I have now published my E-textbook "How to do Research: Today's Tips and Tools" to help students starting their post-graduate research. I deeply appreciate the international input received across all disciplines as to what supervisors / advisors need to tell their research students.
Supervisor should not compare between students, Because supervisor may have some students whose works are not time consuming or you can say they are lucky to get perfection in everywhere.Do not underestimate the other poor fellow who are not perfect now . Supervisor should be sticking with these type of students to get the best output rather comparing with his best one. Because it was the supervisor who selected that student and it is his duty to supervise him.
You can not expect a good positive result all the time. Some supervisor accuse student when they do not find positive result of an investigative study, lets say, anti inflammatory effect of ''A''. Its not necessarily that ''A'' got the desired effect, but many supervisors used to blame the student.
Though the relationship with the supervisor is professional, but if any family matters harm the student and thus affect the student, supervisor may come up as a friend and can provide mental strength.
A supervisor must know the psychology of the student.
A supervisor should be capable to understand the challenges and the opportunities his/her student may have to face during his/her research. Only an experienced researcher can become a good supervisor. But they should not restrict the thoughts of their student. Because a good researcher could be able to think beyond the established theories.
I heard a story that Max Plank, (famous for his Quantum theory) once requested Max Well to accept him as a research student in Optics. But Max Well rejected this request and restricted his thoughts that the Electromagnetic Wave Theory was perfect.
Supervisor should not compare between students, Because supervisor may have some students whose works are not time consuming or you can say they are lucky to get perfection in everywhere.Do not underestimate the other poor fellow who are not perfect now . Supervisor should be sticking with these type of students to get the best output rather comparing with his best one. Because it was the supervisor who selected that student and it is his duty to supervise him.
You can not expect a good positive result all the time. Some supervisor accuse student when they do not find positive result of an investigative study, lets say, anti inflammatory effect of ''A''. Its not necessarily that ''A'' got the desired effect, but many supervisors used to blame the student.
Though the relationship with the supervisor is professional, but if any family matters harm the student and thus affect the student, supervisor may come up as a friend and can provide mental strength.
A supervisor must know the psychology of the student.
Thank you for your contributions. Summarising,
Your supervisor should not limit your research or force you to follow in his/her footsteps.
Your supervisor should trust you to deliver the goods, and you should not
break this bond of trust. You need to communicate clearly with your
supervisor about what you have done and what you want from your
supervisor. If you do not clearly articulate what has been done and
what you need, your supervisor cannot encourage and help you. Your
supervisor should fairly encourage you to work to the highest standards
of research and ethics. But what does the new research student not know that
he/she needs to know?
I am quite a kid to comment in this discussion as time yet to come for me findning myself in a position to supervise somebody. Its time just to go through the views in this discussion. Thanks to Ian Kennedy, Gibies George,Md. Nazmul Islam and Munvar Shaik.
I share almost all the views expressed in this forum. True a supervisor should be capable of understanding potential as well as viewpoint of his student, he should not impose his views on the student and should not place all students in the same box. True, my experience is some students excell well and sometimes go beyond where their supervisor cannot face them. Well, any body has given thought that someimes supervisor is confronted with students going in wrong direction and in spite right instruction at the right time they end up with nothing. I don't call it a failure, it may be a new begnning. Another pont I would like that it is also the duty of the supervisor to bring his weak student if not at par (because a teacher can give knowledge not intelligence that includes common sense and in large part imagination) then certainly an respectable researcher who is able to justify his/her degree. And this is the very pressure where most of the supervisors break down. Otherwise, an intelligent student with common sense and imagination is capable of making his way.
Generally, a research degree is obtained for the sake of degree, there are very few students who take research to broaden their mental horizon in a specific field. To such students, research is a mechanical process whereby after completing one step comes another step and so on and finally there is ready a thesis. But, research is more than that. It is a creative activity like that of any artist. A person acculturated in a specific discipline after having knowledge experience in the core area of one's research, its overlaping and peripheral area is only capable of reproducing his knowledge experience into something new in that field like a musician, artists or dancers who express his/her experience in different ways never presented like that earlier.
