What is a doctorate? A concept-mapped analysis of process versus product in the supervision of lab-based PhDs

Educational Research

Volumn 54, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 3-16

  Kandiko, Camille B ^a   Kinchin, Ian M ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

concept mapping; Doctoral education; lab based sciences; supervision

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857946533     PISSN: 00131881     EISSN: 14695847     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00131881.2012.658196     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Brew, A. 2003. Teaching and research: New relationships and their implications for inquiry-based teaching and learning in higher education. Higher Education Research and Development, 22(1): 3-18.
2. Burns, R., Lamm, R. and Lewis, R. 1999. "Orientations to higher degree supervision: A study of supervisors and students in education". In Supervision of Postgraduate Research in Education Edited by: Holbrook, A. and Johnston, S. 55-74. Australian Association for Research in Education, No. 5. Victoria: AARE
3. Charmaz, K. 2001. "Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis". In Handbook of interview research: Context and method, Edited by: Gubrium, J. and Holstein, J. 675-694. London: Sage Publications.
4. Crossley, M. and Watson, K. 2003. Comparative and international research in education: Globalisation, context and difference, London: RoutledgeFalmer.
5. Cullen, D., Pearson, M., Saha, L. J. and Spear, R. H. 1994. Establishing effective PhD supervision, Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
6. Curzon-Hobson, A. 2002. A pedagogy of trust in higher learning. Teaching in Higher Education, 7(3): 265-276.
7. Delamont, S., Atkinson, P. and Parry, O. 1998. Supervising the PhD: A guide to success, London: Society for Research into Higher Education.
8. Edmondson, K. M. 2000. "Assessing science understanding through concept maps". In Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view, Edited by: Mintzes, J., Wandersee, J. H. and Novak, J. D. 15-40. New York: Academic Press.
9. Gerstner, S. and Bogner, F. X. 2009. Concept map structure, gender and teaching methods: An investigation of students' science learning. Educational Research, 51(4): 425-438.
10. Grant, B. M. 2008. Agonistic struggle: Master and slave dialogues in humanities supervision. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 27(1): 9-27.
11. Gurr, G. M. 2001. Negotiating the 'rackety bridge' - a dynamic model for aligning supervisory style with research student development. Higher Education Research & Development, 20(1): 81-92.
12. Hay, D. B. and Kinchin, I. M. 2006. Using concept maps to reveal conceptual typologies. Education and Training, 48(2/3): 127-142.
13. Hay, D. B. 2007. Using concept maps to measure deep, surface and non-learning outcomes. Studies in Higher Education, 32(1): 39-57.
14. Hay, D. B., Wells, H. and Kinchin, I. M. 2008. Quantitative and qualitative measures of student learning at university level. Higher Education, 56(2): 221-239.
15. Hetrick, S. and Trafford, V. 1995. The mutuality of expectations: mapping the perceptions of dissertation supervisors and candidates in a postgraduate department of a new university. Journal of Graduate Education, 2(2): 36-43.
16. Hoffman, R. R. and Lintern, G. 2006. "Eliciting and representing the knowledge of experts". In Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance, Edited by: Ericsson, K. A., Charness, N., Feltovich, P. and Hoffman, R. 203-222. New York: Cambridge University Press.
17. Holbrook, N. J. 2005. Simulating scientific thinking online: an example of research-led teaching. Higher Education Research & Development, 24(3): 201-213.
18. Jarvis, P. 2006. Towards a comprehensive theory of human learning: Lifelong learning and the learning society, Vol. 1., London: Routledge.
19. Kam, H. 1997. Style and quality in research supervision: the supervisor dependency factor. Higher Education, 34(1): 81-103.
20. Kandiko, C. B. and Kinchin, I. M. PhD supervision as intellectual courtship. Society for Research into Higher Education (SRHE) Annual Conference 2009. 8-10 December. Celtic Manor, Newport, South Wales
21. Kandiko, C. B. and Kinchin, I. M. What is a PhD? Process versus product in PhD supervision. CMC 2010: 4th International Conference on Concept Mapping. October 2010. Vina del Mar
22. Kandiko, C. B., Kinchin, I. M. and Hay, D. B. PhD supervision: Mapping the cognitive change of students and their supervisors. Society for Research into Higher Education (SRHE) Annual Conference. 9-11 December. pp.9-11. The Adelphi Hotel, Liverpool
23. Kandiko, C. B., Kinchin, I. M. and Hay, D. B. PhD supervision: Concept mapping understanding across disciplines. Postgraduate Supervision Conference. 27-30 April. Stellenbosch
