thesis supervisor author

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to footer

Tress Academic

#80: Do I have to include my supervisor as a co-author?

February 9, 2021 by Tress Academic

The co-authorship of supervisors on papers of their PhD students is a hot topic in academia. Should they be included or not? All sorts of rules, conventions, and rumours seem to exist. Let’s clarify a few of them here!  

1. Why worry about co-authorship of supervisors?

Oh dear, when we started to look into the question of whether PhD supervisors should be included as co-authors on a paper, we had no idea what kind of discussion we’d end up in. Of course, we always had our own opinion on it, but let us explain the situation: The question regarding whether PhD students should or must include their supervisors as co-authors/main author on the paper is a question that we get asked in almost every other course. Last time this question came up was only last week in one of our writing courses. So it must be a question of great interest to early-career researchers and PhD students! But it must also be a question that displays a lot of insecurity and perplexity. 

The answer to this question seems to be so easy because there are clear rules about what makes somebody an author on a paper and what does not. Ethical bodies dealing with publication ethics, like the COPE, CSE or ICMJE (see below) provide great guidance about authorship, and most journal publishers have adopted their suggestions. So it should be clear who is expected to be credited as an author and who is not. But having discussed it so many times in courses with students, we know a simple YES or a NO on the question above is not enough. So, we’re not providing a simple answer here either.  

2. The case of Rebecca and her supervisor

Rebecca is a 3rd year student in a biology programme and she told us her story: She is doing exciting research in a field that she loves. She’s highly motivated and brings a lot of energy and effort to her PhD work. The regulations of her university, where she will hopefully get awarded a PhD soon, require that she has to write and publish three papers in international peer-reviewed journals. Rebecca’s research is going fine, she is progressing well, and is just about one and a half months behind her original schedule for her PhD. She’s in a good mood and optimistic to bring the research work to an end, to get the papers published, and complete the degree. But she still has one big problem: She has no idea if she should include her supervisor as co-author on the paper.      

She spoke to many fellow PhD students and Postdocs and asked for their advice. The stories she heard were so diverse that she still has no idea how to do it right. Some suggested the supervisor has to be on every paper, while others said they wrote their papers totally without them, got no input and, consequently, did not include them as co-author. Another suggestion was to include the supervisor as the main author, even if they contributed very little because it might be helpful to have a “big name” as a first author on the paper. A former PhD student told Rebecca that in his lab, it was a “must” to include the supervisor as the last author on all the papers, regardless of whether they were written by Master students, PhD students or Postdocs. One friend directed Rebecca to another friend who did a PhD and included the supervisor on all his papers because he was afraid that if he didn’t do it, it would affect the successful completion of his doctorate. 

3. Is Rebecca a solitary case? 

No! We spoke to many people like Rebecca and it was surprising how diverse the advice was that students like her had received. But as diverse as the single stories are, they have one common thread: Co-authorship of supervisors on the papers of their PhD students seems to be dominated by confusion, fears, and a lack of communication. 

You can browse the web and you will find many references and cases that deal with all sorts of problems, opinions, conventions, and misconduct in the PhD student-supervisor relationship with regard to co-authorship on publications (see e.g. Find a PhD 2014 , Thompson 2017,  Academia Stackexchange 2018 ). Cases are even reported where supervisors either neglect to co-author with their students, or where they publish work from their PhD students without even considering the student as co-author (e.g. COPE 2010 ,  Hayter & Watson 2017 ). So, it is definitely a tense field in which we’re operating when trying to answer this question.

4. Who is an author on a paper?  

Luckily, you can find clear instructions in publication ethics guidelines. According to them, an author on a paper is somebody who has contributed to the research, written parts of the paper, reviewed successive manuscript versions, and taken part in the revision process. Sole provision of research funding or carrying out routine based activities that are linked to the research presented in a paper does not qualify for authorship ( COPE 2000 , CSE 2012 , ICMJE 2019 ).  

So let’s go back to our question: Do you have to include your supervisor as co-author on your papers? The answer is YES and NO!

5. No! Supervisors should not be included as co-authors!

There is no rule that says PhD supervisors have to be a co-author on a paper of their PhD students. So, you don’t have to include your supervisor due to one of the cases described below: 

• Just because they happen to be your supervisor. 
• They are in a hierarchically higher academic position than you.
• They are well-known and respected in the field.
• You think you have to be grateful and pay back your supervisor.
• You’ve been told that it is always done like that in your field. 
• You’ll feel guilty if you don’t include them as co-author. 
• You fear a negative impact on your PhD if you don’t do it.
• You have applied for a PhD position at your supervisor’s lab/institute and think you’re obliged to include them.  
• They provide funding for your project.  

6. YES! Supervisors should be included as co-authors!

We do not suggest that your supervisors have to be excluded in all circumstances from your paper. No! There are very valid and compelling reasons that make your supervisor a co-author on your paper, e.g. if …

• they contributed to your work
• they contributed to your writing
• they were advising you on the steps of the writing process
• if they provided substantial intellectual support for the work you publish
• if they provided substantial input to help you with the revision of the paper  

In the cases reported above, your supervisor is a natural co-author, and withdrawing their right to become a co-author would be a violation of publishing ethics. 

7. How to avoid a co-authorship dispute

Rebecca’s problem in the case reported above is obvious: She was never involved in any discussion with her supervisor about co-authorship on any of the three papers she has to do. She kept silent, and the supervisor didn’t initiate a talk about it. Both are operating on the assumption that things will work out in their interest. 

Another question deals with how far supervisors involve themselves in the research of their PhD students, and how much support they offer, but this is a different question which we’re not going to discuss at this time. Regardless of whether the supervisor has contributed a lot or only very little, it would have been wise for both PhD student and supervisor to sit together and get the co-authorship question out of the way. 

For Rebecca, it would have been helpful to get familiar with the rules that apply to her institute or faculty. She could speak to somebody at the university who can advise her independently. 

A good way to avoid the hassle and frustration from unsettled authorship-disputes would be to take the PhD student-supervisor relationship seriously, and let both sides do what they’re supposed to do: The supervisor is providing a supportive framework and involves themself in the student’s work only insofar as they allow the student to grow and reach their goal. Get your supervisor involved in your work, and then co-authorship will never be questioned.This would be mutually beneficial, and would provide benefits to both parties.

We hope that this article has helped you get a clearer idea of YOUR answer regarding the question of whether to include YOUR supervisor on your papers or not. Make a good decision, and then move on with your good work! 

Relevant resources: 

• Academia Stackexchange 2018. Telling PhD supervisor I published a paper about my thesis without telling them or listing them as authors?
• COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), 2000. The COPE Report 1999. Guidelines on good publication practice. Family Practice 17, 218-221.
• COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) 2010: Supervisor published PhD students work.  
• CSE (Scott-Lichter, D., the Editorial Policy Committee, Council of Science Editors) 2012. CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications, 2012 Update. 3rd Revised Edition. Wheat Ridge, CO.
• Find a PhD, 2014. Co-authorship with the supervisor.  
• Haytor, M., Watson, R. 2017. Supervisors are morally obliged to publish with their PhD students.
• ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors), 2019. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: Writing and editing for biomedical publication. Updated version April 2019.
• Thompson, P. 2017: Co–writing with your supervisor – the authorship question . 

More information: 

Do you want to successfully write and publish a journal paper? If so, please sign up to receive our free guides.  

© 2021 Tress Academic

#authorship, #WritingPapers, #PaperWriting, #publishing #journals, #supervision, #coauthor #PhD

Loading metrics

Open Access

Ten simple rules for choosing a PhD supervisor

Contributed equally to this work with: Loay Jabre, Catherine Bannon, J. Scott P. McCain, Yana Eglit

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

• Loay Jabre, 
• Catherine Bannon, 
• J. Scott P. McCain, 

Published: September 30, 2021

• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330
• Reader Comments

Citation: Jabre L, Bannon C, McCain JSP, Eglit Y (2021) Ten simple rules for choosing a PhD supervisor. PLoS Comput Biol 17(9): e1009330. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330

Editor: Scott Markel, Dassault Systemes BIOVIA, UNITED STATES

Copyright: © 2021 Jabre et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

The PhD beckons. You thought long and hard about why you want to do it, you understand the sacrifices and commitments it entails, and you have decided that it is the right thing for you. Congratulations! Undertaking a doctoral degree can be an extremely rewarding experience, greatly enhancing your personal, intellectual, and professional development. If you are still on the fence about whether or not you want to pursue a PhD, see [ 1 , 2 ] and others to help you decide.

As a PhD student in the making, you will have many important decisions to consider. Several of them will depend on your chosen discipline and research topic, the institution you want to attend, and even the country where you will undertake your degree. However, one of the earliest and most critical decisions you will need to make transcends most other decisions: choosing your PhD thesis supervisor. Your PhD supervisor will strongly influence the success and quality of your degree as well as your general well-being throughout the program. It is therefore vital to choose the right supervisor for you. A wrong choice or poor fit can be disastrous on both a personal and professional levels—something you obviously want to avoid. Unfortunately, however, most PhD students go through the process of choosing a supervisor only once and thus do not get the opportunity to learn from previous experiences. Additionally, many prospective PhD students do not have access to resources and proper guidance to rely on when making important academic decisions such as those involved in choosing a PhD supervisor.

In this short guide, we—a group of PhD students with varied backgrounds, research disciplines, and academic journeys—share our collective experiences with choosing our own PhD supervisors. We provide tips and advice to help prospective students in various disciplines, including computational biology, in their quest to find a suitable PhD supervisor. Despite procedural differences across countries, institutions, and programs, the following rules and discussions should remain helpful for guiding one’s approach to selecting their future PhD supervisor. These guidelines mostly address how to evaluate a potential PhD supervisor and do not include details on how you might find a supervisor. In brief, you can find a supervisor anywhere: seminars, a class you were taught, internet search of interesting research topics, departmental pages, etc. After reading about a group’s research and convincing yourself it seems interesting, get in touch! Make sure to craft an e-mail carefully, demonstrating you have thought about their research and what you might do in their group. After finding one or several supervisors of interest, we hope that the rules bellow will help you choose the right supervisor for you.

Rule 1: Align research interests

You need to make sure that a prospective supervisor studies, or at the very least, has an interest in what you want to study. A good starting point would be to browse their personal and research group websites (though those are often outdated), their publication profile, and their students’ theses, if possible. Keep in mind that the publication process can be slow, so recent publications may not necessarily reflect current research in that group. Pay special attention to publications where the supervisor is senior author—in life sciences, their name would typically be last. This would help you construct a mental map of where the group interests are going, in addition to where they have been.

Be proactive about pursuing your research interests, but also flexible: Your dream research topic might not currently be conducted in a particular group, but perhaps the supervisor is open to exploring new ideas and research avenues with you. Check that the group or institution of interest has the facilities and resources appropriate for your research, and/or be prepared to establish collaborations to access those resources elsewhere. Make sure you like not only the research topic, but also the “grunt work” it requires, as a topic you find interesting may not be suitable for you in terms of day-to-day work. You can look at the “Methods” sections of published papers to get a sense for what this is like—for example, if you do not like resolving cryptic error messages, programming is probably not for you, and you might want to consider a wet lab–based project. Lastly, any research can be made interesting, and interests change. Perhaps your favorite topic today is difficult to work with now, and you might cut your teeth on a different project.

Rule 2: Seek trusted sources

Discussing your plans with experienced and trustworthy people is a great way to learn more about the reputation of potential supervisors, their research group dynamics, and exciting projects in your field of interest. Your current supervisor, if you have one, could be aware of position openings that are compatible with your interests and time frame and is likely to know talented supervisors with good reputations in their fields. Professors you admire, reliable student advisors, and colleagues might also know your prospective supervisor on various professional or personal levels and could have additional insight about working with them. Listen carefully to what these trusted sources have to say, as they can provide a wealth of insider information (e.g., personality, reputation, interpersonal relationships, and supervisory styles) that might not be readily accessible to you.

Rule 3: Expectations, expectations, expectations

A considerable portion of PhD students feel that their program does not meet original expectations [ 3 ]. To avoid being part of this group, we stress the importance of aligning your expectations with the supervisor’s expectations before joining a research group or PhD program. Also, remember that one person’s dream supervisor can be another’s worst nightmare and vice versa—it is about a good fit for you. Identifying what a “good fit” looks like requires a serious self-appraisal of your goals (see Rule 1 ), working style (see Rule 5 ), and what you expect in a mentor (see Rule 4 ). One way to conduct this self-appraisal is to work in a research lab to get experiences similar to a PhD student (if this is possible).

Money!—Many people have been conditioned to avoid the subject of finances at all costs, but setting financial expectations early is crucial for maintaining your well-being inside and outside the lab. Inside the lab, funding will provide chemicals and equipment required for you to do cool research. It is also important to know if there will be sufficient funding for your potential projects to be completed. Outside the lab, you deserve to get paid a reasonable, livable stipend. What is the minimum required take-home stipend, or does that even exist at the institution you are interested in? Are there hard cutoffs for funding once your time runs out, or does the institution have support for students who take longer than anticipated? If the supervisor supplies the funding, do they end up cutting off students when funds run low, or do they have contingency plans? ( Fig 1 ).

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330.g001

Professional development opportunities—A key aspect of graduate school training is professional development. In some research groups, it is normal for PhD students to mentor undergraduate students or take a semester to work in industry to get more diverse experiences. Other research groups have clear links with government entities, which is helpful for going into policy or government-based research. These opportunities (and others) are critical for your career and next steps. What are the career development opportunities and expectations of a potential supervisor? Is a potential supervisor happy to send students to workshops to learn new skills? Are they supportive of public outreach activities? If you are looking at joining a newer group, these sorts of questions will have to be part of the larger set of conversations about expectations. Ask: “What sort of professional development opportunities are there at the institution?”

Publications—Some PhD programs have minimum requirements for finishing a thesis (i.e., you must publish a certain number of papers prior to defending), while other programs leave it up to the student and supervisor to decide on this. A simple and important topic to discuss is: How many publications are expected from your PhD and when will you publish them? If you are keen to publish in high-impact journals, does your prospective supervisor share that aim? (Although question why you are so keen to do so, see the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment ( www.sfdora.org ) to learn about the pitfalls of journal impact factor.)