Therefore, to me the first thing a supervisor should do is to ask his students to read lierature in peripheral and related areas of the theme of the research and report his/her supervisor what he/she has learnt and express his/her opinion about that and its relation to tth theme of the research. It will catalyst all capabilities of the student instead of making him/her a zombie or machine.
A supervisor should be wise enough to handle "science" as well as student. Science should not be a bounded thing with lots of constrains. So a supervisor should not give constrains for thoughts....because greater thoughts have come from greater misunderstandings................So ultimate freedom of thinking may give a new and fresh twist to the research.......
Bhavya: What I hear you say is that the student should be left to find and form his/her own idea of what the (physical) field is. I agree. But, should the student also be given enough freedom (or be forced) to find and form his/her own idea (ab initio) of what _research_ is?
Dr. Lan Kennedy: First of all let me thank you for giving response. I do agree with you. But initially when we start research we will be like totally blind. At that time a good supervisor can show the light to the right path ( I believe if he can do that, surely rest of the time also he will do). What I said is, when students come up with new ideas, a guide should support them, if it can give exciting or challenging results. Other part is most of the inventions have been started from failures. So if our guide is there to support, it will be a blessing. Am I right sir?
And I agree that guide should be strict too.........That can amend our behavior and that will make us systematic too......
The supervisor should kindly rekindle the student's curiosity and creativity, and strictly enforce research standards!
Maheshwary Singh, I fully agree with you. In my opinion first and most important duty of a supervisor is to direct his/her fellow researcher to the most appropriate reference material. If the supervisor succeed in that then an average research fellow can find his research topic and his objectives, because the first and foremost thing in research is to identify what is known and what is unknown. I strongly believe that 50% of research is over when one have finalize his topic and objectives. The remaining 50% is how to tackle technical and practical hurdles.
Sir, i believe, its interpretation! a supervisor doesn't wants to teach, cause a guy/girl is there to research with at least some basics, and students don't need a spoon feeding cause he/she should storm his brain when he for research! but at some point we are totally blank, and there is the role of a supervisor! but, I dont think this is what you want to write a book on! well, as a researcher all he want is motivation, in every point of research life, because all I find is trial and errors (both physically and mentally:P). So if you could please help them to motivate it helps a lot to outcome the situation.
Sir your doing a good job, a good supervisor is one who don't put their own views on the students just show way how to reach a goal and cooperate in all area. In research students life role of supervisor plays apern important role.
But all supervisor are unable to understand this one.
When performing a research work - the role of the supervisor is to identify the problem, train the students with the basics/fundamentals/test protocols and to provide the necessary tools to work with and a good work environment.
The role of the students is to execute the work with focus, write down all the observations inhis/her record book, discuss the observations/findings during the review meeting and refine the work periodically. If nessary, both the supervisor and the student has to discuss the issues with their peers.
Both the supervisor and the research student have to work together to make a useful contribution.
Pinpointing the mistakes/limiations does not help any one.
Once the research problem is identified then providing a good work environment and motivation is the primary duty of a supervisor.
To me perhaps identification of a problem to execute the work with focus following some protocol is a mechanical process that may lead one to his/her degree but shall not inculcate in him/her true spirit of research and its purpose. Following a set procedure generally researchers end up what others have already done are doing, here the purpose of research fails. Another flaw in this procedure is we very often fail to find out what is not known irrespective of the fact whether research is experiments or on data from research results of others or data published and material provided by laboratories as in the case of nuclear research. It is very often a little deviation from the set procedures that may result in new findings. How to deviate from the set procedure, a researcher may decide on the basis of literature in core, peripheral and areas related to theme of the research. No doubt even sometimes borrowing of methods and theory from different discipline may help a researcher to unfold reality that was not known earlier.
Hans Zwaga - What is the time frame do your recommend for executing these stages?
Hans Zwaga- Your ten-steps-plan sounds good given your experience and insight, but what about the students starting their post-graduate research. Can a student can develop the idea and start working in 8 weeks. If a student can do it, it means he/she was developing bsaics of the idea for a long time.
(The translation from Afrikaans was for the lurkers, not you. This is a global, public place!)
I think they should let them know that the most support comes at the beginning and after that the reading takes up so much time that they get cranky.....
