Research Supervision
Information and Tools
Print PDF

Monitoring student progress

Overview and research

One of the major responsibilities of a supervisor is monitoring the progress of candidates. There is ample evidence to suggest that candidates who do not receive regular monitoring are at risk of withdrawing from their program or taking significantly longer than usual to complete.

Monitoring candidature involves several individuals:

  • The candidate
  • The supervisors on the panel
  • The postgraduate convener or equivalent
  • The Head of School or equivalent

Some of these forms of monitoring are formal, and others informal.

Formal monitoring examples are listed below, including those provided by the ANU. It is suggested that the following are important milestones in canditure:

  • Presentation of a thesis proposal at a "public" seminar. There is some research to suggest that, not surprisingly, where candidates present a less than ideal proposal seminar, it is likely that there will be difficulty with the progress of candidature.
  • Annual reviews and plans. While there is a tendency for some supervisors to suggest to candidates that the annual review of progress and planning for the coming year is an administrative 'burden' only, the research suggests that where these reviews are undertaken by the candidate, supervisors, and the research centre - as a serious aspect of candidature - they can contribute substantially to progress. Carey Denholm (2007, p. 63) suggests that in "any review session it is important to:
1. talk about the purpose of the session and the time period;
2. ensure that all parties present remain within the boundaries of the review;
3. discuss what will be recorded and to whim any report will be sent; and
4. make explicit that the review is to assist the candidate to achieve their tasks and goals."
  • Mid-candidature presentations. Again there is some evidence to suggest that some supervisors and research centres see such presentations as an administrative necessity, yet the research suggests that such presentations contribute substantially to candidature learning, development and progress.
  • Internal surveys of candidate satisfaction. The progress of candidature relies on several components, and while in some cases the candidate might be one of the main areas of concern, many studies suggest that poor supervision is more likely to be a cause of lack of progress rather than lack of candidate ability or application. Regularly reviewing the quality of supervision is an integral aspect of monitoring progress.

Informal monitoring examples:

  • Keep an eye on the contact that a candidate makes; e.g. when a candidate fails to make meetings, or cancels a number in a row, a supervisor would be wise to take action and not wait for the annual review of progress. There is evidence to suggest that more frequent meetings with supervisors are strongly correlated with timely and successful completion;
  • Presentations at local, national and international conferences;
  • Submission of manuscripts for peer review and publication;
  • Focus groups of candidate satisfaction.

Critical tips for supporting candidates with their project progress:

  • Helping candidates break down a three to four year project into manageable chunks
  • Initiating time and project management skills
  • Encouraging self-management skills, i.e. avoiding self-sabotaging behaviours that many can adopt
  • Encouraging early and frequent writing
  • Developing a supportive and intellectual research culture.

The above text was based on the following research:

Carson, E. (2007). Helping candidates manage their candidacy. In C. Denholm & T. Evans (Eds.), Supervising Doctorates Downunder (pp. 54-61). Melbourne: ACER.

Denholm, C. (2007). Conducting reviews of candidacy. In C. Denholm & T. Evans (Eds.), Supervising Doctorates Downunder (pp. 62-70). Melbourne: ACER.

Latona, K., & Browne, M. (2001). Factors associated with completion of research higher degrees (Higher Education Series). Canberra: DETYA, Higher Education Division.

Taylor, S., & Beasley, N. (2005). A handbook for doctoral supervisors. London: Routledge.

Ideas and tools

An example of a very effective monitoring process is presented by John Lloyd from the Computer Sciences Laboratory

ANU information

Supervisors have specific responsibilities regarding monitoring outlined in the following:

ANU Policy on Supervision

Milestones for PhD candidates (pdf)

Policy on Annual Reviews of Progress and Plans for following twelve months

Policy on Proposal Seminars

 

For College-specific information contact:

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