Rule 4: It takes two to tango

Sooner or later, you will get to meet and interview with a prospective PhD supervisor. This should go both ways: Interview them just as much as they are interviewing you. Prepare questions and pay close attention to how they respond. For example, ask them about their “lab culture,” research interests (especially for the future/long term), and what they are looking for in a graduate student. Do you feel like you need to “put on an act” to go along with the supervisor (beyond just the standard interview mode)? Represent yourself, and not the person you think they are looking for. All of us will have some interviews go badly. Remember that discovering a poor fit during the interview has way fewer consequences than the incompatibility that could arise once you have committed to a position.

To come up with good questions for the prospective supervisor, first ask yourself questions. What are you looking for in a mentor? People differ in their optimal levels of supervision, and there is nothing wrong with wanting more or less than your peers. How much career guidance do you expect and does the potential supervisor respect your interests, particularly if your long-term goals do not include academia? What kind of student might not thrive in this research group?

Treat the PhD position like a partnership: What do you seek to get out of it? Keep in mind that a large portion of research is conducted by PhD students [ 4 ], so you are also an asset. Your supervisor will provide guidance, but the PhD is your work. Make sure you and your mentor are on the same page before committing to what is fundamentally a professional contract akin to an apprenticeship (see “ Rule 3 ”).

Rule 5: Workstyle compatibility

Sharing interests with a supervisor does not necessarily guarantee you would work well together, and just because you enjoyed a course by a certain professor does not mean they are the right PhD supervisor for you. Make sure your expectations for work and work–life approaches are compatible. Do you thrive on structure, or do you need freedom to proceed at your own pace? Do they expect you to be in the lab from 6:00 AM to midnight on a regular basis (red flag!)? Are they comfortable with you working from home when you can? Are they around the lab enough for it to work for you? Are they supportive of alternative work hours if you have other obligations (e.g., childcare, other employment, extracurriculars)? How is the group itself organized? Is there a lab manager or are the logistics shared (fairly?) between the group members? Discuss this before you commit!

Two key attributes of a research group are the supervisor’s career stage and number of people in the group. A supervisor in a later career stage may have more established research connections and protocols. An earlier career stage supervisor comes with more opportunities to shape the research direction of the lab, but less access to academic political power and less certainty in what their supervision style will be (even to themselves). Joining new research groups provides a great opportunity to learn how to build a lab if you are considering that career path but may take away time and energy from your thesis project. Similarly, be aware of pros and cons of different lab sizes. While big labs provide more opportunity for collaborations and learning from fellow lab members, their supervisors generally have less time available for each trainee. Smaller labs tend to have better access to the supervisor but may be more isolating [ 5 , 6 ]. Also note that large research groups tend to be better for developing extant research topics further, while small groups can conduct more disruptive research [ 7 ].

Rule 6: Be sure to meet current students

Meeting with current students is one of the most important steps prior to joining a lab. Current students will give you the most direct and complete sense of what working with a certain supervisor is actually like. They can also give you a valuable sense of departmental culture and nonacademic life. You could also ask to meet with other students in the department to get a broader sense of the latter. However, if current students are not happy with their current supervisor, they are unlikely to tell you directly. Try to ask specific questions: “How often do you meet with your supervisor?”, “What are the typical turnaround times for a paper draft?”, “How would you describe the lab culture?”, “How does your supervisor react to mistakes or unexpected results?”, “How does your supervisor react to interruptions to research from, e.g., personal life?”, and yes, even “What would you say is the biggest weakness of your supervisor?”

Rule 7: But also try to meet past students

While not always possible, meeting with past students can be very informative. Past students give you information on career outcomes (i.e., what are they doing now?) and can provide insight into what the lab was like when they were in it. Previous students will provide a unique perspective because they have gone through the entire process, from start to finish—and, in some cases, no longer feel obligated to speak well of their now former supervisor. It can also be helpful to look at previous students’ experiences by reading the acknowledgement section in their theses.

Rule 8: Consider the entire experience

Your PhD supervisor is only one—albeit large—piece of your PhD puzzle. It is therefore essential to consider your PhD experience as whole when deciding on a supervisor. One important aspect to contemplate is your mental health. Graduate students have disproportionately higher rates of depression and anxiety compared to the general population [ 8 ], so your mental health will be tested greatly throughout your PhD experience. We suggest taking the time to reflect on what factors would enable you to do your best work while maintaining a healthy work–life balance. Does your happiness depend on surfing regularly? Check out coastal areas. Do you despise being cold? Consider being closer to the equator. Do you have a deep-rooted phobia of koalas? Maybe avoid Australia. Consider these potentially even more important questions like: Do you want to be close to your friends and family? Will there be adequate childcare support? Are you comfortable with studying abroad? How does the potential university treat international or underrepresented students? When thinking about your next steps, keep in mind that although obtaining your PhD will come with many challenges, you will be at your most productive when you are well rested, financially stable, nourished, and enjoying your experience.

Rule 9: Trust your gut

You have made it to our most “hand-wavy” rule! As academics, we understand the desire for quantifiable data and some sort of statistic to make logical decisions. If this is more your style, consider every interaction with a prospective supervisor, from the first e-mail onwards, as a piece of data.

However, there is considerable value in trusting gut instincts. One way to trust your gut is to listen to your internal dialogue while making your decision on a PhD supervisor. For example, if your internal dialogue includes such phrases as “it will be different for me,” “I’ll just put my head down and work hard,” or “maybe their students were exaggerating,” you might want to proceed with caution. If you are saying “Wow! How are they so kind and intelligent?” or “I cannot wait to start!”, then you might have found a winner ( Fig 2 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330.g002

Rule 10: Wash, rinse, repeat

The last piece of advice we give you is to do this lengthy process all over again. Comparing your options is a key step during the search for a PhD supervisor. By screening multiple different groups, you ultimately learn more about what red flags to look for, compatible work styles, your personal expectations, and group atmospheres. Repeat this entire process with another supervisor, another university, or even another country. We suggest you reject the notion that you would be “wasting someone’s time.” You deserve to take your time and inform yourself to choose a PhD supervisor wisely. The time and energy invested in a “failed” supervisor search would still be far less than what is consumed by a bad PhD experience ( Fig 3 ).

The more supervisors your interview and the more advice you get from peers, the more apparent these red flags will become.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330.g003

Conclusions

Pursuing a PhD can be an extremely rewarding endeavor and a time of immense personal growth. The relationship you have with your PhD supervisor can make or break an entire experience, so make this choice carefully. Above, we have outlined some key points to think about while making this decision. Clarifying your own expectations is a particularly important step, as conflicts can arise when there are expectation mismatches. In outlining these topics, we hope to share pieces of advice that sometimes require “insider” knowledge and experience.

After thoroughly evaluating your options, go ahead and tackle the PhD! In our own experiences, carefully choosing a supervisor has led to relationships that morph from mentor to mentee into a collaborative partnership where we can pose new questions and construct novel approaches to answer them. Science is hard enough by itself. If you choose your supervisor well and end up developing a positive relationship with them and their group, you will be better suited for sound and enjoyable science.

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• PubMed/NCBI
• 5. Smith D. The big benefits of working in a small lab. University Affairs. 2013. Available from: https://www.universityaffairs.ca/career-advice/career-advice-article/the-big-benefits-of-working-in-a-small-lab/

Supervisor as coauthor in writing for publication: Evidence from a cohort of non-native English-speaking Master of Education students

• Original Paper
• Published: 20 January 2021
• Volume 1 , article number  44 , ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Weipeng Yang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8057-2863 1 ,
• Yongyan Li   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8130-7041 2 &
• Hui Li   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9355-1116 3  

958 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Existing studies on writing for publication have focused on doctoral students and junior scholars, leaving those non-native English-speaking (NNES) Master’s students understudied. This article presents a case study of the challenges and coping strategies shared by the six purposively selected NNES Master’s students, who have each successfully published in an international academic journal with their supervisor. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the students and their supervisor, and their research proposals, manuscripts and publications were collected and analysed. The results indicated that: (1) the topics co-constructed by the students and their supervisor laid a solid foundation for their success in journal publication; (2) all the case students demonstrated a long-term commitment to academia and proactively coped with numerous challenges during their writing-for-publication processes; and (3) ‘supervisor as coauthor’ was found to be a successful strategy, with co-revision at its core.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Writing in doctoral programs: examining supervisors’ perspectives

Ethical and Practical Considerations for Completing and Supervising a Prospective PhD by Publication

Mentoring Junior Scientists for Research Publication

Data availability.

The data are not publicly available due to their containing information that could compromise the privacy of research participants.

This Chinese saying originates in Difan [帝範], a collection of advice provided by the first emperor of the Tang Dynasty, Li Shimin (known as Tang Taizong) (598–649), to his children.

After receiving their Master’s degree, five of the six participants went on to pursue a doctoral degree (except Jia who was working in a kindergarten at the time when the interviews were conducted).

Anderson C, Day K, McLaughlin P (2006) Mastering the dissertation: lecturers’ representations of the purposes and processes of Master’s level dissertation supervision. Stud High Educ 31(2):149–168

Article   Google Scholar  

Anderson C, Day K, McLaughlin P (2008) Student perspectives on the dissertation process in a masters degree concerned with professional practice. Stud ContinuEduca 30(1):33–49

Belcher D (1994) The apprenticeship approach to advanced academic literacy: Graduate students and their mentors. EnglSpecifPurp 13(1):23–34

Google Scholar  

Casanave CP (2019) Performing expertise in doctoral dissertations: thoughts on a fundamental dilemma facing doctoral students and their supervisors. J Second Lang Writ 43:57–62

Creswell JW (2014) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 4th edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA

Cuthbert D, Spark C, Burke E (2009) Disciplining writing: the case for multi-disciplinary writing groups to support writing for publication by higher degree by research candidates in the humanities, arts and social sciences. High Educ Res Dev 28(2):137–149

Dowd JE, Connolly MP, Thompson RJ Jr, Reynolds JA (2015) Improved reasoning in undergraduate writing through structured workshops. J Econ Educ 46(1):14–27

Drennan J, Clarke M (2009) Coursework master’s programmes: the student’s experience of research and research supervision. Stud High Educ 34(5):483–500

Flowerdew J (1999) Problems in writing for scholarly publication in English: the case of Hong Kong. J Second Lang Writ 8(3):243–264

Florence MK, Yore LD (2004) Learning to write like a scientist: coauthoring as an enculturation task. J Res Sci Teach 41(6):637–668

Greaney AM, Sheehy A, Heffernan C, Murphy J, Mhaolrúnaigh SN, Heffernan E, Brown G (2012) Research ethics application: a guide for the novice researcher. Br J Nurs 21(1):38–43

Ho MC (2017) Navigating scholarly writing and international publishing: individual agency of Taiwanese EAL doctoral students. J EnglAcadPurp 27:1–13

Huang JC (2010) Publishing and learning writing for publication in English: perspectives of NNES PhD students in science. J EnglAcadPurp 9(1):33–44

Hyland K (2012) Welcome to the machine: thoughts on writing for scholarly publication. J Second Lang Teach Res 1(1):58–68

Kamler B (2008) Rethinking doctoral publication practices: writing from and beyond the thesis. Stud High Educ 33(3):283–294

Kramer B, Libhaber E (2016) Writing for publication: institutional support provides an enabling environment. BMC Med Educ 16(1):115

Lave J, Wenger E (1991) Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Book   Google Scholar  

Lee A, Boud D (2003) Writing groups, change and academic identity: research development as local practice. Stud High Educ 28(2):187–200

Lee A, Kamler B (2008) Bringing pedagogy to doctoral publishing. Teach High Educ 13(5):511–523

Lei J, Hu G (2015) Apprenticeship in scholarly publishing: a student perspective on doctoral supervisors’ roles. Publications 3(1):27–42

Li Y (2006) A doctoral student of physics writing for publication: a sociopolitically-oriented case study. EnglSpecifPurp 25(4):456–478

Li Y (2016) Chinese postgraduate medical students researching for publication. Publications 4(3):25

Li Y, Li D, Yang W, Li H (2020) Negotiating the teaching-research nexus: a case of classroom teaching in an MEd program. N Zeal J Educ Stud 55(1):181–196

Luo N (2015) Two Chinese medical master’s students aspiring to publish internationally: a longitudinal study of legitimate peripheral participation in their communities of practice. Publications 3(2):89–103

Martín P, Rey-Rocha J, Burgess S, Moreno AI (2014) Publishing research in English-language journals: attitudes, strategies and difficulties of multilingual scholars of medicine. J EnglAcadPurp 16:57–67

Martinez R, Graf K (2016) Thesis supervisors as literacy brokers in Brazil. Publications 4(3):26

McGrail MR, Rickard CM, Jones R (2006) Publish or perish: a systematic review of interventions to increase academic publication rates. High Educ Res Dev 25(1):19–35

Page-Adams D, Cheng LC, Gogineni A, Shen CY (1995) Establishing a group to encourage writing for publication among doctoral students. J Soc Work Educ 31(3):402–407

Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative research and evaluation methods, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA

Simpson S (2013) Systems of writing response: a Brazilian student’s experiences writing for publication in an environmental sciences doctoral program. Res Teach Engl 48(2):228–249

Thorpe A, Snell M, Davey-Evans S, Talman R (2017) Improving the academic performance of non-native English-speaking students: the contribution of pre-sessional English language programmes. High Educ Q 71(1):5–32

Wenger E (1998) Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Yang W, Li Y, Zhou W, Li H (2020) Learning to design research: students’ agency and experiences in a Master of Education program in Hong Kong. ECNU Rev Educ 3(2):291–309

Yin RK (2014) Case study research: design and methods, 5th edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors wish to thank the students who took part in the study, for their time and cooperation.

This work was supported by the General Research Fund (Research Grants Council) under Grant No. 17607517.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

S R Nathan School of Human Development, Singapore University of Social Sciences, Singapore, Singapore

Weipeng Yang

Faculty of Education, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China

Macquarie School of Education, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

WY carried out the research and drafted the manuscript. YL and HL provided important ideas for the research and helped to draft the manuscript. All of the authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Weipeng Yang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interest.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Yang, W., Li, Y. & Li, H. Supervisor as coauthor in writing for publication: Evidence from a cohort of non-native English-speaking Master of Education students. SN Soc Sci 1 , 44 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-020-00044-y

Download citation

Received : 20 July 2020

Accepted : 25 November 2020

Published : 20 January 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-020-00044-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Academic supervision
• Master of Education
• Non-native English-speaking students
• Supervisor as coauthor
• Writing for publication
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Our websites may use cookies to personalize and enhance your experience. By continuing without changing your cookie settings, you agree to this collection. For more information, please see our University Websites Privacy Notice .