Well, agreed many times tenacity of theory and in research process pays but ends up what is already known or may be deduced. It is mistake, some accident or some problem that is generally related as the cause of new findings or inventions, not the tenacity of theory or method. However, instead of shifting bones from grave to the other, very often an extensive and exhaustive knowledge experience results in something new, what people have not thought of before or experimented with.
Hi Peter:
I know words have meanings by their use i.e., the context in which they are used. I am sorry I misread the meanings of your use of tenacity. In fact, in philosophy of science and research tenacity is used for theories and methods which should have died but students and followers of proponents of these theories and methods keep alive and sometimes it pays. In the context of research process it generally means to follow strictly the laid down procedure or process.
It is good and O.K. if you have used it in the sense of "motivation" subsuming other concepts enumerated and explained by you. Thank you.
Think different..and Be Creative..that gives a Novel Idea..See Ya.
Ideally, research students should be taught the basics of research, provided with an outline of the research area and asked to explore the various possibilities.
The research students should be asked to think radically and suggest various avenues to solve a research problem. This should be made as a regular assignment.
The research students should be advised to follow the new leads that emerge while performing a research work. Most of the time, these new leads would be interesting and worth exploring.
The research students should be trained to perform uninhibited research, without losing track.
In a competing world, supervisors hesitate to give that much freedom and timeframe to their research students and most of the students do not want to venture any risk, making things simple and easy.
Thanks, EVERYbody. Now, I am asking the research students: What do you wish you had known before you started your research?
Ian, My comment is that supervisors can never assume that the post-grad student has the knowledge or understanding of the research process. It's a steep learning curve, and nobody but the student can do it, however as a PhD student, I really appreciate that my supervisors check that I understand what the next step in the process is and are happy to answer questions....making themselves available as needed.
I agree with the remarks of Peter Smetaniuk.
In my opinion, understanding science is like "blind men touching an elephant" (refer the following link to know more about this story).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant
We will never get a complete picture. Hence, all of us are learning every day.
Research is a continuous process... there is no end to it.
As many of the developments originate while we are doing something else, there is no beginning to it.
We are constantly re-searching it to get a better understanding and this process becomes a cycle.
I severely summarize the sentences above. (Reader's Digest version!): Researchers are lifelong learners. They look through a glass, darkly and try to see the truth. I am also trying hard!
What is the generic knowledge that we need to give our researchers who are starting with their research today in the modern world of the Web? I have two lists: (1) The programs and (2) the useful terminology. (1) The programs include Apache Open Office, ResearchGate (of course!), www.qiqqa.com/70557, WiredMarker, Google's Desktop, Scholar, and Translate services, BibTex, SWAN, Picasa. (2) The useful concepts include the subquestions, the subanswers, the keyphrase and keypaper, keyauthor, keyjournal, keyconference, the folksonomy, the thesis-book, the thesis-theme, the paper-chapters, the MyResearch subdirectory, the Master Documentation List, research templates. Can you add to my lists?
In my opinion, supervisors should make you more focused where one would like to research further.I think he should also have a good friendly,open minded attitude with his researchers in his responses. Supervisor also needs to participate in his/her research fellows works,if its so the research will be more productive and innovative, I think. He/She shall never assume that the post-grad student has the knowledge or understanding of the research process. It's a steep learning curve, and nobody but the student can do it, however as a PhD student, I really appreciate that my supervisors check that I understand what the next step in the process is and are happy to answer questions....making themselves available as needed. These are all my personal views and opinions and When I become a supervisor I would love to follow these views.
@Rekah: Thank you. I agree with you whole-heatedly. It is interesting that your answer does not include the word 'tell'!
@Sajida and Rekha: I agree. Your answers reveal how difficult the task of being a good supervisor can be!
I think supervision should be just what it means. The supervisor is not conducting the research for the student (a common mistake) rather he/she is making sure that the research is done according to acceptable or standard guidelines, protocols and deadlines. The supervisor has to 'peek into' the student's work from time to time so that these objectives can be met. However the student has to do the work himself / herself rather than being spoon fed. This requires a delicate balance of tact,diplomacy and firmness that most Supervisors have to master before they can be successful in their jobs.
