence and network with like-minded people.

All too quickly time ran out and the discussion came to a close. The group covered a range of issues related to Doctoral research and I hope I have succeeded in summarizing the main points.