Enrichment Programs

Individualized & Interdisciplinary Studies Program

Guide for thesis supervisors.

Thank you for supervising an individualized major senior thesis project. Your expertise is critical in guiding the student’s project and setting the criteria for its evaluation. The guidelines below outline some considerations particular to individualized major students. They are most appropriate for traditional research projects but may also be relevant to less traditional final projects.

All individualized majors complete a capstone, which provides them an opportunity to integrate knowledge they have acquired during the course of their majors. About 40-45 percent of individualized majors do so by completing a thesis. (The rest complete our capstone course or an approved alternative.)

Thesis projects usually take the form of a traditional research study, but other formats, such as a photo essay, film, website, or piece of creative writing are also possible. Thesis projects, whatever their form, should contribute to the development of knowledge or practice in new ways, involve significant background research, and require sustained attention in the implementation of the project. If the final product takes a less traditional form, it should include a piece of writing that describes the student’s learning process.

Thesis Courses

Some thesis projects will comprise six credits completed over the course of two semesters. This is mandatory for students completing Honors Scholar requirements in their individualized major. Non-honors students may complete a one-semester, three-credit thesis project. Students intending to complete a thesis project must submit a thesis proposal  which they have discussed with their thesis supervisor no later than the last day of classes of the semester before they begin their thesis.

In the social sciences and humanities : In the Fall semester of the senior year, students will typically begin their research by enrolling in a thesis-related research seminar, graduate course, or independent study in their thesis supervisor’s department. During the Spring semester, students will enroll in UNIV 4697W Senior Thesis (for which the thesis supervisor serves as instructor) in which they will complete the research and write the thesis. During this process, the student meets regularly with the thesis supervisor for feedback on data collection, evidence gathering, analysis, and writing.

In the sciences , students may follow a more extended sequence, perhaps two to three semesters of data collection and laboratory work (independent studies or research courses) followed by thesis writing (UNIV 4697W) in the final semester.

Learning Outcomes

Individual faculty will differ in expectations regarding research methodology, theoretical approaches, and presentation of findings. Nonetheless, there are some general criteria and intended learning outcomes for all individualized major thesis projects.

• The student’s research, analysis, and writing on the thesis project should be relevant to their individualized major and represent an opportunity for them to integrate and deepen at least several aspects of study in the major.
• A thesis should do more than summarize the existing literature on a particular topic. It should make an original contribution to the field of study, present new findings in the form of new data, or new, critical interpretations of existing material. It should reflect a good command of the research methodologies in the relevant discipline(s).

Upon completion of the thesis project the student should be able to:

• Define a research question and design a substantial research project.
• Select a methodological approach to address the research question.
• Identify appropriate sources and collect relevant and reliable data that addresses the research question.
• Analyze the strengths and limitations of different scholarly approaches to the question, and recognize the resulting interpretative conflicts.
• Develop an argument that is sustained by the available evidence
• Present that argument in a clear, well-organized manner.

Requirements for Honors Students

As noted above, all Honors students are expected to complete at least six credits of thesis-relevant coursework. In addition, all Honors students are expected to have a second reader and make a public presentation of their thesis project.

Second Reader

We ask Honors students to identify a second reader for their thesis from a relevant discipline, which may be the same as, or different from, the supervisor’s discipline. The second reader will provide the student with a different perspective and may provide additional insights on how to achieve the intended learning outcomes of the thesis. The thesis supervisor, in consultation with the student, determines when to bring the second reader on board. It is the supervisor’s prerogative to define how the grade for the thesis will be determined.

Public Presentation

Honors students are required to make a public presentation of their thesis research in a format negotiated with the thesis supervisor. Where possible, the audience should include the thesis supervisor, the second reader, and an IISP staff member. Other faculty members and the student’s peers may be invited to join the audience, as well.

Existing departmental exhibitions or “Frontiers in Undergraduate Research” make excellent venues for student presentations. If a student cannot find a venue for his or her presentation, please consult with IISP and we will coordinate one.

Note: Although non-Honors students who are completing a thesis are not required to have a second reader or make a public presentation, we would certainly welcome them to do so.

Honors Advising

An IISP staff member serves as Honors Advisor to each individualized major following an Honors Scholar plan of study. The staff member’s role as an Honors advisor is to coordinate and facilitate students’ plans for completing Honors Scholar requirements, including the thesis, and to monitor progress toward completion.

Thesis Course Registration

Specific instructions for registering for UNIV 4697W are available on the Capstone page .

We very much appreciate your willingness to supervise an individualized major’s senior thesis. If you have any questions about the Individualized Major Program or about supervising an individualized major thesis, please contact IISP staff .

Duties of a thesis supervisor and the supervision plan

The instruction belongs to the following themes.

• Supervising theses

Search for degree programme

Open university programmes.

• Open university Flag this item

Bachelor's Programmes

• Bachelor's Programme for Teachers of Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Agricultural Sciences Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Applied Psychology Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Art Studies Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Biology Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Chemistry Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Computer Science (TKT) Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Cultural Studies Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Economics Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Education: Class Teacher (KLU, in Swedish) Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Education: Class Teacher, Education (LO-KT) Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Education: Class Teacher, Educational Psychology (LO-KP) Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Education: Craft Teacher Education (KÄ) Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Education: Early Education Teacher (SBP) Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Education: Early Education Teacher (VO) Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Education: General and Adult Education (PED, in Swedish) Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Education: General and Adult Education (YL and AKT) Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Education: Home Economics Teacher (KO) Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Education: Special Education (EP) Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Environmental and Food Economics Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Environmental Sciences Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Food Sciences Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Forest Sciences Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Geography Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Geosciences Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in History Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Languages Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Law Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Logopedics Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Mathematical Sciences Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Molecular Biosciences Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Pharmacy Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Philosophy Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Physical Sciences Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Politics, Media and Communication Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Psychology Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Science (BSC) Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Social Research Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Social Sciences Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Society and Change Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in the Languages and Literatures of Finland Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Theology and Religious Studies Flag this item
• Bachelor's Programme in Veterinary Medicine Flag this item

Master's and Licentiate's Programmes

• Degree Programme in Dentistry Flag this item
• Degree Programme in Medicine Flag this item
• Degree Programme in Veterinary Medicine Flag this item
• International Masters in Economy, State & Society   Flag this item
• Master ́s Programme in Development of health care services Flag this item
• Master's Programme for Teachers of Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Agricultural Sciences Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Agricultural, Environmental and Resource Economics Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Area and Cultural Studies Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Art Studies Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Atmospheric Sciences (ATM) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Changing Education Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Chemistry and Molecular Sciences Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Computer Science (CSM) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Contemporary Societies Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Cultural Heritage Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Culture and Communication (in Swedish) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Data Science Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Economics Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Education: Class Teacher (KLU, in Swedish) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Education: Class Teacher, Education (LO-KT) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Education: Class Teacher, Educational Psychology (LO-KP) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Education: Craft Teacher Education (KÄ) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Education: Early Education (VAKA) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Education: General and Adult Education (PED, in Swedish) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Education: General and Adult Education (YL and AKT) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Education: Home Economics Teacher (KO) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Education: Special Education (EP) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in English Studies Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Environmental Change and Global Sustainability Flag this item
• Master's Programme in European and Nordic Studies Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Finnish and Finno-Ugrian Languages and Cultures Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Food Economy and Consumption Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Food Sciences Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Forest Sciences Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Gender Studies Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Genetics and Molecular Biosciences Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Geography Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Geology and Geophysics Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Global Politics and Communication Flag this item
• Master's Programme in History Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Human Nutrition and Food-Related Behaviour Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Integrative Plant Sciences Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Intercultural Encounters Flag this item
• Master's Programme in International Business Law Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Languages Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Law Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Life Science Informatics (LSI) Flag this item
• Master's programme in Linguistic Diversity and Digital Humanities Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Literary Studies Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Logopedics Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Materials Research (MATRES) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Mathematics and Statistics (MAST) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Microbiology and Microbial Biotechnology Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Neuroscience Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Particle Physics and Astrophysical Sciences (PARAS) Flag this item
• Master's programme in Pharmaceutical Research, Development and Safety Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Pharmacy Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Philosophy Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Politics, Media and Communication Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Psychology Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Russian, Eurasian and Eastern European Studies Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Scandinavian Languages and Literature Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Social and Health Research and Management Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Social Research Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Social Sciences (in Swedish) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Society and Change Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Theology and Religious Studies Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Theoretical and Computational Methods (TCM) Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Translation and Interpreting Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Translational Medicine Flag this item
• Master's Programme in Urban Studies and Planning (USP) Flag this item
• Master’s Programme in Global Governance Law Flag this item
• Nordic Master Programme in Environmental Changes at Higher Latitudes (ENCHIL) Flag this item

Doctoral Programmes

• Doctoral Programme Brain and Mind Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Atmospheric Sciences (ATM-DP) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Biomedicine (DPBM) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Chemistry and Molecular Sciences (CHEMS) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Clinical Research (KLTO) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Clinical Veterinary Medicine (CVM) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Cognition, Learning, Instruction and Communication (CLIC) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Computer Science (DoCS) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Drug Research (DPDR) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Economics Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Food Chain and Health Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Gender, Culture and Society (SKY) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Geosciences (GeoDoc) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in History and Cultural Heritage Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Human Behaviour (DPHuB) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Integrative Life Science (ILS) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Interdisciplinary Environmental Sciences (DENVI) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Language Studies (HELSLANG) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Law Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Materials Research and Nanoscience (MATRENA) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Mathematics and Statistics (Domast) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Microbiology and Biotechnology Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Oral Sciences (FINDOS) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Particle Physics and Universe Sciences (PAPU) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Philosophy, Arts and Society Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Plant Sciences (DPPS) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Political, Societal and Regional Changes (PYAM) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Population Health (DOCPOP) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in School, Education, Society and Culture Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Social Sciences Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Sustainable Use of Renewable Natural Resources (AGFOREE) Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Theology and Religious Studies Flag this item
• Doctoral Programme in Wildlife Biology (LUOVA) Flag this item

Specialist training programmes

• Multidisciplinary studies for class teachers (teaching in Finnish) Flag this item
• Multidisciplinary studies for class teachers (teaching in Swedish) Flag this item
• Non-degree studies for special education teachers (ELO) Flag this item
• Non-degree studies for special education teachers (LEO) Flag this item
• Non-degree studies for special education teachers (VEO) Flag this item
• Non-degree studies in subject teacher education Flag this item
• Spe­cific Train­ing in Gen­eral Med­ical Prac­tice Flag this item
• Specialisation Programme in Clinical Mental Health Psychology Flag this item
• Specialisation Programme in Neuropsychology Flag this item
• Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Environmental Health and Food Control (old) Flag this item
• Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Equine Medicine (old) Flag this item
• Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Food Production Hygiene Flag this item
• Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Infectious Animal Diseases (new) Flag this item
• Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Production Animal Medicine (old) Flag this item
• Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Small Animal Medicine (old) Flag this item
• Specialisation Studies in Community and Hospital Pharmacy (for B.Sc.Pharm.) Flag this item
• Specialisation Studies in Community and Hospital Pharmacy (for M.Sc.Pharm.) Flag this item
• Specialisation Studies in Industrial Pharmacy (for B.Sc.Pharm.) Flag this item
• Specialisation Studies in Industrial Pharmacy (for M.Sc.Pharm.) Flag this item
• Specialist Training in Dentistry Flag this item
• Specialist Training in Hospital Chemistry Flag this item
• Specialist Training in Hospital Microbiology Flag this item
• Specialist Training in Medicine, 5-year training Flag this item
• Specialist Training in Medicine, 6-year training Flag this item
• Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Environmental Health and Food Control Flag this item
• Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Equine Medicine (new) Flag this item
• Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, general veterinary medicine Flag this item
• Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Infectious Animal Diseases (new) Flag this item
• Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Production Animal Medicine (new) Flag this item
• Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Small Animal Medicine (new) Flag this item
• Trainer Training Programme in Integrative Psychotherapy Flag this item
• Training Programme for Psychotherapists Flag this item
• Language Centre
• Open University

Supervision work is closely linked to the intended learning outcomes of the degree and thesis as well as the related grading criteria. In accordance with the Regulations on Degrees and the Protection of Students’ Rights at the University of Helsinki, the student must receive instruction both during their studies and while writing their thesis.  See here for instructions on ensuring that your supervision is aligned with the learning outcomes.

On this page

Supervision principles.

The Rector decides on the principles of supervision, including the rights and obligations of the student and the supervisor. The degree programme’s curriculum must contain instructions on how to prepare a personal study plan, along with the practices for approving and updating the plan. Please review the curriculum of your faculty and the thesis grading criteria in order to ensure that your supervision is aligned with the learning outcomes.

In the Rector’s decision, supervision refers to the support provided for the student’s or doctoral candidate’s learning process as they change, gain experience and grow as an expert. As a whole, supervision consists of communication, advice, instruction and special guidance. Supervision and counselling can be organised in a group led by the supervisor, at a seminar, in a peer group of students or doctoral candidates organised by the supervisor or in a personal meeting separately agreed between the supervisor and the student/doctoral candidate. Supervision and counselling can also be provided electronically through, for example, Moodle or other teaching tools available. 

Members of the teaching and research staff provide counselling that is related to teaching and research and requires knowledge of the content of different studies and disciplines. This counselling may concern, for example, personal study plans or thesis supervision. 

Guidance and counselling are provided in the Finnish and Swedish-language and multilingual degree programmes in Finnish or Swedish depending on the student’s native language or in English or another language as agreed with the student. If the student’s native language is a language other than Finnish or Swedish, guidance and counselling are provided in English or, if agreed with the student, in another language. In English-language master’s programmes and doctoral programmes, guidance can also be provided solely in English.

The degree programme steering group is responsible for ensuring that each student is appointed with a primary supervisor who is responsible for the supervision of their thesis. Additional supervisors may also be appointed. Your supervision plan can be used to agree on the responsibilities related to the supervision.

Supervision as interaction and the supervision plan

Supervision is about interaction with responsibilities that are divided between the different parties of the supervision relationship. Ambiguities related to supervision are often due to the parties’ different expectations regarding the content and responsibilities of the supervision and the fact that the parties are often unaware of the others’ expectations. Below, you can find a table that serves as a great tool for considering the different rights and obligations related to supervision

The policies and practices of supervision should be discussed in the early stages of the thesis process. The supervisor and the student may also prepare a written supervision plan that clarifies the schedule for the supervision and the thesis work as well as the content of the supervision. The plan can also be utilised if any problems arise or you fall behind schedule.