My first response was to ask "about what?". This is a complex question & there is no simple answer. I teach a series of PG seminar about doing a PhD or professional doctorate & another series about writing a thesis/dissertation. I have just finished telling those canidiates that they need to consult their supervisors, and pay attendtion to what they says, but that a enrolling in a PhD implies an existing level of expertise both in the topic & as a researcher/writer. By the end of the process, they will be an expert, if not the expert, in the field.
I explain that discipline-based supervisors are expected to advise and guide their HDR candidates in terms of the subject matter, discipline expectations, acceptable standards & to some extent, the theoretical & methodological underpinnings of the study, but they should not expect their supervisors to tell them how to write questionnaire or structure a paragraph. There are plenty of resources available to help with those aspects of reserach, including people like me.
My own supervisor was an extarordinarily talented man, with a long & distinguished career. He was able to suggest resources that I had not found in my own literature reviews and help me clarify my ideas & argument, but he did not ever tell me what conclusions to draw o rhow to write.
@Iftikhar: I fully endorse your viewpoint.
Sadly many students do not know what supervision should be.
@Madeleine: Thanks for your reaction.
"About what?": I am trying to be as comprehensive as possible, while staying generic.
There is no reason why the PG student should not become the world's expert.
(They say that researchers get to know more and more about less and less, until they know everything about nothing!)
Pointing students to other resources is a very central theme (thesis) to my book.
We need to learn the methods and techniques of our talented
supervisors, but too often are we are caught up in not thinking about
the supervision process.
@Ravi: I agree that your list summarizes the relationship that the supervisor should have with the research student. But what should the supervisor TELL the student about research? E.g., processes, tools, tips?
@Ian: The word TELL is often a nebulous zone. The average student expects that the supervisor will tell all about research, whereas perhaps the most essential part of being a PhD candidate is to be able to do research according to international standard guidelines as independently as possible. After all, once the student qualifies, he/she will expect to be treated as an International figure with the global job market at his/her wish and commmand. Then why this dichotomy at the student level? If you want to be known as an internationally competent figure later on, you should start grooming yourself right from the first day of your student life. Obviously you are not going to acknowledge the supervisor when you appear for a job interview, but heap praises on your research work and achievements as a reseacher on an independent basis. So I say, the supervisor should merely be a good 'facilitator' for the student and provide all the resources required for a satisfactory research outcome..... but let the student use the resources independently 'under supervision'...
@Iftikhar: Your answer is spot on. It is the dichotomy which you describe so well that creates all the student (and supervisor) dissatisfaction and student drop out. So my question really is: What generic resources, required by the average novice researcher need to be provided by the supervisor? I am thinking of pointers to bookmarks, PDF library management software, theme extractors, citation and research paper databases, search tools. I am interested in tools and tips on planning, originality, reading, reviewing, 'de-chaosing', building the research, experimenting, being supervised, writing, ethics, statistics and vocabulary.
@ Ian: Thanks. I would suggest a logical approach re resources. If we go by the steps of systematic research, the first resource would be on finding a suitable research topic. For a good student, this is usually something he/she already has in mind and has done a bit of literature searching on. However for most students, if a database can be made of the latest research topics in each discipline by the Supervisor or the Library / IT managers, this would be a good start. Students can pick and choose from a variety of topics based on current research problems of the last one year or so. They would also be provided a database of research laboratories / centers where such projects (or related) projects are ongoing, so that they could visit / consult these and move ahead to choosing a really good project. To me, the most critical part of the program is suitable project selection. Plenty of time should be devoted to this, in particular from aspects of relevance and feasibility. Time spent here is well spent as it saves frustrations later on, if the wrong topic gets selected.
Further resources would revolve around step-wise completion of research projects.
@Iftikhar: Thanks. I agree that matching the research student to an interesting research question is vital for continued success. Time spent here is well worth it. Also, pointing to people who can help is vital, as you say.
Post-grad students are like babies in many ways: wanting to gather as much info as possible, entranced by details, and unable to grasp the big picture. Supervisors keep the student focused on the big picture. In view of this point, I'd add defining, narrowing down, and understanding the topic of a thesis as a key aim of supervision. With their research and writing experience supervisors can be a filter for the student's ideas. Filtering out unnecessary details ensures the student spends their time efficiently, researching and writing about only what concerns their thesis, not going off on tangents leaving them way over the word limit.
