Fida Hasan - PhD is in itself a very open-ended exercise. Especially in the early stages – and sometimes for much longer – the goal is often unclear. Supervisor can help to define the parameters of the project and make them understand the realistic expectations of what they can achieve and must redefine the scope of their research as it proceeds. In this context, supervisors is required to guide the students throughout PhD and do their best to ensure the research is successful and thesis is of the required standard and regularly provide vital feedback on the final dissertation. Further, supervisor wants their students to be able to work and think independently and willing to take initiatives and responsibilities.

The advisor should help their students get the capability to propose their ower goals; meanwhile, he or she accompanies (just like a mother I recommend the book pf Prof. Gregor Novak https://www.amazon.com/-/es/Andrew-Gavrin-Wolfgang-Christian-Patterson/dp/B008VQR7OM) the formation process.

Hello Fida - The attached paper has some useful insights.

My list would include:

- Get to know your students, respect them, understand what makes them tick;

- Yes - assistance with research design including theoretical framework, research questions and appropriate methodology(ies);

- Reading/lit review suggestions

- Short-term target-setting

- Encouraging

- Prompt, balanced, constructive (but honest) feedback

- Meeting regularly (but negotiated)

- Wider support with academic development e.g. conference attendance; article writing

- Administering the candidature appropriately

- Towards end, quality assuring, constructive feedback on final thesis drafts (can be intensive)

- Appropriate, thoughtful suggestions for external examiners

- Maintaining a respectful post-doctoral relationship.

Peter

I think it depends on the individual (supervisors). Every institution is governed by a set of rules of what a supervisor can/cannot do. In my case though, I do not do the work for my students but I am always at their disposal guiding them, encouraging them, and providing feedback timeously and even within 24 – 48 hours. I do not leave them face the journey by themselves. As Supervisors, we have a key role to play in their development. Hence the term “super”- visor :-)

Fida, the support that the supervisor gives to the PhD student varies depending on the various stages that the student may be in. At the early stage, such support ranges from the clarification of the research problem, the research questions, aims and objectives etc... When the student is examining the literature review or embarking on data collection or presenting their findings and analysing them, the requisite support and its intensification shifts. In the latter stages of completing the write-up and the ultimate defence of the thesis, the support intensifies depending on the level of expertise that the student has gathered over the months and years. Therefore, the support provided to the student is an inclusive one as it may also include pastoral and academic. Interesting question.

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/comment/supervisors-can-do-a-lot-more-to-support-phd-students

For me it depends on the supervisor, some are willing and ready to give insight while some are always distant. The aim of PhD is to develop your ability for independent research and study.

The necessary level and intensity of support will depend on candidate skill level, but support around research habits and appropriate presentation of information are the areas where I feel support is the most meaningful. The willingness and ability to consistently provide supports will vary by supervisor.

Being overly helpful to a PhD student can rob them of the opportunity to become competent -- Supervisors should provide guidance but keep the direction to a minimum -- let the student make mistakes and learn from them. I have seen the results of PhD students being the assistant rather than the principal in the writing of their thesis -- the result is never pretty and I would never hire such graduates to teach and/or do research.

Chris Wright : Thanks for the input. With the growing competition, a supervisor also runs for the publication. I think PhD students are sort of their assistant in this process. On many occasion, to rapid up the publication requirements and process, the supervisor involves themselves to a greater extent. However, I am more keen to know the 'minimum support'. What is the minimum level of support a supervisor can offer, not being treat as the worst supervisor!

Christine Guella

Totally agree with you. Candidate's skill level is an important parameter to measure the required supports.

However, two areas can be consistent where require consistent input,

Thanks.

Fida Hasan: It takes more effort for a supervisor to not do the work but to guide, suggest, and shape. Supervisors who cannot put in that level of effort should not be supervising.

Hermann Gruenwald

I think this 'student selection' is the key. Independent and self-motivated students run their own projects and mentoring them is sort of blessing.

But on many occasion, I noticed that having such all-rounder is not always easy. If we select them considering their academic GPS, often they are not good in Research. If we ignore good result record and consider their research instance, well, on many occasion they are slow in the learning process and not independent.

Irrespective of everything, what should be the threshold for the support, anyway? Thanks.

Agree. I think the key is motivation along with skills.

Some country prefers 2 years Masters by thesis (100% research) before enrolling to PhD. Many others, however, allows 2 years Masters by course works with 33% research component as the PhD enrolment requirements.

Whether the candidates from such two backgrounds vary in their competencies in general?

Thanks.

Hermann Gruenwald

I think it is the responsibility of the supervisor to ensure that support is accorded to a PhD student from the point of proposal development until the submission of the final thesis for assessment by the external examiner. He/She must avail the PhD student with helpful suggestions that will drive the project to its logical conclusion and acceptance.

It is imperative to develop an academic relationship with the student as motivation. The need to drive the process through two to three-week goal setting by appointment and agreement. The advantage of keeping a record of online and/or offline meetings leads to possible joint publications. Linking the study to an overarching project compliments regular collaborative seminar sessions.

Hi, Fida: It depends on organizational parameters. Some institutions have guidelines about self-directed learning, where the student researcher drives the bus and the faculty is the co-pilot. At my org, the faculty member reviews the student's arguments and empirical supports for accurate representation in the manuscript while also working with other committee members to ensure a solid research and data collection plan.

As far as maintaining schedule, we have student expectations as well and as faculty, we can establish reasonable expectations with each individual researcher. Minimum conversations happen once per month, but most of us are in more frequent contact, particularly during covid!

It depends on the professor experience. If the professor found the student is active in research and eliciting the knowledge, the professor might need to push the student to make something worths it.

Too often I see questions here in ResearchGate that a thesis/dissertation advisor SHOULD be answering. so I think that many advisors/supervisors do not give enough help.

Hermann Gruenwald But student supposes to be the 'scrum master' of their project if we follow the agile model. Which essentially means they will drive their project. A mentor (supervisor) suppose to input in their intellectual development, and quality production, isn't it?

Artur, even though a lot of motivating students with independent thinking are doing their PhD, few issues stay underline

As you say, the doctoral candidates have to follow a line, rather than develop their own line of research - because of a particular personal (doktorvater's) scientific interest.

Institutions and university can pay less money as the doctoral candidates themselves are convinced that they are JUST students

More importantly, it is common among the current generation doctoral students being too ambitious but not realistic. 70% of them even expect that their supervisor should approve what they wrote, and few among them expect supervisors to write major part of thesis for them.

The support should be great to raise the morale of the Ph.D. student.

Supervising and being supervised are transformative actions--often it becomes difficult to disentangle what work is from the supervisor and what is from the student. However, the student must remain the principal of his/her thesis and must never become a mere assistant to the process. Ideally, eventually the student will exceed the supervisor and be able to provide competent supervision for future students -- that is how society progresses.

As much as is required within the constraints of the institution.

Support the candidate research project by advising him/her on the skills needed to successfully complete the PhD programme; and have good relationship with the candidate.

the supervisor is supposed to be able to lead such student and provide necessary guidance for such student.

Initially Supervisor should help student to select topic of research and then explain main features of research topic. Give ideas to formulate problems & suggest suitable method of solution. Also how to interprete the analytical & numerical results.

In my opinion, the supervisor with up-to-date knowledge should help the student to develop his / her intellectual scope, to be able to balance between ambitious and real aspirations and to create synergies between all his / her activities.