Topics the supervisor should incorporate in the supervision

When supervising a student’s thesis work, remember to pay attention to the following topics:

• the responsible conduct of research and avoiding cheating
• guiding the student in matters related to data protection  
• matters related to open access publications and the public availability of theses  
• inform the student of the general process of thesis examination and approval and the related schedule 

Different faculties may have their own decisions and instructions on thesis supervision. Please read the instructions provided by your faculty.

See also the Instructions for Students

You will find related content for students in the Studies Service.

Bachelor’s theses and maturity tests

Thesis and maturity test in master's and licentiate's programmes.

• Instructions for students
• Notifications for students

School of Graduate Studies

Supervisor guidelines for the doctoral thesis, doctoral thesis.

The doctoral thesis is the culmination of advanced studies and rigorous research in a field of study. It is the pinnacle of the student’s doctoral program. Although the thesis is indisputably significant, it is also important to remember that the doctoral thesis is just one of many steps along the student’s career path and should therefore be well-defined and manageable. 

At the University of Toronto, the term ‘thesis’ is generally used to refer to the culminating project for either a Master’s or a doctoral degree. At other institutions and in other countries, the term ‘dissertation’ is more commonly used at the doctoral level. This document uses the term ‘thesis’ to refer to a doctoral thesis, but supervisors or departments may prefer the term ‘dissertation’. 

Doctoral thesis writers have often written a Master’s thesis (or a Major Research Paper) earlier in their careers. A doctoral thesis will have elements in common with those projects while also needing to offer a higher degree of originality and a broader scope. 

The doctoral thesis has been historically written as a unified work, similar in form to a scholarly monograph; this traditional format remains the norm in some disciplines. In other disciplines, the traditional thesis has been replaced by a publication-based thesis in which a series of scholarly publications on the same research problem are combined into a coherent whole. Today, there is a growing acceptance of more flexible formats and structures that aim to enhance professional practice or that include creative scholarly artefacts such as film, audio, visual, and graphic representations. There is also growing recognition of the need to welcome Indigenous forms of knowledge building and dissemination. Regardless of format or structure, all doctoral theses must meet the fundamental requirements of demonstrating academic rigour and making a distinct contribution to the knowledge in the field.

The decision about the structure and format of the student’s doctoral thesis should be made by the supervisor and the supervisory committee members and be informed by the practices in the specific discipline and the student’s academic and professional goals. In some fields, the decision about structure and format is relatively easy to make while in others the decision requires careful consideration from all involved parties.

The following guidelines have been designed to help students, supervisors, and supervisory committee members by identifying the required academic criteria of the doctoral thesis and by describing the various available formats and structures. Supervising faculty members are encouraged to clearly communicate the required academic criteria and expected format of the doctoral thesis early in the student’s doctoral program to facilitate the student’s writing process.

Key Criteria of the Doctoral Thesis 

Regardless of the format of the doctoral thesis, certain criteria must be met. For the thesis to be acceptable, the student must do the following:  

• Demonstrate how the research makes an original contribution by advancing knowledge in the field
• Show a thorough familiarity with the field and an ability to critically analyze the relevant literature
• Display a mastery of research methods and their application
• Offer a complete and systematic account of their scholarly work
• Present the results and analysis of their original research
• Document sources and support claims 
• Locate their work within the broader field or discipline
• Write in a style that respects the norms of academic and scholarly communication 

Most doctoral writers understand that their thesis will need to meet these criteria without necessarily understanding  how  they will do so. A central element of writing a thesis is coming to understand how to write an extended text that meets these criteria. With guidance—from the supervisor, the supervisory committee, from peers, and from institutional writing support—these criteria will ultimately help the student to understand when they have met their thesis writing goals.

Formats of the Doctoral Thesis 

Traditional thesis.

The traditional, or monograph-style, thesis format reflects the original conception of a thesis as a “book” presenting the candidate’s research project. The traditional format is organized as a single narrative describing the research problem, the context of the research, the methods used, the findings, and the conclusions. The organization of  a  traditional thesis is generally organic. If the thesis deals with experimental research, it may be structured with an introductory chapter, a literature review chapter, a method chapter, some number of findings chapters, and a discussion/ concluding chapter. If the thesis is based on non-experimental research, the form is likely to be determined by the exigencies of the particular topic. After doctoral studies are complete, a traditional thesis will often be revised into a scholarly monograph or a number of research articles, but the form in which it is presented for the final oral exam is not itself intended for publication. This style of thesis remains the norm in the Humanities and in many Social Science disciplines.

Publication-Based Thesis

The publication-based thesis (PBT), also referred to as the manuscript or article-based thesis, is a coherent work consisting of a number of scholarly publications focusing on the same research problem. The PBT, which takes many forms, generally includes an introductory section, the publishable manuscripts, and a cumulative discussion or conclusion chapter. To promote coherence, the introduction and cumulative concluding chapters clearly explain how these separate manuscripts fit together into a unified body of research. The opening and closing chapters—which act as bookends to the publishable articles—are integral to the purpose of these theses. In these sections, the writer will set out the broad contours of the problem and its significance, review the relevant literature and contextualizing material, and draw the ultimate conclusions about the implications of the whole research project.  As the PBT is a relatively new type of thesis structure designed to meet different professional demands, its form is necessarily different in different contexts. For instance, in some fields, the articles may appear in the thesis in their precise published form; in others, the articles may need to be adapted to better serve the needs of the full thesis. The student and supervisor/supervisory committee will need to establish a clear understanding from the outset about the internal structuring of the PBT.

Although departmental requirements and norms may vary, below are some general guidelines that may be helpful for those writing PBT. 

• The number of articles required for inclusion is usually three, although the number depends on the articles’ scope, scientific quality and significance, and publishing forum, as well as the author’s independent contribution to any co-authored articles included in the thesis. 
• Publication of manuscripts, or acceptance for publication by a peer-reviewed journal, does not guarantee that the thesis will be found acceptable for the degree sought. 
• Published-based theses may include published, in press or in review manuscripts or articles that have not yet been submitted for publication. Normally, the thesis and examination committees must deem the articles as publishable if the articles are not published at the time of defence.  
• In some departments, the publication-based thesis includes each individual manuscript in a form that is identical to the published/submitted version, including the reference list.  In other departments, students are permitted or required to adapt the articles into a form more suitable for inclusion in the thesis. 
• Publication-based theses can include co-authored publications and, in such cases, a detailed statement on individual student contributions to each article must be clearly articulated. Students are strongly recommended (and, in some units, required) to have their contributions approved by the authors of the articles in question.
• No two student theses will be allowed to be identical.
• In the case of multiple-authored articles, the expectation is that the thesis writer will be the first or co-first author. In rare cases, a supervisor may decide that a paper can be included when the thesis writer is not a first author, provided that their contribution to the paper is substantial. In all cases, the parts of the PBT that are not written for publication (the Introduction, Discussion, Conclusions and Future Recommendations chapters) must be entirely the work of the thesis writer.

Multimodal Thesis 

All doctoral theses must contain a written component; however, other elements may be included in addition to the written text. Some examples of other elements that may be included with the written text are films or videos, electronically interactive word/image-based texts, poems, novels or sections of a novel, play scripts, short stories, documentation of performances, or pieces of art. In multimodal theses, the creative element should be integrated into the theoretical context in order to show explicitly how the thesis, as a whole, leads to new insights and contributions. In all other respects, the thesis must conform to the same standards required for all doctoral theses. It should make an original contribution to knowledge, demonstrate appropriate research methods and training, and be worthy of publication in whole or in part.

Portfolio Thesis

The portfolio thesis is a form of thesis in which a certain amount of publishing will “equal” a thesis, without requiring a separate text to be written. This type of thesis is also known as a stapler thesis or a Ph.D. by publication, a name that highlights the absence of an actual thesis. This form of thesis is currently rare at the University of Toronto.

Professional Doctoral Thesis in Practice  

At the University of Toronto, the professional doctoral thesis in practice includes the identification and investigation of a problem in practice, the application of theory, research and policy analysis to the problem of practice, translating research into practice, and a proposed plan for action to address the problem of practice. The professional doctoral thesis in practice is expected to have meaningful generative impact on practice and policy.

Ontario Council of Academic Vice-Presidents’ (OCAV) Doctoral Degree Expectations for Doctoral Students in Ontario

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 22 August 2019

The journey of thesis supervisors from novice to expert: a grounded theory study

• Leila Bazrafkan 1 ,
• Alireza Yousefy 2 ,
• Mitra Amini 1 &
• Nikoo Yamani 2  

BMC Medical Education volume  19 , Article number:  320 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

9694 Accesses

6 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

Supervision is a well-defined interpersonal relationship between the thesis supervisors and their students. The purpose of this study was to identify the patterns which can explain the process of expertise attainment by thesis supervisors. We aimed at developing a conceptual framework/model to explain this development based on the experience of both students and supervisors.

We have conducted a qualitative grounded theory study in 20 universities of medical sciences in Iran since 2017 by using purposive, snowball sampling, and theoretical sampling and enrolled 84 participants. The data were gathered through semi-structured interviews. Based on the encoding approach of Strauss and Corbin (1998), the data underwent open, axial, and selective coding by constant comparative analysis. Then, the core variables were selected, and a model was developed.

We could obtain three themes and seven related subthemes, the central variable, which explains the process of expertise as the phenomenon of concentration and makes an association among the subthemes, was interactive accountability. The key dimensions during expertise process which generated the supervisors’ competence development in research supervision consisted maturation; also, seven subthemes as curious observation, evaluation of the reality, poorly structured rules, lack of time, reflection in action, reflection on action, and interactive accountability emerged which explain the process of expertise attainment by thesis supervisors.

Conclusions

As the core variable in the expertise process, accountability must be considered in expertise development program planning and decision- making. In other words, efforts must be made to improve responsibility and responsiveness.

Peer Review reports

Supervision is a well-defined term in the interpersonal relationship between thesis supervisors and students. A supervisor is designated to assist the student’s development in terms of their research project [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. Faculty members supervise the students because qualified supervision leads to success on the part of the student, and it has moral, reputational, and financial outcomes for the institution. Supervisors are expected to train students to gain competence in areas such as specialist skills, generalist skills, self-reliance skills, and group/team skills [ 4 ]. Expertise is derived from the three essential elements of knowledge, experience, and the ability to solve problems in society [ 5 , 6 , 7 ]. .According to Dreyfus, acquisition of expertise or practical wisdom represents a higher level of “self-actualization.” At this point, one reaches a level in which they can flourish in their talents and abilities. This enables the teachers to function in scientific communities and multicultural environments [ 7 ].

Wiscer has identified three stages in the thesis supervision process and describes the duties of the supervisors in each of them [ 8 ]. Pearson and Brew state that maturation in specialist skills, generalist skills, self-reliance skills, and group/team skills are the major areas that need to be promoted in the student. Moreover, these are the generic processes in which the supervisors should be involved for efficacious supervision if they aim to help the students develop in various institutional, disciplinary and professional settings; acquire appropriate expertise and features needed for employment; and make an outline of what might form a flexible professional development program for supervisors in this setting [ 3 ]. Vereijken et al. emphasized novice supervisors’ approaches to reach expertise in supervision and explained the relationship between practice and dilemmas among novice supervisors [ 9 ].

.Despite the importance of expertise in higher education and particularly research supervision, research abilities are not considered as one of the priorities in the employment of the academic staff. Furthermore, the newly employed faculty members are often involved in teaching, administrative tasks, and services in health care; this inhibits them from expertise attainment in other aspects such as research supervision [ 10 , 11 , 12 ]. In this regard, Malekafzali believes that in the area of research activities, the faculty members have serious weaknesses in defining the problem, choosing the appropriate method for research, analyzing the data, interpreting the results, and publishing scientific articles. Besides, there is a lack of coherent and compiled training programs which can enhance their research capabilities [ 13 ].

One of the most important factors contributing to the thesis and research quality is the process of developing expertise in supervisors’ research supervision. Most studies in our country have focused on research abilities during the research, and fewer studies have focused on the process of expertise acquisition in thesis supervision, and no actual model has been proposed for this [ 11 , 12 , 13 ]. The quantitative researches could not explain exactly how and through which process the faculty members, as thesis supervisors, become experts in thesis supervision since the expertise process is multi-factorial and has many unknown aspects. Considering the effective role of qualitative research in clarifying ambiguous and unknown aspects, we chose the grounded theory approach for this study [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. This theory will be used when the investigator intends to determine the patterns of actions and social interactions needed for the development of expertise by specific groups of people in a specific setting [ 17 , 18 ].

In this study, we aimed to identify the themes that explain the expertise development process among thesis supervisors in Iran, and also to develop a conceptual framework/model to explain this development based on the experience of both students and supervisors.

This study was carried out in 20 universities of medical sciences with different ranks in Iran because universities are the places where supervisors and students interact purposefully to discourse the needs of experts on specific occasions and in specific conditions. In these universities, different students study with various disciplines. There are three types of universities in Iran. Type 1 universities are the ones with the most facilities, faculties, research presentations, international collaborations, and scientific outcomes. The second rank belongs to type 2, and the one with the least mentioned qualities is type 3 universities. All three types of universities were included in this study. In all these courses, writing a thesis is one of the requirements with the same role and regulation. The majority of the students in this research project were in the late stages of both undergraduate and postgraduate educational programs within the same function and regulation.

Study design

We conducted this qualitative study based on a grounded theory approach in a systematic form [ 17 , 18 ]. Grounded theory is a symbolic interaction which is derived from systematic data collection during the research process. In this strategy, collecting and analyzing data and the theory derived from the data have a close association [ 17 , 19 ]. The investigator’s purpose in using grounded theory is to describe and clarify a phenomenon in the social condition and to identify the essential processes working within [ 17 ].

Participants

In this study, 84 subjects including 56 faculty members of medical sciences, 20 undergraduate and postgraduate students (medical students, MS of Science, Ph.D. and residents), and eight managers in the field of research supervision participated. Using purposive sampling, snowball sampling with maximum variation, we selected the participants from a variety of academic ranks with different work experiences, as the key informants in thesis supervisors. Then, to continue the sampling, we used theoretical sampling and data saturation. The inclusion criterion was 5 years of work experience in thesis supervision, and the exclusion criterion was the unwillingness to participate in the study. Firstly, we collected data in Shiraz University with the help of a research supervisor who is known for his high quality of supervision and then data gathering was initiated in the university of Isfahan. There were 34 key informants from the two universities and 22 individuals from other universities. Students were selected based on their willingness to participate.