@Riz: Thanks. Paraphrasing what you said: The research student needs to clearly define his / her formal research question and what the implications are in finding a formal answer to that question. The supervisor needs to give the student full reins, but needs to pull in the reins when the student goes awry or loses focus.
i have read all the answers all of you comrades have given and i agree that the supervisor ought to be like a driving instructor who is alert lest the learner causes an accident along the road. The supervisor guides the researcher but the student ought to do the research.
@Rishikesh: Well said! This is indeed the case and accounts for selection and graduation of candidates who would otherwise be deemed unfit on merit. It is a sad story that the evils of society have crept into research, including medical research, so that now we cannot be certain if the piece of work published is authentic or otherwise. Previously, researchers were the holy grail of the medical profession and their honesty and repute above board; alas this is no longer the case. If research standards are lowered to the extent of selecting candidates on non-meritorius grouds, ultimately all of society will suffer. So do your bit to keep up the merit-based process in research.
@Ester, To continue your analogy: The supervisor should sit next to the candidate, giving general directions: "Go North!" But otherwise he should keep his mouth shut, unless a tree is about to hit the car, at which stage he should apply his dual control footbrake!
@Rishikesh: Are the menial tasks intended to force the student to say "Hey, I should not be doing this!"? @Iftikhar: Is there a *publicised* whistle-blowing process available?
@Ian: Unfortunately there isnt, or not to my knowledge as an organized activity. It happens that if the 'good' students complain to the University Administration about such practices, the Supervisors tend to mitigate their evil deeds and twist facts around to make the good student appear jealous or just plain spiteful....resulting in action against the whistle-blower.It happens that there is a kind of mafia operating in such places and the whole mafia works as a group to recruit their own type of candidate and see them through. They go to the extent of falsifying the research work, data, results, etc. Often the entire project is copied from some other source and altered enough to look genuine. Many people get away with it, some of the unlucky ones get caught.
I always start with the same question, "So why are you doing research?" Students tend to reply by talking about why they are researching their particular topic but then I push them to examine why they are doing research in general. Before you can 'do' research it helps to know WHY you want to 'do' it.
My second piece of advice is to get students away from the idea that research can only happen in big blocks of time where they need total isolation for three weeks so they can write a lit review. They need to find space in their day-to-day life to embed their research so that it becomes a natural part of what they do (like watching TV or having a beer). They should be reading the odd article in the bath or writing scrappy notes as they wait on a bus.
Finally, before students leave an hours supervision they should ask their supervisor to summarise they key points from the discussion and help them develop a 'to do' list. Too many students leave supervision no wiser than they were beforehand and some leave dazed and confused.
@Erik: Thanks for the good advice. I had a 3-B model for where research students have creative thoughts and should capture them: upon entering the Bath, Bus, Bed (and then as one student added: Bar!) I now have a 4-B model.
@Ian, love the 4-B model. It just goes to show that ideas/inspiration can come at any time and it is a good idea to be ready to record them somehow. I can't recall the number of time that I have had a 'great' idea and simply hoped that I would remember it later on. Of course, later on I remembered that I had had a great idea but I couldn't actually remember what the idea was.
Perhaps iphones can help. Most have voice record functions and students always seem to have one (or two) in their hand. Maybe we could encourage them to dictate these little epiphanies into their phones?
Yes, and my Ipod has a predictive notepad, ideal for taking down those brilliant ideas before they all evaporate.
Different schools leading to PhD with different requirements, hard to find a standard style to follow. However, in my openion, asking the research student to first prepare a good summary about the project involved. Then try to find a research paln to start the point. Here, I will discuss both the summary and plan with the student and try to make it better. My point is to teach the student how to search and evaluate and to wrtie a scientific report. Then to plan the future project. I will say here that care must be taken to clearly differentiate between objectives and activities (I want to prepare the student as a researcher but not as a techincian preforming work). I mean, activity is work performed, objectives are states to be reached. Self-dependant is also the target to be reached and the student has to think in a scientific way.
There is conflict in teaching self-dependence. The student views the supervisor as disinterested and remote. The supervisor regards the student as naive. Perhaps the first thing the supervisor should tell the student is that the student must learn to be independent.
