13 rue Jacques Peirotes
67000 Strasbourg
+336 52 85 85 22
www.adoc-metis.com
Adoc Mètis : des outils pour déployer les talents de l’Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche
Results of a cross survey aimed
at PhD supervisors and doctoral
researchers in France
CoPhS – September 30 – October 2, 2024
Carole CHAPIN, Adoc Mètis
Barthélémy DURETTE, Solstice
Simon E.B. THIERRY, Adoc Mètis
2
Overview
●
Cross-survey aimed at doctoral supervisors (DS) and
doctoral researchers (DR)
●
Findings :
– Identification of situations that arise frequently for DS but for
which they are not satisfied with their reaction
– Perception discrepancies in the occurrence frequency of some
situations between DSs and DRs
– Supervisors willing to be trained are less satisfied with their
reactions than the others (DSs not willing to attend training, DSs
who already attended training)
3
Disclosure statement : Adoc Mètis
●
Consulting and training firm,
specialized in Human
Resources Management for
Higher Education and Research
(since 2012)
●
5 PhDs : consultants, trainers
and researchers
●
Trainings about
– Research methodology
– Equality & diversity
– Management (including doctoral
supervision)
– Pedagogy
4
Outline
●
Survey protocol
●
Impact of the scientific field
●
Frequent situations with unsatisfying practices
●
Frequency discrepancies between supervisors and doctoral
researchers
●
Impact of supervisory training
●
Conclusion
Survey protocol
CoPhS 2024
6
Cross-survey
Doctoral supervisors
304 exploitable answers
Mirror questions, e.g.
– “How often do you have to give advice to a doctoral researcher
regarding the scientific orientation of their project ?”
– “How often do you ask your supervisor for advice regarding the
scientific orientation of your project ?”
Doctoral researchers
1023 exploitable answers
Survey structure and anonymised results available on Zenodo (in French) : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4340821
7
Principles of the survey
Satisfaction : Likert scale
Survey structure and anonymised results available on Zenodo (in French) : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4340821
8
Principles of the survey
●
5 topics covered :
– Scientific supervision
– Supervisory relationship
– Advancement of the research project
– Skills development
– Career preparation
●
DR/DS comparisons : weighted answers
based on the numbers of DRs and
permanent researchers (data from the
french ministry for HER)1
●
Statistical analysis performed by 2nd
author (Barthélémy Durette)
Survey structure and anonymised results available on Zenodo (in French) : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4340821
1
Ministère de l’Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche, Etat de l’Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche, https://publication.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/eesr/FR/
9
Limitations
●
No information allowing us to link a supervisor’s answer
with their supervisees’ answers
●
Diffusion bias :
– Institutions we work with are more likely to have passed on the
survey
– People who attended our trainings are more likely to have opened
the email
●
Interest bias : people who answered are more likely to
believe that doctoral supervision is an important topic
Impact of the scientific field
CoPhS 2024
11
Impact of the scientific field
●
Our hypothesis : satisfaction with the
practices will vary according to the
scientific fields, with a strong
correlation with the funding levels of
each discipline
●
Findings :
– Significant impact of the discipline on the
frequency of some situations (see fig. on
the right)
– Non-significant impact of the discipline on
the satisfaction with the supervisory
practices
●
Our interpretation : hedonic treadmill +
anchoring bias
Examples of differences in the frequency of
occurrence (%age of DRs who answered
“sometimes” or “often”)
1) I delay the doctoral reseearcher's task to give
them time to overcome one of their difficulties
2) The specific characteristics of a doctoral
researcher require different treatment in terms
of supervision
3) I take a decision with which my doctoral
researcher disagrees
4) A doctoral researcher I'm supervising is finding it
hard to become independent
5) I need to help a doctoral researcher improve their
writing skills
Frequent situations with unsatisfying practices
CoPhS 2024
13
Occurence frequency according to supervisors
14
Frequent situations with unsatisfactory
practices
15
Frequent situations with unsatisfactory
practices
●
Situations that arise frequently according to doctoral supervisors
but for which they are unsatisfied with their reaction
– Assisting doctoral researchers with the administrative aspects of the
doctorate
– Delays in completing tasks in order to give doctoral researcher time to
overcome difficulties
– Planning doctoral researchers' writing tasks
– Improving doctoral researchers' writing skills
– Improving doctoral researchers' synthesis skills
●
Those topics are of interest for supervisory training
– Training content
– Training advertising
Frequency discrepancies between supervisors