Theoretical sampling was used next to develop the tentative theory. The basis for theoretical sampling was the queries that emerged during data analysis. At this stage, the researcher interviewed the supervisor, administrators, and students. Theoretical sampling facilitated in verifying the supervisors’ responses and credibility of categories and resulted in more conceptual density. Data saturation was obtained when no new data emerged in the last five interviews. Therefore, data gathering by interviews was terminated.

Data collection

We collected the data primarily by semi-structured interviews from September 2017 to September 2018. The participants were recognized with unknown codes based on their field of work and setting, and each participant was interviewed in one or two sessions. Having obtained the participants’ informed consent, we recorded the interviews and they were transcribed verbatim immediately. The interviews began with open-ended general questions such as, “What did you experience during research supervision?” and then the participants were asked to describe their perceptions regarding their expertise process. Leading questions were also used to deeply explore the conditions, processes, and other factors that participants recognized as significant issues. The interview was based mostly on the questions which came up during the interview. On average, each interview lasted for an hour, during which field notes and memos were taken. At the end of each session, the participants were asked to give an opinion on other important topics which did not come up during the interview, followed by data collection and analysis which are simultaneously done in grounded theory; analytic thought and queries that arose from one interview were carried to the next one [ 20 ].

The data were also collected by unstructured observations of the educational atmosphere in the laboratory, and the faculty member and students’ counseling offices. These observations lasted 5 weeks, during which the faculties and students’ interactions and the manner of supervision were closely monitored. The observation was arranged to sample the maximum variety of research supervisor activity for some faculty member who is known to be a good or poor supervisor and detailed organized field notes were kept.

Also, we used the field notes to reflect emergent analytic concepts as a source of three angulations of data, frequently reconsidering the data, and referring to field notes in the context of each participant’s explanation. Analysis of the field notes facilitated in shaping contextual conditions and clarifying variations in the supervisors’ responses in each context. This led to the arrangement of several assumptions in the effect of contexts.

Data analysis

We simultaneously performed data collection and analysis. We read the scripts carefully several times and then entered them into MAXQDA (version10). We collected and analyzed the data practically and simultaneously by using a constant comparative method. Data were analyzed based on the 3-stage coding approach, including open, axial, and selective coding by Strauss and Corbin In the open coding stage, we extracted the basic concepts or meaning units from the gathered information. Then, more general concepts were formed by grouping similar concepts into one theme. The themes became clearer throughout the interviews. Then, the constructs of them were compared with each other to form tentative categories. After that, we conducted axial coding by using the guidelines given in Corbin and Strauss’s (2008) Paradigm Model [ 21 ]. The extracted themes (codes) in the previous (open coding) stage were summarized in 3 main themes during the axial coding stage, and then the core variables were selected in the selective coding stage [ 20 ]. To generate a reasonable theory to the community, a grounded theorist needs to condense the studied happenings a the precise sequence. To check the data against categories, the researcher asks questions related to certain categories and returns to the data to seek evidence. After developing a theory, the researcher is required to confirm the theory by comparing it with existing theories found in the recently available research [ 21 ]. We finalized the model after 5 days; during this time, we explained the relations between subcategories and the core category for realizing theoretical saturation and clarifying the theoretical power of the analysis explained about work as narration.

In terms of accuracy improvement, we used the Lincoln and Guba’s criteria, including credibility, dependability, conformability, and transferability [ 22 , 23 ].

To increase credibility, we collected data from different universities in Iran, and their credibility was also confirmed by three reviewers and experts in qualitative research. Also, some of the participants rechecked the data and the investigators’ description and interpretation of their experiences carefully. Prolonged engagement and tenacious observation facilitated the data credibility. In this way, the process of data collection and analysis took 12 months. Data triangulation and method triangulation also confirmed credibility [ 20 ]. The use of the maximum variation sampling method contributed to the dependability and conformability of data. Furthermore, once the explanation of the phenomenon was full, it was returned for confirmation to 3 participants of each university, and they validated the descriptions. Finally, to attain transferability, we adequately described the data in this article, so that a judgment of transferability can be made by readers.

Ethical considerations

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences (92–6746). The participants were informed about the research aim and interviews. Informed consent for conducting and recording the interview was obtained. The confidentiality of the participants’ information was maintained throughout the study.

In this study, the mean age of the faculty members and students was 44.34 ± 14.60 and 28.54 ± 2.38 years, respectively. All the faculty members and most of the students were married. Only three students were single. Three themes and seven interrelated sub-themes emerged from the data (Table  1 ). The main variable, which explains the process of expertise as the phenomenon of concentration and makes an association among the categories, was interactive accountability. The key dimensions of the expertise process are displayed in a model (Fig.  1 ).

The process of expertise attainment in research supervisor model

Theme 1: engagement

In this theme, the initial phase of expertise, the supervisor starts to observe the others’ behavior in the students’ supervision and guidance based on the practical and cognitive skills previously acquired. They attempt to recognize the different needs based on the amount of their motivation and previous competence so that the models become important for them, and they recognize the scope of the needs based on their importance. Then, they try to understand the needs and values of real thesis supervision in this context. In this theme, two sub-themes, curious observation, and evaluation with reality emerged.

Curious observation

In this sub-theme, several concepts such as personal interest, self-awareness, ability to meet the students’ needs, ability to detect weaknesses in research skills, and observation of role models in this area act as the impellent factors in expertise attainment in research supervision.

Regarding personal interest, a successful faculty member in the area of research supervision said:

“…In my experience, faculties must be selected from those who have curious personalities as well as being good observers, first of all. In this way, they will have the appropriate intrinsic character to acquire knowledge in guidance and supervision)…” (Faculty member N0.3)

According to our participants, the most important intrinsic motivation is the desire to update the content knowledge and skills in research supervision. An experienced professor said:

“ … The knowledge gap between the new and old generations of faculty members is what forced me to update my knowledge...and it has been detected by myself…” (Faculty member N0.3).

Another important intrinsic motivation is the ability to meet the educational and research needs of students. However, usually these needs are combined; one of the faculty members put it:

“…I would like to be an expert in this process (thesis supervision) to meet my students’ needs. Because I have seen and felt this need many times before…” (Faculty member N0.12).

Since the publication of research directly affects the promotion of a faculty, some professors seek skills that are practical in article publication such as several statistical and basic skills for thesis writing. The participants considered the self-awareness and consciousness elements as very important. Through consciousness, one can better understand their needs.

Evaluation with reality

In this sub-theme, in the initial phase maintaining academic dignity and competition motivates the faculty members to obtain expertise in research supervision. At this point, the supervisor evaluates themself and their potentialities considering more precise features and acquired information (or data), so that they can find the distance between the optimal state and the existing conditions. They also evaluate the others’ potentialities in this field realistically and compete. Good supervision is then highlighted for them. Based on the supervisors’ experience, at this stage, they are seriously engaged in evaluation and competition.

Another motivation was obtaining academic and social promotion. Although the number of theses supervised by them can affect the academic promotion of supervisors, this effect is insignificant. The real motivation is maintaining academic dignity and competition amongst peers. A member of the clinical faculties stated:

“ … To enhance academic dignity, a faculty member should master various skills such as patient care, teaching, educational skills, and last but not least, research supervision. I got involved in research and thesis supervision because I felt I should not be left behind…” ( Faculty member N0.17).

At this stage, the junior supervisor tries to increase the cognitive knowledge in research supervision such as increasing specific knowledge of the discipline, planning, directing of a project effectively, and developing good interpersonal skills presented in research supervision.

Theme 2: supervision climate

In this theme, we describe the contextual factor which changes the process of expertise attainment in thesis supervisors. The result of the study reflects some concerns about the relationship between individuals in the context in that they interact purposefully but with barriers. The supervision climate in the thesis supervision process in this theme led to the emergence of two sub-themes, challenging shortcomings and role ambiguity. These challenges include poorly structured rules and regulations which, in turn, can cause confusion and role ambiguity.

Challenging shortcomings

This report shows that contextual factor plays a significant role in promoting the quality of a thesis in a university, but the process is faced with altered challenges such as inadequate resources, inadequate time, and ineffective evaluation and rule and regulation deficit. These challenges include the following. Most faculty members and students have experienced these shortcomings.

Various inadequate resources, such as access to new and online journals, laboratory equipment were one of the challenges for supervisors in certain aspects which required more competency, and the constraints on communication with the other academic centers worldwide undermine the sense of competition and hinder the effort put in to become an expert. One of the students said: “… I see how difficult it is to gain access to a good article or laboratory materials in this situation …we try, but it just isn’t possible...” (Faculty member N0.17).

Based on our results, the sudden changes in personal life, work position, and organizational change can affect the path to expertise. These changes such as marriage, work overload, admission of students over the capacity, new rules and regulation of scholar citizenship, promotion and so on can have both positive and negative impacts, depending on whether they facilitate or restrict the professional development of faculties as supervisors. For instance, an increase in student admission causes work overload, which results in neglecting self-improvement.

“…As you know, we are over- loaded with students (they have increased the number of admissions), which is beyond our capacity. This means that most of our time will be dedicated to teaching. Self-improvement is difficult due to lack of time…” (Faculty member N0.6).

Role ambiguity

Poorly structured supervision can occur where there is an ambiguous context of supervision structure, supervisors and students’ roles. Most participants, as faculty members, managers, and students have experienced some difficulties in this regard, due to poorly structured rules(EDITORS NOTE; do you mean ‘rules and regulations ‘here) and regulations and its impact on the thesis supervision. It is not only the rules themselves but also the way they are implemented. One of the faculty members expressed confusion over the rules related to the dissertation as follows:

“…It should be made clear what I must do exactly. It is obvious regarding supervision on the work of students; there are not the same expectations from an Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and a professor. Most problems occur as a result of the gap in legislation; For example, the rules imply a full Professor does not need a statistical consult, while many supervisors like me do not have enough knowledge and skills in statistical analysis...” (Faculty member N0.1).

Failure to implement the rules also increases the sense of this ambiguity, and there are no specific rules for verifying capability and audits to determine inadequate experts in thesis supervision. The role ambiguity or unclear roles and responsibilities of the supervisor and student in the thesis process were other limitations that were emphasized by the majority of participants. A faculty member stated:

“… Supervisors have different roles during the thesis process. To enhance this process, one must exactly know one’s responsibilities. For instance, in the beginning, the supervisor should guide the students through the process of finding a suitable research topic, but if the teacher's role is unclear, then instead of guiding they may actually choose the topic, and if so, the students will be prevented from exploring, using their creative thinking, and improving their problem-solving abilities…” (Faculty member N0.1).

Various performance

Based on the participants’ experiences, in this situation in which there are inadequate resources and organizational and social problems, some faculty members are well-trained in the field of supervision. One of the senior faculty members said: “It is my honor to mention that despite the existence of many obstacles, I have been able to train well-educated students, who have become researchers and contribute to the development of science in my country.”

One of the most important causes of poor performance is ineffective evaluation. Based on the participants experiences, two main problems can result in ineffective evaluation. First of all is the inadequate feedback from the supervisor which leads to unmotivated learners and the second one is lack of feedback from the stakeholders and educational institutes which in turn diminishes the supervisor’s efforts toward self-improvement. These can lead to poor performance both in students and supervisors.

In one of the Ph.D. student’s words:

“…In this system, there is no supervision on the supervisors; there is no control or evaluation of their work. Also, the supervisors don't get feedback from their students during the research process, and there is no third person who investigates whether the report is real or not…” (student N0. 7).

Evidence from data suggests that an unfair judgment and evaluation of academic theses are other problems in the process of acquiring the merit of teachers. If there isn’t proper evaluation, students and supervisors would not have the right standards to correct their performance.

The professors do not always consider the lack of expertise to be the only cause of poor performance. Many believe that inadequate monitoring can also reduce the motivation for quality performance. This means that supervisors may obtain the necessary expertise, but they are not motivated to enhance their performance since they are not expected to do this. One student had experienced:

“…I was so thrilled that my thesis supervisor was an experienced, older and well-known professor, but unfortunately, I soon found out that not only was his scientific knowledge outdated, but also he lacked the necessary supervision skills, so he let the students do all the work unsupervised. He did not take any responsibility during the process…” (Student N0.4).

Another point which leads to poor performance is the fact that some faculty members do not comprehend the main purpose of the thesis writing process; actually, they do not know the difference between teaching and guiding in the project or thesis supervision. One of the basic science supervisors said: “… Some faculties consider a thesis as research work and not a lesson in which research methodology should be taught...” (Faculty member N0.5).

Performing poorly along with ignoring professional ethics can also lead to increased tension and stress in student-teacher relationships. This can result in despondency and frustration in both students and teachers and create a vicious cycle of inefficient supervisors who will train inefficient students or future supervisors.

One of the students put it this way:

“...I feel the absence of a supervisor in my research; I would have been more successful, and my results would have been better if I had had more guidance.” (Student N0.6).

Theme 3: maturation

In this theme, the secondary phase of expertise, the individual is emotionally involved and feels that success or failure is important. This is a stage in which the learner needs an integrated schedule to be competent, and as a result, success or failure will follow. The supervisors frequently think about personal promotion and takes action in this way. They try out different approaches, and sometimes due to disappointment and embarrassment they fail. Some individuals quit at this stage and never reach competence, or they have what may be called an artificial competence. And this does not mean that they are not considered to be well-known supervisors; rather, they know, as do the students, that they are not competent. At this stage, the supervisor attempts to acquire the identity of a researcher and tries to enhance his availability, and be dutiful, knowledgeable, and enthusiastic in research supervision. Along the lines of this theme, three sub-themes of Reflection in action, Reflection on action, and Interactive accountability emerged.

Reflection in action

In this sub-theme, the patterns of expertise development begin, and self-directed learning, participatory teaching and learning strategies through a hidden curriculum are considered. At this stage, the supervisor tries to follow self-directed learning, and the amount of time allocated to expertise acquirement seems to be one of the most important factors. In this regard, one stated:

“…My success in this case (research supervision) is, first of all, due to self-evaluation and self-effort. For instance, to be in control and take full responsibility, I think about everything related to the guidance of the students, and I felt the need to master every aspect of research, even the statistical skills needed for analysis…” (Faculty member N0.8).