@Ian: Really a sore point, most of the times, this idea of independance. I guess if I aim to make a PhD graduate able to totally plan and execute a research project, I will be happy. No doubt, research is a team work, but each member must be able to contribute an original line of work in the project independently. So the concept of independence in training must be done keeping the aim in mind: To make the PhD scientist able to do independent research work.
Dear Dr Ian Kennedy,
I shall be happy to provide you the desired inputs and several Links to my personal website that contains a few Research Papers -- one is on Teachers' Training.
About Me: http://consultant-law-education-india-nepal.in/author.htm
My Monograph (a Chapter from my Book titled 'HRD in Creative Organisations: R & D Institutes' -- it has been reviewed by Dr APJ Abdul Kalam, Dr Jayant V Narlikar and Dr PC Shejwalkar): http://consultant-law-education-india-nepal.in/monograph/
Paper on Teachers' Training (a Monograph which is under publication): http://consultant-law-education-india-nepal.in/misc/TeachersTraining.pdf
I wonder if you would like to join as a distinguished Member of the Advisory Editorial Board for PUL-SATOR -- we publish Research Papers that merit publication irrespective of the Author's "Affiliation":
http://consultant-law-education-india-nepal.in/ EditorialBoard.htm
http://consultant-law-education-india-nepal.in/ PUL-SATOR/
Regards,
I would suggest looking at prior books with good ideas for researchers such are "Advice for a Young Investigator" by Santiago Ramon y Cajal
@Mitchell. Thanks. That one slipped through my net. My time investment in RG is paying off at last.
A supervisor should be primarily involved in the students' research work, many a times, students feel its not the case! Supervisor should allow the student to choose his own area and idea of interest, for research and supervisor should basically be a proper friend, philosopher and guide, keeping in mind that finally the student has to work on his own but should not feel as of he is left alone! It comes, if the supervisor is interested! Proper directions by supervisor, I believe, should click ! Time management is another issue, which the supervisor should be aware of.
Dear Jaya K madam i am agree with your statement, but it is rare to see.
I hope in future situations are like your thinking only.
Hi sharanappa, yes it's rare but not difficult! Keeping the focus in mind, to help the student, keeping oneself in the students' shoes, I think, it will be easy to achieve. But the target should be clear, to support the students in achieving their goals! This will actually help the supervisor too, in getting mental satisfaction of playing an important role in someone's career and life !
Ian Kennedy, it's a very interesting question and several of the answers are also very interesting. I think most of the research supervisors/advisers fail to take a big picture view of the research as a multifaceted project. They emphasize too much on few of the aspects and leave several other equally important facets totally unattended. This is particularly true when we talk of the research carried out by students working to earn a degree, usually PhD. While pursuing research for PhD a student very often gets stuck and feels disappointed with his/her progress or achievement and reaches breaking point where he/she needs reassurance and motivation but the supervisors are so often overwhelmed with the timely completion or the quality of work that they remain completely indifferent to the student's emotional state. Such are the moments when emotional connection between a supervisor becomes vulnerable and often breaks down. That's when a supervisor looses his position as a true guru or mentor. Many a supervisors remain disillusioned that they only have to teach their students the processes for carrying out good research but I think a professor must know that in the process he/she is actually producing a future guru and a guru can't truly be a guru if he/she lacks human touch.
So I think there should be a whole chapter in the book emphasizing the emotional side of this very special relationship between a student and his/her adviser.
@ Rauf: The chapter is "Chapter 29: Working with your supervisor " I have stolen your phrase "the human touch" and inserted it in the chapter. Thanks a lot!
Hi Ian, I would very much like to see the book, hope I have contributed positively! All the best to you :))
@Jaya: Do you agree with this paraphrase of what you have written: Help your supervisor to get satisfaction from playing an important role
in developing your career. You can do this by getting your supervisor to become interested and involved in your research project.
If so, may I cite you in my book? (Jaya Kurhekar, 2013. Public communication, ResearchGate)?
I congratulate you on the attempt to write this book as I have read a few and none of them have been particularly helpful. I am writing a study guide for my university and realise how hard it is but one point I would like to add to the discussion is the following. Know your research question/hypothesis. Understanding what you are looking for will help with every part of the research, whether it is the questionnaire or the data selection, all of your choices will be defined by the answer you are trying to find. But remember research question is a question and not an answer! Don't try to find the answer that proves your hypothesis but rather find a question that will test the hypothesis without bias. The results will generate more questions and you should try to answer them but always keep the main question in your mind and don't stray to far.