and doctoral researchers
CoPhS 2024
17
Discrepancies in perception of occurrence
frequency
●
For some situations, the occurrence frequency mentioned by
supervisors does not seem compatible with the one mentioned
by doctoral researchers
●
Considering only people PhD holders (had the occasion to
encounter all situations) and supervisors of at least 5 doctoral
researchers :
– X = percentage of supervisees who encountered the situation
(sometimes+often)
– Probability of having never encountered the situation for a supervisor is at
most (1-x)5
“theoretical maximal percentage” of DSs answering “No,
→
never”
●
We isolated situations for which the percentage of “No, never”
was way higher than the “theoretical maximal percentage”
18
Situations with strong discrepancies
19
Supervisory tool
●
Situations where there is a strong discrepancy in
perception between DR and DS could be sources of
misunderstandings and conflicts
●
Could lead to an interview guide / interview
recommandations for supervisors : list of questions that
should be raised from time to time with doctoral
researchers
Impact of supervisory training
CoPhS 2024
21
Global satisfaction levels
●
Global satisfaction level for a
question : number of “little
unsatisfied” + number of “very
unsatisfied”
– No correlation between global
satisfaction and having attended a
training (p > 0,5)
– Among the untrained supervisors,
correlation between global
satisfaction and wanting to attend a
training (p < 0,05)
●
Global satisfaction level for a
given supervisor : mean value of
weighted answers (very
unsatisfied = 0 ; very satisfied = 4)
22
Our interpretations
●
Supervisors not willing to be trained : they are satisfied
with their practices and see no reason to be trained
●
Supervisors who encounter issues they can not tackle :
they are open to attending training
●
Supervisors who attended a training found the tools to
tackle difficult situations
Conclusion
CoPhS 2024
24
Summary
●
Cross survey with mirror questions
●
Identification of certain situations in which supervisors are
not satisfied, and which could be addressed during
training
●
Identification of issues on which perceptions differ, and
recommendation to supervisors to discuss them
●
Different levels of satisfaction depending on whether
you've been trained or not, interpretation pending further
inquiry
25
Perspectives
●
Qualitative study to dig further
– Interview supervisors and their supervisees, in order to better
determine differences in perception
– Ask supervisees about their satisfaction w/r to their supervision
and compare with whether or not their supervisors attended
training
●
Study the (un)satisfaction of trained supervisors in more
detail (situation by situation rather than with a global level
of satisfaction)
Thank you for your attention !
contact@adoc-metis.com

Results of a cross survey aimed at PhD supervisors and doctoral researchers in France

  • 1.
    13 rue JacquesPeirotes 67000 Strasbourg +336 52 85 85 22 www.adoc-metis.com Adoc Mètis : des outils pour déployer les talents de l’Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche Results of a cross survey aimed at PhD supervisors and doctoral researchers in France CoPhS – September 30 – October 2, 2024 Carole CHAPIN, Adoc Mètis Barthélémy DURETTE, Solstice Simon E.B. THIERRY, Adoc Mètis
  • 2.
    2 Overview ● Cross-survey aimed atdoctoral supervisors (DS) and doctoral researchers (DR) ● Findings : – Identification of situations that arise frequently for DS but for which they are not satisfied with their reaction – Perception discrepancies in the occurrence frequency of some situations between DSs and DRs – Supervisors willing to be trained are less satisfied with their reactions than the others (DSs not willing to attend training, DSs who already attended training)
  • 3.
    3 Disclosure statement :Adoc Mètis ● Consulting and training firm, specialized in Human Resources Management for Higher Education and Research (since 2012) ● 5 PhDs : consultants, trainers and researchers ● Trainings about – Research methodology – Equality & diversity – Management (including doctoral supervision) – Pedagogy
  • 4.
    4 Outline ● Survey protocol ● Impact ofthe scientific field ● Frequent situations with unsatisfying practices ● Frequency discrepancies between supervisors and doctoral researchers ● Impact of supervisory training ● Conclusion
  • 5.
  • 6.
    6 Cross-survey Doctoral supervisors 304 exploitableanswers Mirror questions, e.g. – “How often do you have to give advice to a doctoral researcher regarding the scientific orientation of their project ?” – “How often do you ask your supervisor for advice regarding the scientific orientation of your project ?” Doctoral researchers 1023 exploitable answers Survey structure and anonymised results available on Zenodo (in French) : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4340821
  • 7.
    7 Principles of thesurvey Satisfaction : Likert scale Survey structure and anonymised results available on Zenodo (in French) : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4340821
  • 8.