The supervisors’ activities were divided into two groups: self-directed –learning strategy and gaining experience through individual effort. Expertise requires continuous interaction and experience. They evaluate their learning, and by this, they experience the manner of managing and allocating time for effective supervision. According to participants, the amount of time allocation for expertise seems to be one of the most important factors for self-directed learning and expertise acquirement.

The formal training workshops provided an opportunity for supervisors with similar terms and the same problems in terms of learning experiences, environmental features, students, and educational problems to come together in one place. Participants also considered the formal participatory teaching necessary since it can provide an opportunity for the peers to get together and exchange their experiences. As a clinical faculty member put it:

“…Collaborative strategies can be beneficial in many ways. One of them is the facilitation of experience exchanges amongst teachers, peers, and colleagues and modeling the behavior of teachers and teaching workshops that emphasize the importance of their expertise in research supervision…” (Faculty member N0.1).

In our participants’ experience, this self-directed learning is effective if, and only if, it is done accompanied by proper training and participatory teaching. Otherwise, it is a waste of time. As an example, one of the students in this field said:

“…my supervisor was a great teacher and put in a lot of time and effort on my thesis supervision; however, due to his lack of research skills, I had to change my thesis proposal three times. However, after he participated in a training course at the University of Oxford, his progress was unbelievable and impressive…and I saw his expertise…” (Student N0.11).

One of the faculty members also quoted:

“…When the teachers feel a gap in their knowledge or skill, the university must provide a comfortable, appropriate, and easy way for learning them …” (Faculty member N0.10).

Regarding this subject, one of the Managers in this field stated:

“…Another improvement strategy is the use of interpersonal interactions among faculty members, these instructive interpersonal interactions among the faculty members in similar conditions make it possible to benefit from peers’ feedback …” (Manager N0.1).

A hidden curriculum strategy, like learning through trial and error can also affect the expertise process. One of the professors expressed:

“… Learning through trial and error is very effective; through the supervision of each thesis, we learn some of our mistakes and try not to remake them in the next one …” (Faculty member N0.3).

The professors do not always consider the lack of expertise to be the only cause of poor performance. Many believe that inadequate monitoring can also reduce the motivation for quality performance. This means that supervisors may obtain the necessary expertise, but they are not motivated to enhance their performance since they are not expected to do this. One student’s experience:

Reflection on action

The learner provides an integrated schedule for their competence and uses all the facilitators and facilities around them for further efficiency and promotion. This stage is named Conditional Self-efficacy by expertise experience. At this stage, the supervisor is considered a competent individual who can guide the students based on the experiences of specialized and non-specialized faculty members.

In this regard, one of the students said:

“…I can acknowledge that my supervisor functioned very impressively in this thesis, but guidance and supervision are not static; rather, it is an active process. To be a good supervisor, the faculty members should try to keep up to date and revise their attitudes, duties, and their specialty and knowledge. …” (Student N0.3).

According to the participants, at this stage the supervisors have achieved meta-competence and general characteristics or professional value; are able to guide the students and others; and develop characteristics such as acquiring specific knowledge of the discipline, especially well-organized knowledge, planning, directing of a project effectively, having good interpersonal skills, and being dutiful, knowledgeable and enthusiastic in research.

One of the PhD students states: “… My supervisor is typical of an expert. His ingenious inquiries, extraordinary attention to science and his personality have always been admired and he has been a role model for me…” (Student N0.6).

For example, the supervisors attend educational programs on scientific writing and thesis evaluation as well as ethics in research and apply them in team work. Gradually, their competency can enable them to function as a good supervisor for their students. At this stage, the supervisor develops so that they can respond due to discovery and intuition. These responses replace their dubious and unskilled reactions. The supervisor now reflects various stages of supervision and guidance. They take action, and in fact, a part of their reactions are achieved through observation and recognition. In this stage, they not only recognize what should be done but also distinguish how to achieve it with more precise discretion. A competent person does the appropriate task in the most appropriate time using the right platform.

The time period required for training or acquiring expertise varies from one person to another. Some individuals become experts very soon, whilst it takes others longer.. As one of the professors said:

“…In the beginning, I was too concerned with my responsibility as a thesis supervisor and was not sure what I should do. However, after ten years of experience, I have gained a sense of awareness which makes supervision easier for me. Of course, up to date knowledge and skill as to managing a thesis are always necessary. It took me about 12 years to reach where I am today. Furthermore, an individual who is expert at present, will not be so in two years, so I want to say that the expertise in thesis supervision in a continuum, which depends on the supervisor’s reflections on work and activity …” (Faculty member N0.15).

The continuous path of expertise in supervision can be affected by various factors. This has resulted in a range of expertise and performance in supervisors. This range and continuum is a theme that most of our participants agreed with. One of the managers revealed:

“…There is surely a continuum of expertise. We cannot deny the expert supervisors; however, the existence of those with poor supervising skills must also be acknowledged (in thesis supervision). There are those on whose ethics, honesty, and knowledge we can rely on. On the other hand, there are a few who are not as trustworthy as needed.” (Manager N0.1).

The core variable: interactive accountability

As shown in Fig. 1 , through this survey, we found that the core variable in thesis supervision process is the interactive accountability shaped by interactions of supervisors and students in an academic setting, so to enhance the accountability, each group must take responsibility and do his or her job. In this regard, one of the managers claimed:

“…When supervisors find themselves responsible, and the university officials recognize this responsibility, the supervisors are motivated to seek expertise and try to enhance their competencies and acquire learning strategies because of being accountable…” (Manager N0.2)

This means that teachers must be responsive to the needs of students, university and community. Accountability is a mutual interaction between the students and their supervisor, in other words, if the student is responsive to his duties, he creates motivation in his supervisor. One of the participants commented;

“…I've always tried to be a competent thesis supervisor, so that I have the ability to meet the needs of the community and university as well as students. I say to myself when I accept the supervision of a thesis, I should be well accountable for its results…” (Faculty member N0.32)

This study aimed at exploring the processes of expertise among thesis supervisors based on the experience of faculty members, students, and managers of Iranian universities of medical sciences. The section concludes with an explanation of how these themes are a cohesive relationship, which enables the expertise development of supervisors. It seems that the core variable in the expertise process is the concept of interactive accountability and efforts to acquire the capacity to respond to the students and academic needs. This will help them to promote their professional behavior in research supervision. The importance of accountability and various types of ability in thesis supervision has also been emphasized by other studies [ 24 , 25 , 26 ]. It was also mentioned as the major feature of the supervisor in other studies [ 26 , 27 ].

In this study, “accountability” emerged as the behavioral pattern through which the supervisors resolved their main concern of being an expert in being responsive to academic and students’ needs. Supervision training is complex since academic choices in the real world can depend on supervisor characteristics. The results of this study revealed that in the initial phase of supervision, observation, evaluation, and reflection in action and maturation stage in the secondary phase were the major themes that emerged. This result compared with Bandura’s social learning and self-efficacy theory was significant in similarity and difference. Bandura believes that achieving self-efficacy is one of the most important contributors to competence. In his model, he suggested four sources of self-efficacy, including previous accomplishments, vicarious experiences such as having a role model, verbal persuasion such as coaching and evaluative feedback, and emotional arousal [ 28 , 29 ]. Likewise, in this study, we found that the emotional arousals such as personal interest in cooperative learning, peer competition, meeting the needs of students, self-awareness and the need for upgrading are the significant factors for the faculties’ expertise. Also, our participants found that the utilization of previous experiences is the most effective method of achieving personal competence. However, this study indicates conditional expertise, which means if an expert’s information is not up to date and they do not make any effort in this regard, being an expert and having expertise is not a permanent condition.

This study also revealed that self-effort, workshops, and role models, as part of a hidden curriculum, are influential methods of teacher empowerment which agrees with the results of some studies such as those of Britzman et al. and Patel et al. Patel et al. have also suggested the importance of role modeling; they believe that modeling and observing other faculty members behavior is an effective tool for promoting and strengthening the sense of efficacy in learners [ 30 , 31 ].

Based on our study results, among the learning methods used in Iran, the collaborative education and problem-based learning is the widely accepted method which is preferred by most faculties. Therefore, cooperative and collaborative learning strategies can be used in educating the faculty members towards expertise in supervision, as revealed in other studies [ 32 , 33 ].

Lack of time is reported by supervisors to be one of the most common barriers in trying to become an expert and carry out respectable worthy supervision, and taking one’s time is acknowledged as a motivating factor for putting in more effort in thesis supervision [ 34 , 35 , 36 ].

The effect of contextual factors is studied in several surveys [ 36 , 37 , 38 ]. Gillet et al. state that contextual and organizational factors play a key role in the competence of teachers in research supervision [ 36 ]. This study also showed that faculty expertise in thesis supervision was significantly affected by the impact of contextual interventional factors such as sudden changes, structural shortcomings, and educational environment. Based on our and other studies’ results, among the sudden changes, increased workload due to the increase in the student population has greatly affected expertise. Moreover, while an increase in the workload can lead to more experienced faculty members, it is very time-consuming and, therefore, reduces the chance to obtain new information and skills in thesis supervision [ 33 , 37 ].

Similar to our study, other studies such as those of Al-Naggar et al. and Yousefi et al. have also found insufficient monitoring and lack of formative evaluations to be one of the main obstacles in the thesis supervision process. Studies have indicated that to improve the supervision process, careful planning and incentive rules must be applied [ 5 , 34 ]. Similarly, our participants mentioned that rules and regulations which have resulted in the positive effect of research on scholarship and promotion had truly motivated them. Like our study, other studies in Iran have also found that the amount of time allocated to learning is one of the influential factors affecting the faculty members’ expertise [ 13 , 38 ]. A malfunctioning relationship between the student and supervisors can affect both of them negatively; that is, it can compel the students to misbehave and also reduce the teachers’ motivation to develop better skills. This malfunction may be due to the lack of constructive interactions or paternalism leadership in research supervision [ 39 , 40 ]. As shown in Fig. 1 , this study provided a conceptual framework that can be used in policy making and studies of expertise development in research supervision. This framework is based on the perception and experience of the majority of those involved in the thesis process. It also provides teachers with an opportunity to compare and share their experiences.

This model has three fields of experience, which yields a comprehensive gradient of the factors used for the development and progress of thesis supervision quality. In other words, it is a rational structure that makes an effort to cover a comprehensible number of stages, of concept, achievement, and impact or consequence. In other words, this model is a combination of a great number of items that help to recognize the present and future processes of expertise in thesis supervision, and future challenges in this area which predict results and impacts of supervisor’s knowledge, attitude and research supervision. Table one offers the categories and clarifications [ 17 ].

This study is based on our overall model of expertise attainment. This model reveals that specific personal efforts such as observation of prior knowledge, evaluation or self-assessments alongside the university contextual dynamics help to figure out how supervisors select their approaches and engagements, and respond carefully to their task, which in turn impacts the supervisors’ level of expertise and, finally, outcomes such as work and perseverance, which then help them to become an expert. Similar to the social learning theory of Bandura, this model also states that there is a mutual relationship between different parts that can mutually affect one another. For instance, faculty members have shown in various studies how one’s previous academic success and failure can affect the future levels of involvement and motivation. Based on the study aims, we focused on only three of the components of the model: observation, evaluation, and self-efficacy; in terms of motivational processes, we focused on four motivational components. The first is self-efficacy, defined as students’ judgments of supervisor abilities to carry out a task, and their beliefs about their ability to do so show the highest levels of academic achievement and also engagement in academic behaviors promoting learning.

Through the use of this grounded theory, we can begin to understand the supervisors’ challenges and why it may be difficult to become an expert in research supervision in practice. The junior supervisors curiously observe and evaluate their environment by reflection and in action and do their best to attain knowledge and skills in the supervision of the theses, so that they can reach maturation. They are mainly supported by prior knowledge of the research supervision, which they had acquired when they were students. The concept of “interactive accountability” refers to the fact that if the supervisor is responsive to the students’ needs, they can be an expert in supervision. If they cannot overcome the barriers and shortcomings such as lack of time, they will not attain expertise in thesis supervision.

Strengths and limitations of the study

This grounded theory study describes the main dimensions of expertise in research supervision from straight reports of a large qualitative sample ( n  = 84) which consists of thesis supervisors, from all Iranian universities in three different data collection phases. Like other qualitative research, the results of this study cannot be generalized; therefore, it is recommended that the researchers conduct further qualitative research in other contexts to support these findings.

Despite the above limitations, we believe that this model can be useful for supervisors in the thesis supervision area, not only in analyzing the supervisors’ experience of supervision and being an expert but also in recognizing the areas of intervention or development of teacher training.

Implications of the study

The findings of the present study will help administrators to choose the supervisor with definite criteria in medical sciences institutes and facilitate the expertise in the supervision process through elimination of the shortcomings and improvement of the educational climate. The supervisor’s interest, talent, and capabilities should be assessed at the beginning of their employment as academic staff. Supervisors should attend educational workshops for updating their knowledge about supervision. It is recommended that collaborative strategies and methods should be used, so that we can contribute to the process of becoming an expert. The assessment of supervisors’ functioning in supervising and provision of feedback can contribute to the process of expertise. Feedback received from students about their supervisors will improve the supervisor’s further expertise and capabilities. For future studies survey on the impact of successful models in thesis supervision, disclosure analysis studies about student and supervisor are recommended.

In this study, we aimed to find out how thesis supervisors achieve expertise in supervision. The results of our study indicated that thesis supervisors achieve expertise in supervision in two stages of engagement and maturation. The emotional need to be responsive towards peers and students is the main motivation for the acquisition of competency at observation and evaluation phase of engagement. Through the evaluation and observation phase, the supervisors reach cognitive competence, such as research skills. Also, in the maturation phases, they reach meta-competence in research supervision such as problem-solving and resolving dilemmas by reflection in and when exposed to dilemmas. Meanwhile, the effects of supervision climate include shortcomings and role ambiguities which should be taken into account. According to this model, when supervisors are exposed to such problems, they apply multiple strategies, such as self-directed and collaborative learning; and learning by trial and error and from the role models. This will help them to promote their professional behavior in research supervision. This study indicated that interactive accountability, as the core variable, can be guaranteed in thesis supervisors by making the role clear, creating a supportive context, and improving the academic competencies of staff in an ongoing fashion. Therefore, this can promote constructive expertise in supervisors and foster a deeper understanding of the supervisor’s expertise in thesis supervision.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets produced and analyzed during the present study are not publicly accessible due to participant confidentiality, but are obtainable from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Harwood N, Petrić B. Adaptive master’s dissertation supervision: a longitudinal case study. Teach High Educ. 2018; https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1541881 .

