Viewpoints on Supervision Presenter: Nigel Topham (PhD tutor)

1. Viewpoints on SupervisionPresenter: Nigel Topham (PhD tutor)

2. The supervisory team • Each student/supervisor relationship is different • Minimum of 2 supervisors (University Regulations) • Principal Supervisor • Responsible for daily and strategic direction • Member of School staff or from an Associated Institution who has been approved by College • Second Supervisor • Must be from School staff if principal supervisor is not • If outwith School appointed and agreed by Graduate School • Role varies depending on project

3. Student-supervisor relationship changes over time • 1st meeting: “What do I want from my PhD?” (career aspirations, skills,…) • Month 1: "What am I doing here?" • is there a project out there somewhere? • Months 2-3: "What should I do next" • is that where the project is? • Months 4-6: "This is what I've done so far - what should I do next?" • aha ... I've got a clue what the project is now! • Months 6-36: "This is what I've done and this is what I'm going to do next - is that OK?" • it's your project! – take ownership

4. Groundrules (from Code of Practice)Student to: • Work diligently, and meet expected standards • Be responsible for the academic quality of the thesis • Maintain regular contact with the supervisor, and submit work as required • Publish and present conference papers • Play a full role in the intellectual life of the School • Seek advice from supervisor (or others as appropriate), immediately if a problem arises

5. Survey of Supervisors’ Views Characteristics encouraged in research students • Enthusiastic, curious, open-minded, creative, critical • Soon takes ownership of and responsibility for project • Uses time effectively • Regular meetings/communication with supervisor • Appreciates that research does not always goes smoothly; takes constructive criticism well • Views PhD as an apprenticeship in research; small amount of good quality work Unhelpful characteristics • Does not inform supervisor of progress • Stuck in subordinate role, passive • Reactive rather than proactive • Thinks can write up in last 6 months • Avoids interaction with intellectual community

6. Groundrules (from Code of Practice)Supervisor to: • Be available throughout study period (or have made alternative arrangements) • Comment on written work within a reasonable time period • Provide access to appropriate equipment and advise on necessary training

7. Survey of PhD students Characteristics students like to see in supervisors • Honesty, enthusiasm, organised • Helpful, defend interests • Approachable, good listener, reassurance Characteristics that are unhelpful in supervisors • Too busy, absent, forgetful, controlling • Not committing enough time to you • Not finding out what you want from the PhD

8. What to do if things go wrong • Don’t panic! • Seek advice as soon as possible • Speak to your Supervisory Team • Speak to your Institute Director • Consult tutor for research students • Nigel Topham (or Alex Lascarides) • Speak to Head of Graduate School • Postgraduate Secretaries can offer advice on non-academic matters • University advice services

9. General advice • You are all perfectly capable of succeeding • So: • Be confident, • communicate your ideas to colleagues, • listen to others, and • seek out PhD “best practice” from others in your group / institute / school • Avoid common pitfalls • Impractical plans (or none at all) • Too much implementation, at the expense of innovation / novel ideas • Irregular or infrequent contact with supervisor • Getting diverted or tinkering / re-working previous results • Procrastination – “I’m OK, 3 years is a long time…”

10. Practical suggestions • Read a few Informatics PhD theses.. see what is expected • Break your work-plan down into 6 – 10 month chunks • Each one builds on previous achievements • Synchronize completion of ‘chunk’ with conference submission deadline • Avoids the ‘’all or nothing’’ problem • Provides externally-defined milestones (will keep you on track!) • Avoid common pitfalls • Impractical plans (or none at all) • Too much implementation, at the expense of innovation / novel ideas • Irregular or infrequent contact with supervisor • Getting diverted or tinkering / re-working previous results • Procrastination – “I’m OK, 3 years is a long time…”