    8 Principles of thesurvey ● 5 topics covered : – Scientific supervision – Supervisory relationship – Advancement of the research project – Skills development – Career preparation ● DR/DS comparisons : weighted answers based on the numbers of DRs and permanent researchers (data from the french ministry for HER)1 ● Statistical analysis performed by 2nd author (Barthélémy Durette) Survey structure and anonymised results available on Zenodo (in French) : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4340821 1 Ministère de l’Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche, Etat de l’Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche, https://publication.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/eesr/FR/
  • 9.
    9 Limitations ● No information allowingus to link a supervisor’s answer with their supervisees’ answers ● Diffusion bias : – Institutions we work with are more likely to have passed on the survey – People who attended our trainings are more likely to have opened the email ● Interest bias : people who answered are more likely to believe that doctoral supervision is an important topic
  • 10.
    Impact of thescientific field CoPhS 2024
  • 11.
    11 Impact of thescientific field ● Our hypothesis : satisfaction with the practices will vary according to the scientific fields, with a strong correlation with the funding levels of each discipline ● Findings : – Significant impact of the discipline on the frequency of some situations (see fig. on the right) – Non-significant impact of the discipline on the satisfaction with the supervisory practices ● Our interpretation : hedonic treadmill + anchoring bias Examples of differences in the frequency of occurrence (%age of DRs who answered “sometimes” or “often”) 1) I delay the doctoral reseearcher's task to give them time to overcome one of their difficulties 2) The specific characteristics of a doctoral researcher require different treatment in terms of supervision 3) I take a decision with which my doctoral researcher disagrees 4) A doctoral researcher I'm supervising is finding it hard to become independent 5) I need to help a doctoral researcher improve their writing skills
  • 12.
    Frequent situations withunsatisfying practices CoPhS 2024
  • 13.
  • 14.
    14 Frequent situations withunsatisfactory practices
  • 15.
    15 Frequent situations withunsatisfactory practices ● Situations that arise frequently according to doctoral supervisors but for which they are unsatisfied with their reaction – Assisting doctoral researchers with the administrative aspects of the doctorate – Delays in completing tasks in order to give doctoral researcher time to overcome difficulties – Planning doctoral researchers' writing tasks – Improving doctoral researchers' writing skills – Improving doctoral researchers' synthesis skills ● Those topics are of interest for supervisory training – Training content – Training advertising
  • 16.
    Frequency discrepancies betweensupervisors and doctoral researchers CoPhS 2024
  • 17.
    17 Discrepancies in perceptionof occurrence frequency ● For some situations, the occurrence frequency mentioned by supervisors does not seem compatible with the one mentioned by doctoral researchers ● Considering only people PhD holders (had the occasion to encounter all situations) and supervisors of at least 5 doctoral researchers : – X = percentage of supervisees who encountered the situation (sometimes+often) – Probability of having never encountered the situation for a supervisor is at most (1-x)5 “theoretical maximal percentage” of DSs answering “No, → never” ● We isolated situations for which the percentage of “No, never” was way higher than the “theoretical maximal percentage”
  • 18.
  • 19.
    19 Supervisory tool ● Situations wherethere is a strong discrepancy in perception between DR and DS could be sources of misunderstandings and conflicts ● Could lead to an interview guide / interview recommandations for supervisors : list of questions that should be raised from time to time with doctoral researchers
  • 20.
    Impact of supervisorytraining CoPhS 2024
  • 21.
    21 Global satisfaction levels ● Globalsatisfaction level for a question : number of “little unsatisfied” + number of “very unsatisfied” – No correlation between global satisfaction and having attended a training (p > 0,5) – Among the untrained supervisors, correlation between global satisfaction and wanting to attend a training (p < 0,05) ● Global satisfaction level for a given supervisor : mean value of weighted answers (very unsatisfied = 0 ; very satisfied = 4)
  • 22.
    22 Our interpretations ● Supervisors notwilling to be trained : they are satisfied with their practices and see no reason to be trained ● Supervisors who encounter issues they can not tackle : they are open to attending training ● Supervisors who attended a training found the tools to tackle difficult situations
  • 23.
  • 24.
    24 Summary ● Cross survey withmirror questions ● Identification of certain situations in which supervisors are not satisfied, and which could be addressed during training ● Identification of issues on which perceptions differ, and recommendation to supervisors to discuss them ● Different levels of satisfaction depending on whether you've been trained or not, interpretation pending further inquiry
  • 25.
    25 Perspectives ● Qualitative study todig further – Interview supervisors and their supervisees, in order to better determine differences in perception – Ask supervisees about their satisfaction w/r to their supervision and compare with whether or not their supervisors attended training ● Study the (un)satisfaction of trained supervisors in more detail (situation by situation rather than with a global level of satisfaction)
  • 26.
    Thank you foryour attention ! contact@adoc-metis.com