Hal de Kleijn RA, Meijer PC, Brekelmans M, Pilot A. Adaptive research supervision: exploring expert thesis supervisors’ practical knowledge. High Educ Res Dev. 2015;34(1):117–30.

Article   Google Scholar  

Pearson M, Brew A. Research training and supervision development. Stud High Educ. 2002;27(2):135–50.

Light, G, Cox R, Calkins S. Learning and teaching in higher education: the reflective professional. 2nd ed. London: Paul Chapman; 2009.

Youseffi A, Bazrafkan L, Yamani N. A qualitative inquiry into the challenges and complexities of research supervision: viewpoints of postgraduate students and faculty members. J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2015;3(3):91.

Google Scholar  

Lee AM. Developing effective supervisors: concepts of research supervision. South Afr J High Educ. 2007;21(4):680–93.

Hall-Ellis SD, Grealy DS. The Dreyfus model of skill acquisition: a career development framework for succession planning and management in academic libraries. Coll Res Libr. 2013;74(6):587–603.

Wisker G. The good supervisor: Supervising postgraduate and undergraduate research for doctoral theses and dissertations. 2nd ed. Palgrave Macmillan; 2012.

Vereijken MW, van der Rijst RM, van Driel JH, Dekker FW. Novice supervisors’ practices and dilemmatic space in supervision of student research projects. Teach High Educ. 2018;23(4):522–42.

Haghdoost AA, Ghazi M, Rafiee Z, Afshari M. The trend of governmental support from post-graduated Iranian students in medical fields to study abroad. Iran J Public Health. 2013;42(Suppl 1):141–6.

Malekzadeh R, Mokri A, & , Azarmina P. Medical science and research in Iran. Arch Iran Med (2001)4(1):27–39.

Samari A, Sorkhabi E, Omran S, Geraeenejed. Research and identify the factors contributing to the process of “academic development”. Iran Univ Stud Educ Plann. 2014;2(4):67–100.

Malekafzali H, Majdzadeh S, Fotouhi A, Tavakoli S. Applied research methodology in medical sciences. Tehran: Tehran University of Medical Sciences; 2004.

Creswell JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publication; 2012.

Strauss AJC. Basic of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage Co; 1998.

Jeon Y-H. The application of grounded theory and symbolic interactionism. Scand J Caring Sci. 2004;18(3):249–56.

Denzin NK. The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. 2nd edition. Routledge: Taylor and Francis group; 2017.

Book   Google Scholar  

Dilley P. Interviews and the philosophy of qualitative research. J High Educ. 2004;75(1):127–32.

Strauss AJC. Basic of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage Co; 2008.

Cho JY, Lee E-H. Reducing confusion about grounded theory and qualitative content analysis: similarities and differences. Qual Rep. 2014;19(32):1–20.

Gioia DACK, Hamilton AL. Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research notes on the Gioia methodology. Organ Res Methods. 2013;16(1):15–31.

Skeith L, Ridinger H, Srinivasan S, Givi B, Youssef N, Harris I. Exploring the thesis experience of master of health professions education graduates: a qualitative study. Int J Med Educ. 2018;9:113.

Yeatman A. Making supervision relationships accountable: graduate student logs. Aust Univ Rev. 1995;38(2):9–11.

Saaban A, Abu B, Jiar YK. Students and supervisors’ roles and responsibilities in doctoral research supervision. Adv Sci Lett. 2018;24(1):66–8.

Carter S, Laurs D, Chant L, Wolfgramm-Foliaki E. Indigenous knowledges and supervision: changing the lens. Innov Educ Teach Int. 2018;55(3):384–93.

Boston P. The three faces of supervision: Individual learning, group learning, and supervisor accountability. In C. Burck and G. Daniel (2010) (Eds.) Mirrors and Reflections Processes of Systemic Supervision. Routledge, Taylor, and Francis; 2010:27–48.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Manathunga C. The development of research supervision: “turning the light on a private space”. Int J Acad Dev. 2005;10(1):17–30.

Bandura A. On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. J Manag. 2012;38(1):9–44.

Bandura A. On deconstructing commentaries regarding alternative theories of self-regulation. J Manag. 2015;41(4):1025–44.

Britzman DP. Practice makes practice: A critical study of learning to teach. -State University of New York Press; 2003.

Patel M, Reed D, Smith C, Arora V. Role-modeling cost-conscious care—a national evaluation of perceptions of faculty at teaching hospitals in the United States. J Gen Intern Med. 2015;30(9):1294–8.

Howard M, Steensma HK, Lyles M, Dhanaraj C. Learning to collaborate through collaboration: how allying with expert firms influences collaborative innovation within novice firms. Strateg Manag J. 2015:n/a.

Steinert Y. Faculty development: core concepts and principles. Steinert Y, editor. Faculty development in the health professions. Innovation and change in professional education. 11: Springer Netherlands; 2014. 3–25.

Al-Naggar R, et al. Doctorate international students’ satisfaction and stress on academic supervision in a Malaysian University: a qualitative approach. Educ Res. 2012;3(3):264–9.

Gillet N, Gagné M, Sauvagère S, Fouquereau E. The role of supervisor autonomy support, organizational support, and autonomous and controlled motivation in predicting employees’ satisfaction and turnover intentions. Eur J Work Organ Psy. 2012;22(4):450–60.

Harden RM. AMEE guide no. 14: outcome-based education: part 1-an introduction to outcome-based education. Med Teach. 1999;21(1):7–14.

Bazrafkan L, Shokrpour N, Yousefi A, Yamani N. Management of stress and anxiety among phd students during thesis writing: a qualitative study. Health Care Manag. 2016;35(3):231–40.

Ghadirian L, Sayarifard A, Majdzadeh R, Rajabi F, Yunesian M. Challenges for better thesis supervision. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2014;28:32.

Vehviläinen S, Löfström E. ‘I wish I had a crystal ball’: discourses and potentials for developing academic supervising. Stud High Educ. 2016;41(3):508–24.

Grossman ES. ‘My supervisor is so busy...’ informal spaces for postgraduate learning in the health sciences. South Afr J High Educ. 2016;30(2):94–109.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The researchers would like to thank all research participants of Medical Sciences Universities (faculty, student, and managers) who contributed to the study. The authors would also like to thank the Education Development Center of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences for cooperation in this study and special thanks to Professor Shokrpoour for her editing.

The present article was extracted from the thesis written by Leila Bazrafkan. The design and implementation of the project was financially supported by Esfahan University of Medical Sciences (Grant No. 92–6746).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Clinical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

Leila Bazrafkan & Mitra Amini

Department of Medical Education, Medical Education Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Alireza Yousefy & Nikoo Yamani

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

LB developed the study design, conducted the interviews and analysis, ensured trustworthiness, and drafted the manuscript. AY, as the supervisor participated in the study design, supervised the codes and data analysis process, and revised the manuscripts. NY as research advisor participated in the study and provided guidance during the study and MA revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors’ information

LB is an assistant professor of medical education in Medical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences,

AY is Professor of Medical Education Dept., Medical Education Research Center, University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan

MA is Professor of Medical Education in the Medical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences,

NY Associate Professor of Medical Education Dept., Medical Education Research Center, University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nikoo Yamani .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences (92–6746). The participants were justified about the research aim and interviews. Informed consent for conducting and recording the interview was obtained. The confidentiality of the participants’ information was maintained throughout the study.

Consent for publication

Participants gave printed informed consent for the use of passages for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Bazrafkan, L., Yousefy, A., Amini, M. et al. The journey of thesis supervisors from novice to expert: a grounded theory study. BMC Med Educ 19 , 320 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1739-z

Download citation

Received : 07 February 2019

Accepted : 29 July 2019

Published : 22 August 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1739-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Qualitative research
• Medical sciences faculty
• Grounded theory
• Thesis supervision

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Guide, Co-guide, Supervisors as Author in Publication on Student Thesis

Related Papers

Kristhel Feria

Biochemia Medica

Dragana Antoncic

Jornal Brasileiro de Patologia e Medicina Laboratorial

Adagmar Andriolo

Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges

sebastian Uijtdehaage

The health professions education (HPE) community is a crossroad of scholars from various disciplines with potentially conflicting views on who qualifies as author. Established HPE scholars are expected to model ethical research conduct but no research has investigated the extent to which authorship criteria are understood and applied by leaders in the field. This study investigated what leading scholars consider appropriate criteria for authorship and how often these criteria are ignored. Directors of research and editors of HPE journals completed an anonymous survey between September 2015 and August 2016 with questions about authorship practices they experienced and recommended, common authorship criteria, and how often they had encountered unethical authorship decisions. Out of 82 invited scholars, 46 participated in the survey (response rate = 56.0%). They reported a stark contrast between current and recommended authorship practices. Twenty-two (51.2%) had experienced unethical ...

Science and Engineering Ethics

Oscar Garcia Algar

Current Medical Research and Opinion

Thomas Stossel , Keith Veitch

International Journal of Basic & Clinical Pharmacology

balaji more

Background: The knowledge, attitudes and practices of scientific authorship vary across different regions. We conducted this study to understand this variation among medical researchers in India.Methods: An anonymous web-based researcher-survey invited all faculty, researchers and PhD students at Pacific institute of Medical sciences, Udaipur, India. The study design and the questionnaire were approved by the institutional ethics committee. Basic information on study was given to obtain consent for participation. The 30 questions on authorship experience and related issues were based on the statements in International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and other national and international recommendations on authorship. Participants reported their authorship experiences and answered multiple choice questionnaires.Results: The response rate was 36.36% among the participants, who were post-graduate with up to 10 years of research experience. About 62.5% had not been appropri...

Medical Archives

Izet Masic, MD, PhD, FWAAS, FEASA, FIAHSI, FEFMI, FACMI

Iranian Journal of Public Health

Professional Medical Publications

Archives of internal medicine

Abiguei Torrents

RELATED PAPERS

Jonathan Grech

nurul fuada

International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE)

Ivana Ristic

World Journal of Dentistry

Quraish Lal

Chaos, Solitons & Fractals

Sourav Rana

physica status solidi (b)

Gunnar Suchaneck

International Journal of Qualitative Methods

Andrew R Hatala

Ecofeminism and Climate Change

Mohammed Kamal Hossain

ISBN: 978-607-8821-35-8

Vicente ABOITES, FInstP

哪里卖巴拉特大学毕业证 ballarat毕业证文凭学位证书GRE成绩单原版一模一样

Research in Applied Economics

Muqaddas Khalid

Brazilian Journal of Physics

Zahra Rezaei

Jurnal Sosial, Politik dan Budaya (SOSPOLBUD)

Muhammad Irfan Maulana

Organometallics

Michael McGeary

Ecoprint: An International Journal of Ecology

lokman hossain

Cornell University - arXiv

mehmet önder

约克大学毕业证成绩单 约克大学文凭学历证书哪里能买

تحقیقات علوم چوب و کاغذ ایران

Mostafa Nikkhah Dafchahi

Maria Carolina Pire-Sierra

Federica Riccardo

Aesthetic Surgery Journal

ernesto gadsden

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

University of Jyväskylä

• Collaboration
• News and events
• Work with us – open positions
• Contact information

Thesis Supervisor Manual

Shared guidance

Support for the degree student: open science centre as a collaborator.

Open Science Centre, the library, supports thesis students during several steps of the writing process as a partner of a thesis supervisor. This means that the supervisor can share teaching and supervision responsibilities with the Open Science Centre.

The most common areas of cooperation during a thesis writing process:

• Planning e.g., topic consideration
• Plan for data acquisition, Data Management Plan (DMP), publishing strategy
• Research data: collecting
• LIB1DATA, supervision and guidance
• Sources, data acquisition: searching and choosing
• Teaching data acquisition: seminars, LIB1THP, supervision and guidance
• Research data: analysis
• Templates: Word reference management: Refworks
• Theses: JYX
• Discipline-specific features
• Search statement design
• Use of databases
• Using reference management systems, e.g., Zotero
• Referencing, research ethics
• Planning of data acquisition
• Assessing and choosing sources
• Reference management
• Identification of special features, e.g., personal information
• Planning research material handling
• Gathering research
• Publishing thesis in Digital Repository JYX

The supervisor can request a custom training to their seminar from their discipline’s Information Specialist. Individual issues with a degree student can also be assessed during personal supervision, as mentioned above.

Support for the supervisor: help and guidelines to visibility and teaching merits

Since all postgraduate training programs are open to the university staff, the Open Science Centre supports not only the degree student’s, but also the supervisor’s expertise. Enrolling in postgraduate training programs takes place in Congress and enrolling in the online course (LIBJ1001) on Open Science happens in Sisu. Even if you are not taking part in the online course on Open Science, you can still self-study and go through the materials of the course.

Open Science postgraduate programs aim to update supervisors’ knowledge regarding the process of writing a thesis from a research perspective:

• Dissertation Start-up
• Consultation

Data management

• Tailored training
• Templates: Word
• Templates: Word reference management
• Open publishing
• Choosing the publication channel
• Research merits
• LIBJ1001 Open Science Resource
• o C onsultation : open learning materials

Subject and faculty guides are also there to help a degree supervisor. For example, doctoral studies’ guides are available for dissertation supervisors . The instructions on this page are directed mainly for Bachelor’s and Master’s thesis supervisors, but they can be modified to work for dissertation supervisors as well. However, there are separate postgraduate programs for dissertations , and tailored training can be requested for doctoral seminars.

Open Education is also supporting teacher's work: there is a possibility to create own materials or utilise others open educational resources. Teachers and supervisors can open their own materials in the national Library of Open Educational Resources and find new materials in JYKDOK . Help is available in Open Science Centre. It's also beneficial to use open educational practices.

Cannot display this embedded content because your browser does not support iframes.

Information seeking

What is information seeking.

Information seeking often consists of defining the need for data and material, the concrete process of information seeking, and using this acquired data. Each thesis writer has individual needs for specific types of information, so depending on the thesis topic and discipline, each thesis contains its own information seeking process.

The process of information seeking: collaboration

Information seeking is suggested to start by making a information seeking plan while forming the structure of the thesis. The plan can start - depending on the discipline - with e.g., a mind map outlining the thesis topic and possible viewpoints. The supervisor is encouraged to work on the mind map together with the degree student writing the thesis.