24. Kinchin, I. M. 2001a. Can a novice be viewed as an expert upside-down?. School Science Review, 83(303): 91-95.
25. Kinchin, I. M. 2001b. If concept mapping is so helpful to learning biology, why aren't we all doing it?. International Journal of Science Education, 23(12): 1257-1269.
26. Kinchin, I. M. 2004. Investigating students' beliefs about their preferred role as learners. Educational Research, 46(3): 301-312.
27. Kinchin, I. M. 2010. Solving Cordelia's dilemma: Threshold concepts within a punctuated model of learning. Journal of Biological Education, 44(2): 53-57.
28. Kinchin, I. M. 2011. "Relating knowledge structures to learning styles and university teaching". In Style differences in cognition, learning, and management, Edited by: Rayner, S. and Cools, E. 129-142. London: Routledge.
29. Kinchin, I. M., Cabot, L. B. and Hay, D. B. 2008. Visualising expertise: towards an authentic pedagogy for higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(3): 315-326.
30. Kinchin, I. M., DeLeij, F. A.A.M. and Hay, D. B. 2005. The evolution of a collaborative concept mapping activity for undergraduate microbiology students. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 29(1): 1-14.
31. Kinchin, I. M., Hay, D. B. and Adams, A. 2000. How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. Educational Research, 42(1): 43-57.
32. Kinchin, I. M. and Hay, D. B. 2005. Using concept maps to optimize the composition of collaborative student groups: a pilot study. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 51(2): 182-187.
33. Kinchin, I. M. and Hay, D. B. 2007. The myth of the research-led teacher. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13(1): 43-61.
34. Kinchin, I. M., Lygo-Baker, S. and Hay, D. B. 2008. Universities as centres of non-learning. Studies in Higher Education, 33(1): 89-103.
35. Kinchin, I. M., Streatfield, D. and Hay, D. B. 2010. Using concept mapping to enhance the research interview. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9(1): 52-68.
36. King, A. J., Bowe, J., Sprake, J. A. and Kinchin, I. M. 2011. In vivo laboratory practicals in research-led teaching: an example using glucose tolerance tests in lean and obese mice. Journal of Pharmacological and Toxicological Methods, 64(2): 166-172.
37. Kumar, V. and Stracke, E. 2007. An analysis of written feedback on a PhD thesis. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(4): 461-470.
38. Lee, A. 2008. How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3): 267-281.
39. Loewenstein, J. and Gentner, D. 2005. Relational language and the development of relational mapping. Cognitive Psychology, 50: 315-353.
40. Mainhard, T., van der Rijst, R., van Tartwijk, J. and Wubbels, T. 2009. A model for the supervisor-doctoral student relationship. Higher Education, 58(3): 359-373.
41. Meyer, J. and Land, R. 2003. "Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: linkages to ways of thinking and practicing within the disciplines. Occasional Report 4". In Enhancing teaching and learning environments in undergraduate courses, Edinburgh: ETL Project.
42. Murphy, N., Bain, J. and Conrad, L. 2007. Orientations to research higher degree supervision. Higher Education, 53: 209-234.
43. Nesbit, J. C. and Adesope, O. O. 2006. Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76(3): 413-448.
44. Novak, J. 2010. Learning, creating and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations, 2nd ed, Oxford: Routledge.
45. Novak, J. D. and Gowin, D. B. 1984. Learning how to learn, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. Pearson, M. and Brew, A. 2002. Research training and supervision development. Studies in Higher Education, 27(2): 135-150.
47. Pedrosa de Jesus, H. T., Almeida, P. A., Teixeira-Dias, J. J. and Watts, M. 2006. Students' questions: building a bridge between Kolb's learning styles and approaches to learning. Education and Training, 48(2/3): 97-111.
48. Phillips, E. M. and Pugh, D. S. 2005. How to get a PhD: A handbook for students and their supervisors, 4th ed, Berkshire: Open University Press.
49. Roberts, G. 2002. "SET for success: the supply of people with science, technology, engineering and mathematics skills. The report of Sir Gareth Roberts' review". London: HM Treasury.
50. Salmon, P. 1992. Achieving a PhD: Ten students' experiences, Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books.
51. Valter, K. and Akerlind, G. 2010. Introducing students to ways of thinking and acting like a researcher: A case study of research-led education in the sciences. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 22(1): 89-97.
52. Whisker, G. 2004. The good supervisor, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.