Research Supervision
Information and Tools
Print PDF

Problems: prevent & cope

Overview and research

As the saying goes 'it takes two to tango' and generally when things go wrong during candidature, there are generally a few basic principles, whether it be the candidate or supervisor who is expressing the concern. More information is also available on health and wellbeing during candidature.

1. Act early: as with so many things, acting quickly before the situation can escalate and get out of hand, is generally a positive step.

2. Act locally whenever possible: whether candidate or supervisor, it is usually better to start with the person immediately concerned and then work out to people further removed from the situation - e.g. postgraduate convener, Head of Department, Dean of the College, or Dean of Students.

3. Keep records: discussing issues but not being able to remember details or dates can be frustrating for all concerned.

4. Seek advice: before proceeding with a formal grievance it is worth seeking advice, this is for candidates as well as supervisors.

Of particular concern in the postgraduate research environment, is the very personal and generally private nature of the candidate/supervisor relationship and the power differential inherent within that relationship. The potential for misunderstanding is considerable. Having said that it is interesting to note that in most surveys of research student satisfaction, generally about 80% of candidates state that they are satisfied or very satisfied with supervision. However, that leaves approximately 20% who are not satisfied and it seems that when things go wrong they are likely to go very wrong.

Most universities have informal and formal grievance procedures. Informal procedures generally involve talking within the supervisory panel of the department or the research group, to sort out the difficulty. For students it often means talking with peers, particularly those in the Postgraduate Students' Association. In universities, such as the ANU, where there is panel supervision, often other members of the panel make excellent 'sounding boards' for concerns, of either candidates or supervisors.

Formal procedures are usually outlined on university web sites, and might vary slightly, but generally follow the process outlined below:

For candidates:

There would be an expectation that the issue would have been addressed at the local level before being taken further. Following that, there would be an expectation that the candidate would have discussed the matter with the postgraduate coordinator or head of unit. If the matter is still not resolved, then candidates would take their grievance to the Dean of Students or the Dean of Graduate Studies.

For supervisors:

The Annual Reporting process is an opportunity for the supervisor and/or panel to formally express a concern. There are occasions when supervisors have not taken the Annual Report seriously and given it a cursory sign-off, afterwards realising concerns about candidate progress that they have not explicitly documented. Concerns are then generally raised with the Postgraduate Convenor, followed by the Delegated Authority (Head of School or Dean). If the issue cannot be resolved at this level then it generally progresses to the Dean of Graduate Studies or Pro/Deputy Vice-Chancellor.

Ideas and tools

Many of the suggestions made in the Getting Started section of this web site can help avoid a number of the more common misunderstandings which lead to grievances.

ANU information

The ANU has a range of helpful services for students and staff

 

For College-specific information contact:

Currently colleges are compiling information for experienced supervisors at ANU. In the meantime, contact the College Associate Dean (HDR) for more general college information.