Observing Relationships in International Doctoral Supervision

1. SOCIETY FOR RESEARCH IN HIGHER EDUCATION Boundary crossings in international doctoral supervision: contexts, cultures, confluences London, 16th September, 2015 SUPERVISING NON-BRITISH DOCTORAL CANDIDATES: MUTUAL EXPERIENCES AND LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES Professor Emeritus Vernon Trafford, Ph.D. Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, Essex CM1 1SQ Research Associate, Stellenbosch University vntrafford@gmail.com // www.vernontrafford.com

2. AN OBSERVATION Learning is at once the most natural and complex of processes. We who bear the task of shepherding this process often find ourselves amazed and energized as we watch the process unfold before us even as we respect, and are sometimes overwhelmed by, its complexity and nuance. Herein lies the promise and power of making students’ thinking visible: it offers us a window into the learning process itself. Source: Ritchard, Church and Morrison, 2011: 272 Professor Vernon Trafford

3. Always asking me ‘WHY?’ makes me think and then to understand issues. I am happy to read all your draft text ~ but only after you have checked it for accuracy, grammar, referencing, etc. Doing that will help you and it will make my job easier too. Just tell me what you would like me to write ~ PLEASE! Due to my business commitments, please could you arrange for my viva to be held in October, next year? I still do not understand what you mean by the term ‘conceptual frameworks’. It wasn’t needed in my Masters degree. And I got a distinction! Thank you! Could we adapt this material for a conference presentation or a journal article? I do not know how the education system operates in your country. Could you explain it so that I understand how you progressed academically to where you are now. Is it OK if we agree a schedule of meetings for this year, and note those weeks when I am not going to be available to see you? Professor Vernon Trafford

4. DOCTORAL THESES ARE EXPECTED TO CONTAIN EVIDENCE OF . . . . Originality and contribution to knowledge Critical thinking Confident use of language and the appropriate lexicon Demonstrating doctorateness Episteme ~ thinking like a researcher Explicit scholarship Use of conceptualisation Understanding research as an integrated process THE THESIS Professor Vernon Trafford

5. SOME DOCTORAL NUMBERS: 1987 - 2015 Doctoral supervisions Completed 56 First time passes 32 Failures Nil Overseas candidates 33 First time passes 12 Failures Nil Examinerships UK 43 Overseas 9 In: Australia, Finland, Sweden, South Africa Candidates’ country of origin Brunei Darussalam 1 China 1 Germany 2 Guyana 1 India 2 Ireland 2 Israel 19 Kenya 1 South Africa 2 USA 2 International doctoral activities Conferences 14 countries Workshops 17 countries Consultancies 5 countries Professor Vernon Trafford

6. OBSERVING RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CANDIDATES AND SUPERVISORS Expectations of self and of ‘the other’ Presumed status and role of self and ‘other’ Appreciation of others’ orms and values Influences on, and determinants of, the relationships Openness to cultural mores of others Talking/writing: comprehension/style Approach to learning and own development Familiarity with British doctoral processes Compliance with educational tradition(s) Professor Vernon Trafford

7. THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT A B Expectations that are known and are met will reinforce the positive relationships that exist between individuals in various ways. Mutually agreed expectations are likely to reinforce behaviour and be self-supporting between individuals. Jointly agreed intentions and actions are likely to be constantly met. If expectations are unknown then ‘the other’ cannot be certain how their actions will be received or interpreted. Unmet expectations will result in distrust, conflict, reduced collaboration and increased suspicion of ‘the other’. Improving such types of relationships involve high interpersonal sensitivity and is time consuming. EXPECTATIONS by A of B and by B of A Sources: Argyris, 1960; Blau, 1964; Schein, 1980 Professor Vernon Trafford

8. MUTUALITY OF EXPECTATIONS ~ in psychological contracts SUPERVISOR NEGOTIATEDCANDIDATE Transactional VARIABLES Relational • Age • Values • Gender • Institutional • regulations Reciprocal accountability Individual expectations Shared expectations Direct exchange Mutual reciprocity Economic exchange Moral precepts Social exchange Professor Vernon Trafford

9. FOUND WITHIN SUPERVISOR – CANDIDATE TRANSACTIONS Friendly weakness I’m not OK ~ you’re OK Hostile weakness I’m not OK ~ you’re not OK Friendly strength I’m OK ~ you’re OK Hostile strength I’m OK ~ you’re not OK These four combinations of possible attitudes show how an individual may feel about themselves and about others. They illustrate ‘feeling good’, ‘not feeling good’, ‘recognizing implied superiority or inferiority’ and ‘implying an intended relationship between self and other(s)’. These positions in supervisor – candidate relationships may reflect cultural values in action that support or hinder constructive and mutual collaboration. Interpersonal relationships exhibit combinations of thoughts, feelings and behaviours that exhibit conscious or unconscious ‘states’. They are expressed in verbal or non-verbal ways between individuals and within groups and may be changed by individuals or within groups. Culture and personal values will determine how these ‘states’ are used, or become acceptable forms of interpersonal relationships, between supervisors and candidates. Parent Parent Adult Adult Child Child These two forms of Transactional Analysis offer ways to interpret how the relationships between supervisors and candidates commence and develop or become frustrating and hinder joint progress. Source: Berne, 1964

10. SOME PROPOSITIONS When individuals from different cultural traditions work together, it is an opportunity for mutual learning and joint development rather than continuing ignorance of ‘the other’, misunderstandings or conflict. The cultural values and traditions of both parties may differ but each has importance thus they should be understood and respected so that they help rather than hinder the evolving interpersonal relationship. Supervisor – candidate relationships represent opportunities for extended deep learning when both parties are open to understanding the traditions, values, strengths and experiences of ‘the other’. Recognizing and acknowledging the obligations that each has towards the ‘respective success’ of the other, is the first step to establishing a harmonious doctoral relationship. Creating an academic relationship that is based on openness, honesty and trust may be a gradual process to achieve, but one that will cumulatively benefit both parties. Supervisors and candidates need to clarify ~ and agree ~ who owns the thesis, what role each has in the structuring, drafting and revising of text, plus who is responsible for proof reading and auditing the thesis to ensure that it is ready to be submitted to the university for examination. Professor Vernon Trafford

11. A FINAL THOUGHT There is nothing so practical as a good theory. Source: Lewin, K. 1952: 169 Professor Vernon Trafford

12. SOURCES Argyris, C. 1960. Understanding organizational behaviour. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press. Barnard, C.I. 1938. The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Berne, E. 1964. Games people play – the basic handbook of transactional analysis. New York: Ballentine Books Blau, P. 1964. Exchange and power in social life. Wiley: New York Coyle-Shapiro, J. A-M. and Parzefall, M. 2008. Psychological contracts. In: Cooper, C.L. and Barling, J. (eds.) The SAGE handbook of organizational behaviour. London: Sage Hetrick, S. and Trafford, V.N. 1996. The mutuality of expectations of dissertation supervisors and candidates in a postgraduate department of a new university. Journal of Graduate Education, 2.2.35-43 Lewin, K. 1952. Field theory in social science: selected theoretical papers. (D.Cartwright [ed]) London: Tavistock Ritchart, R., Church, M. and Morrison, K. 2011. Making thinking visible. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Rousseau, D. M. 1989. Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2.121-139 Rousseau, D.M. 1995. Psychological contracts in organizations: understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Schein, E. H. 1980. Organizational psychology. 3rd edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Trafford, V.N. and Leshem, S. 2008. Stepping stones to achieving your doctorate. Maidenhead: Open University Press Wisker, G. 2012. The good supervisor. Basingstoke: Palgrave. 2nd Ed.