An example of a mind map. (Source: Jyväskylä University Library (2016) Library tutorial . Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä University Library. URL: https://koppa.jyu.fi/avoimet/kirjasto/en/library-tutorial/topic-and-search-terms/identify-key-concepts/mind-map-1 (Updated: 9.12.2021. Link verified: 25.3.2022.))

Based on a mind map it is easy to define which things need to be looked more into, or which things are targeted in data acquisition and information seeking. For this, it is beneficial to think about specific industry and discipline terms and synonyms for different subject areas already in the mind map.

Training on data acquisition is recommended to be requested from your own discipline's information specialist . The training usually consists of further practical exercises on the same topic the mind map is based on. This means that - based on viewpoints already presented - you can start thinking about search terms and statements suitable for your own discipline’s databases. Instead of a mind map, you can use your own discipline and subject’s preferred methods to think about a thesis topic or possible search statements. For example, PICO can be used with topics related to health sciences. Information about different options is available from the information specialist of your own discipline. You can also negotiate the contents of teaching and supervision with the discipline’s information specialist.

Information seeking in thesis seminars

The idea of scientific information and the principles of information seeking are assessed during information seeking training in thesis seminars.

• What is scientific information?
• What makes a good scientific source of information?
• How to assess information and publishing channels?
• What is systematic information seeking?
• How can you approach your own topic from the viewpoint of information seeking?
• What are tags? What are index term lists?
• How are they used in information seeking?
• How do databases work?
• The most common and multidisciplinary databases
• Discipline-specific databases
• Multidisciplinary topics: possible databases of close sciences
• Reference control
• Saving referencing on a reference management system
• Where to find more information on information seeking?

Teaching about information seeking usually acts as a great kickstarter in the process of information seeking. The students writing a thesis usually need the supervisor’s help with information seeking, as the thesis topic and assessment of sources may change, especially in cases of undergraduate degrees. If the student is still struggling with using databases, they can request a personal tutoring meeting with the discipline’s information specialist or through a separate booking form . However, during undergraduate degrees and writing a Bachelor’s thesis, group meetings in seminars are a place where students can ask questions and go through problems, they might have in terms of information seeking. This means that the personal tutoring or supervision meetings mentioned before are mostly aimed at Master’s thesis or postgraduate students.

Referencing and forming a table of contents is also something that should be practiced during thesis seminars. This is e.g., to make sure the students are aware of the basics of research ethics. The Open Science Centre can also help with handling references, as it arranges monthly training regarding reference management during semesters.

Tips on source groups

• Scientific articles are an essential source of information among several disciplines, because they entail new and fresh research results: single articles are usually published faster than monographies
• Articles from your own discipline
• Books are also an important group for sources of information on a variety of disciplines
• Check the key databases from your discipline’s checklist
• Citing and referencing page numbers : there are differences depending on the form of the e-book
• Guide for using e-books
• Remote access to Electronic Resources
• Google Scholar is a search engine, not a database
• How to choose scholarly sources ?
• Does assessing open sources differ from other types of sources?
• How to find open sources through e.g., browser extensions ? 
• An example of a search phrase on JYKDOK: ensyklopedia* OR encyclopedia* OR hakuteos* OR hakuteokset* OR sanakirja* or dictionary
• Reference books are often helpful when doing concept analysis. They can be searched on JYKDOK through search terms, and some disciplines might have them in their own databases
• Research methods for humanists (Mehu) , useful for other than humanists as well
• SAGE Research Methods Online (SRMO)
• Research methods web resource (MOTV)
• Methodspace
• Information on your own discipline’s methods is available in basic sources, but you can also search for additional method guides.
• Research method guides can be used based on your discipline for, for example, data analysis, planning a research topic, as support for concept analysis, and a writing tool .

What is data management?

Data management is responsible handling or research data, which takes proper scientific practices into account. Typical data can consist of e.g., interviews, questionnaires or surveys, measurement results, material from archives, or code.

The key starting point in data management is planning. For example, you cannot conduct interviews without planning the handling of personal information. A person’s speaking voice is a direct identifier, so every interview consists of personal information.

Forming a data management plan helps take the following factors into account:

• Ethical issues
• Practicalities
• Legal issues

Proper data management helps conduct better research.

Quick tips for data management

• The student forms a data management plan in addition to their research plan. Check the template for a data management plan
• The plan needs to be updated as the research progresses!
• Keep the coherence and quality of the data in mind. A good practice is to take a copy of your raw data and the setting you’re starting with and make changes to that copy, if possible. Then you can check back to the original data if needed.
• If the thesis is made together with a research group or an outside source or party
• Come to an agreement on what kinds of responsibilities and rights the student has. What is done to the data once the thesis is finished? Will the data or pieces of it be published? Is the thesis itself published first, followed with the study of the research group?
• If the student is gathering data for the uses of the research group, how is the student supposed to document the data so that it is easy to understand and systematically portrayed (metadata)?
• Does the data include things protected by copyrights?
• If personal data is involved,
• If delivering the privacy notice to the study participants is impossible, the notice is made public
• The student is the data controller, and the thesis supervisor is named in the privacy notice
• Instructions from the data protection officer on consent and the basis for processing information
• Consent is a condition of participation in the study. Consent should be documented, either by having the participant sign a consent form or e.g. recording verbal consent in the interview recording.
• Data is stored in the U-drive, which can be accessed with university VPN.
• University’s O365 storage is okay, if no special personal data is handled.
• Personal information or other confidential information is not stored in commercial cloud services like Google Drive.
• When handling data, it is suggested to use the programs and environments provided or supported by the university. Commercial environments usually have more security and data protection risks
• Interviews are not recorded on a personal phone or other device. Instead, students use the university’s own recorder that the interviewer can borrow. An interview always includes personal information, as video, pictures, and spoken voice are considered as such
• When conducting an interview remotely: use the Zoom-program that has been acquired for the university . This version of Zoom is different from its general and public version. Instructions for remote interviews and their security can be found on the university’s website.
• Surveys and questionnaires are done with Webropol. It is good to remember to add a research notification and a link to the privacy notice in the survey’s introduction. If special personal data is handled, instead of Webropol, REDCap should be used.

Forms and detailed instructions: university’s instructions for handling personal data

• If there is some other type of confidential information involved, it is also handled securely. Confidential information is excluded from the thesis file that is published by placing them in a separate attachment (if they are a part of the thesis itself)
• Metadata and documentation
• Metadata: Information about the data is recorded in a separate document. For example, when the data was collected; software or devices used to collect the data or required to view the data etc.
• Folders and files are named systematically. The process of foldering the data should be included in the metadata
• Keep a record of data processing (e.g., Excel-sheet or a research diary)
• Saving: U-drive (remote connection through VPN)
• Memory sticks and hard drives are not recommended
• Unfortunately, the students do not have a location where a pair working on the same thesis can work together securely
• U-drive forms a backup automatically
• In addition, previous backup versions of a project or a thesis should be kept on the U-drive in case the writer needs to correct something
• Disposing of data, publishing, and archiving
• If the data includes personal or otherwise confidential information, it must be disposed of securely
• Data on recorders and files on a computer are overwritten
• Papers are placed in containers for confidential material (e.g., inside the university) or burned
• For now, there is no set process of student data publishing or archiving
• You should discuss with your students, how long they should store their data so that the thesis process is not compromised

The teaching team at the Open Science Centre is happy to help undergraduate students with questions regarding data management. Contact form (through which you can send your questions)

Contact us:

• Data protection specialist , handling personal information and other matters of privacy
• HelpJYU portal with security issues

Theses are usually publicly available . In the University of Jyväskylä, this is often conducted on JYX-repository, and opening up a thesis on JYX to the public is easy :

• The thesis file is delivered through an online form to save it on JYX
• Fill in the requested additional information about the thesis and give JYX permission to save it

You can contact the Open Science Centre about issues about saving your thesis to JYX, using pre-existing thesis templates and styles on Word etc.

The file usually has a few initial defaults regarding copyright issues, accessibility etc.

• The supposition is, that the thesis student has been able to use their research data according to copyright regulations, e.g., reference policies, so that other people’s rights have not been violated
• The file should also be produced following the Accessibility Directive, meaning that reading the file is as easy as possible for all readers
• Some text and image production basics are involved, e.g., using the style tools in Word, color choices in images, alternative texts in images and charts, and the choice of file format

In addition to the thesis itself, the process of publishing can include other texts etc. that are considered publications. An article is a publication when talking about an article-based Master’s thesis. However, when practicing research skills, the student might also publish their research data and other material. This was mentioned in the previous section.

A student can also take part in developing learning materials during the Master’s thesis seminar. In a case like this, should those educational materials also be opened ? This means that the student would be a co-creator with their supervisor. If the supervisor has developed the materials mostly independently, they should consider opening the materials, which is one possible characteristic of a good supervisor.

Openness is a normal part of publishing in the research world, and a thesis is a public document by default . The benefits of openness are easy to list, for example:

• The visibility of the work and competence of the student
• Working life
• Possibilities for research in the future
• Accumulating research skills
• Reliability of study results
• Reusability
• Anyone can use it anywhere
• Societal interaction and communication
• Even the visibility of the supervisor’s expertise

Saving a thesis on JYX usually opens the document for everyone to read. This means that it appears well in web searches and it is added to Finna’s national database . You can ask more about saving a thesis to JYX from the Open Science Centre .

In special cases, the thesis cannot be opened to the public. This can happen because of the topic of data in the thesis. The thesis can be about e.g., a criminal case, in which case file confidentiality is required. However, you should still investigate somehow displaying the metadata of the thesis.

Openness has many forms , of which you should discuss with the writer of a thesis. The Open Science Centre also provides help with the various forms of openness. You can ask specific questions or order a separate training for your seminar group . Examples of the forms of openness are

• Publishing channel that is closed (requires a subscription fee) but also where the writer can buy openness for a specific article
• An open publishing channel
• Green Open Access
• Black Open Access
• The seamy side of openness, should be avoided.

Confidentiality and privacy issues

Privacy issues concerning a thesis often arise from the topic at hand. For example, topics about business cooperation and child protection can set boundaries on openness, so that companies or individuals in real life targeted for research can receive the protection needed.

As mentioned before, a Master’s thesis is a public document by default. The writer of the thesis can choose how openly the thesis is shown online when downloading and saving it to JYX. For example, a thesis can be available only on a limited access computer at JYX, if the student wishes to choose so. If the thesis includes private information or other things that are confidential, they can be placed in a separate background document, which is not published on JYX. If the thesis was ordered by a company, the student can also construct a free form document or a presentation that handles the company’s internal affairs and information that would not be handled in a public thesis.

The various forms of a Master’s Thesis: tips on article-based theses

You can open your thesis through University of Jyväskylä’s JYX-publication channel, or in other forms through external publishers. The university and its faculties have their own guidelines on defining a thesis and its contents, and these guidelines can also contain categories for possible publication channels. These kinds of categorizations are also available for article-based Master’s theses. Here are some tips on how to consider different publishing channel for an article-based thesis:

• The focus of the publishing channel
• Getting familiar with the author’s guide
• The readership of the publishing channel: information reaches its potential audience
• The possibility of openness?
• Closed publishing channel → permission to insert an article to a Master’s thesis and open it on JYX?
• Several official – even e.g., numeral – ways of reviewing publishing channels. The channels should be compares and the writer should get familiar with their contexts of use, e.g.  
• Publication Forum (JUFO)
• Several indices and impact factors
• Additional help from altmetrics? E.g., downloads.

Preplanning is important when choosing the right publishing channel as well as while conducting research. This means that publication strategies should be considered during the process of writing a thesis. This kind of planning is also important in terms of acquiring a useful working life skill, and if the degree student is aiming towards doctoral studies in the future. The supervisor can raise discussion about doctoral studies during a Master’s thesis writing process. For example:

• Principles of publishing an academic article: how to bring up a possible career as a researcher?
• Funding: JYU’s open access agreements by publishers are also available in article-based theses
• If you are interested in a career as a researcher, it is useful to start the process of profiling. For example, ORCID (international) is commonly used . When becoming a doctoral student, you can combine ORCID and JYU Converis -profiles together , which makes profiling through release notes easier.

Links for accessibility

• Accessibility in theses on JYX
• General accessibility guidelines (Celia)
• Theseus guide (Universities of Applied Sciences)
• Pay particular attention to e.g.:
• Planning of thesis as a whole: Clear division of paragraphs and chapters. Using style designs in writing programs
• Alternative texts for non-textual sections
• Clear language and expressions
• Creating a PDF-file so that features enhancing accessibility are saved to the file.

Copyright issues

Copyrights are often handled during data acquisition training by reminding about referencing and practicing the use of reference management programs. These are tightly connected to research ethics, which is a topic that should be dealt with in detail during thesis seminars. Copyrights are linked to the thesis writer themself, papers and other productions made by others, text, images, audiovisual material and so on. More information about thesis copyright issues at JYU .

Copyright issues come with several related terms and concepts, from which the following are often encountered when writing a thesis: threshold of originality, related rights, and paternity laws. When it comes to co-writing, coming to a pre-agreement is important. When publishing the thesis, you can think about different kinds of licenses, for example, Creative Commons licenses are often used in a variety of theses and papers regarding their openness .

More information on copyright issues and licenses is available at the Open Science Centre. For example, information sessions on licenses are held as well . Additional information is also available online:

• You will receive a label or certificate after finishing Kopiraittila’s course. It can be used in teaching, e.g., as a requirement for course completion
• Kopiraittila academy (Kopiosto)
• Copyright ABCs -series (Sanasto)
• Tekijänoikeus.fi ( Copyrights in Finland)
• C-info (Kopiosto)
• Teaching and copyrights
• Operight (IPR University Center, OKM) (Copyrights in teaching) ( https://operight.fi/ )
• Images and copyrights
• ImagOA (Aalto University)
• Image copyright ABCs -series (Kuvasto).

Referencing this manual

Open Science Centre (2022) Thesis supervisisor manual. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä. Online guide. URN: https://openscience.jyu.fi/en/thesis-tutorial/thesis-supervisor-manual/supervisor-manual/ (Link updated: date fron the web page . Link checked: date .)

Information seeking in short:

• Teaching about data acquisition during seminars
• Request a training from your discipline’s Information Specialist or via online form
• LIB1THP Introduction to Information Seeking -online course (1 credit)
• Consultation when needed (Master's theses)
• Material availability and other usage of library services: LibraryStart

Data management in short:

• LIB1DATA Introduction to Research Data Management -online course (1 credit)