A second point is that when you write up the research, present it as a story. Lead the audience through the hypothesis, methodology, results, discussion and conclusion. this should help the researcher to develop the cohesion within the paper.
I am sure many of the other comments will be more helpful but I feel that the research should have a clear philosophy and knowing the question and then telling it as a story should help to give that clarity in the finished paper.
Ian, yes, you can quote me, I would be glad! And yes, I believe in what I have quoted, it's true! I believe In helping people more than in troubling them , that's what sometimes, may be unknowingly, supervisors do! Please go ahead and quote me ! I once again maintain, I would like to see the book, if its not too much of a trouble, maybe through a link Or something? I am not so sure how?
I would tell them to use their research to make a difference in people's lives. Serve a community, a school, a country, the world. If researchers only serve their egotistic interests, they are like Dr.Frankenstein who wanted to become immortal by creating a human being with pieces from various dead bodies. In the end he created a monster. I would tell my students to read The Frankenstein by Mary Shelley.
Making a difference to peoples lives is an important motivating factor for some research students. Others may just wish to satisfy their curiosity.
Hi Ian,
My experience is that the supervisor should guide/assist the student in every possible way to acheive their goal while maintaining a positive attitude. Students with high IQ can be excellent in their academics with little efforts of guide, it is the poor students who needs much attention and efforts. My opinion is that actually these students hone the guiding skills of the supervisor.
I was really very lucky to have a very experienced and motivating supervisor during my days of postgraduation in Anatomy ie one of the preclinical subject of MBBS graduation.
@Ian that's Ok but I think if there was anything in my communication that could be quoted it was
" While pursuing research, particularly for a degree, a student very often gets stuck and feels disappointed with his/her progress or achievement and reaches breaking point where he/she needs reassurance and motivation but the supervisors are so often overwhelmed with the timely completion or the quality of work that they remain completely indifferent to the student's emotional state. Such are the moments when emotional connection between a supervisor becomes vulnerable and often breaks down. That's when a supervisor looses his position as a true guru or mentor. Many a supervisors remain disillusioned that they only have to teach their students the processes for carrying out good research but I think a professor must know that in the process he/she is actually making a future guru and one can't truly be a guru if he/she lacks human touch."
Best wishes for your book.
I am supporting Rauf Azam in this view.
A guide should give his student, motivation in the beginning, emotional support in the midway and appreciation in the later stage.
The Research Supervisor has to play many roles with the student like a Mentor, Friend , Parent sometimes, philosopher and a guide.
The first lesson supervisor should teach is no other than research Ethics.
Secondly, Develop Questioning attitude to identify problem areas.
Third, he should teach the basic methodology of doing research.
Fourth, proper direction while doing work.
Fifth Controlling emotions when he get stuck.
Sixth, Appreciate & encourage the work.
Seventh, create & cultivate habit for research.
Eighth,he should tell him to respect people & their Idea.
Along with this he should support him in all direction.
Hi Ian,
From personal experience, I would advice research students to first read and read and read everything published and related to their research area. This gives a much needed inspiration when it comes to generating new original ideas and solutions to their specific problems.
@Ian I think after so many interesting answers and the identification of so many things that the respondents think a supervisor should do and tell the research students in order to help them develop mastery there's a need to list them down and summarize them. Would you please care doing that?
@Rauf: Thanks for your good wishes. I have currrently have my editor's cap on. Clearly, there are real problems in the supervisor:student interface. I have clear guidelines on what a supervisor should do, but am always trying to improve on what the supervisor should TELL the student! The short list includes:
* Define your keyphrase. * Search, search, search. *Follow the citation bush. * Read fast, read slowly, read orderly. * Annotate, comment, highlight, tag. *Critisise, criticise, criticise. *Look for gaps. * Define and refine your research question. *Divide it into subquestions. *Modularise.*State your potential subanswers. *Decide your variables. *Operationalize them. *Consult people. *Prototype *Plan, plan, plan. *Experiment. *Make measurements. *Process your data. *Think, write, document, revise. *Loop back when necessary.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education
- Higher Education
- Academic Writing