Inside the Postgraduate Experience: Postgraduate Research Project
University of Bath Students’ Union
1
Inside the Postgraduate Experience: Postgraduate Research Project
Table of Contents Background and aims of the project ...... 6 I. PGR isolation ...... 7 1. Background ...... 7 2. Types of isolation ...... 7 3. Differences of PGR study ...... 9 4. Mental health ...... 10 5. Contributory factors ...... 10 6. Work-life balance ...... 14 7. Types of social interaction ...... 15 8. Support mechanisms ...... 16 9. Summary ...... 19 10. Recommendations ...... 19 II. PGR Induction ...... 21 1. Background ...... 21 2. PGR start dates ...... 21 3. Arrival and desk space ...... 22 4. Provision of information ...... 23 5. Defining expectations of PGR study ...... 27 6. Lifecycle of the research degree ...... 28 7. Student handbook ...... 29 8. Networking opportunities ...... 29 9. Recommendations ...... 30 III. PGT induction ...... 32 1. Background ...... 32 2. Central induction ...... 33 3. Central induction website ...... 33 4. Faculty/ departmental inductions...... 34 2
5. Advance communication...... 35 6. Relevance of induction ...... 35 7. Support services ...... 36 8. Alumni ...... 37 9. Community and networking ...... 37 10. Summary ...... 38 11. Recommendations ...... 39 IV. PGR lifestyle ...... 40 1. Background ...... 40 2. Wider student experience ...... 40 3. Differences from other levels of study ...... 42 4. Work pattern ...... 44 5. Work-life balance ...... 45 6. Networking ...... 46 7. Socialising ...... 47 8. Sports ...... 51 9. Campus services, transport and accommodation ...... 52 10. Summary ...... 55 V. PGT lifestyle ...... 57 1. Background ...... 57 2. Wider student experience ...... 57 3. Differences to other levels of study ...... 58 4. Challenges ...... 58 5. Work-life balance ...... 60 6. Social activities and networking ...... 61 7. Sports ...... 63 8. Campus services, transport and accommodation ...... 64 9. Summary ...... 65 VI. PGR supervision ...... 66 1. Background ...... 66 2. Expectations of supervisors and PGRs ...... 66 3. Supervisor absence ...... 71
3
4. Supervisory team ...... 71 5. Accessing support ...... 73 6. Supervisory interest ...... 76 7. Research environment ...... 77 8. Summary ...... 78 9. Recommendations ...... 79 VII. Teaching by Postgraduates ...... 80 1. Background ...... 80 2. Allocation of work ...... 80 3. Training...... 81 4. Feedback to GTAs ...... 84 5. Pay ...... 84 6. Zero-hour contracts ...... 86 7. Balancing teaching and PGR study ...... 88 8. Support ...... 91 9. Recommendations ...... 91 Appendix A: Executive summary ...... 93 I. Supervision (PGR) ...... 93 II. Teaching by postgraduates (PGR) ...... 93 III. Isolation (PGR) ...... 93 IV. Induction (PGR) ...... 94 V. Induction (PGT) ...... 94 VI. Postgraduate lifestyle (PGT and PGR) ...... 94 Appendix B: Methodology ...... 95 1. Aims and objectives ...... 95 2. Methodology ...... 95 3. Analysis ...... 96 4. Report and recommendations ...... 96 5. Topics ...... 96 Appendix C: Summary of recommendations ...... 97 I. PGR isolation ...... 97 II. PGR induction ...... 97
4
III. PGT induction ...... 98 IV. Supervision ...... 99 V. Teaching by postgraduates ...... 99 Appendix D: Key recommendations and responsibilities ...... 101 I. PGR supervision ...... 101 II. Teaching by postgraduates (PGRs) ...... 101 III. PGT induction ...... 101 IV. PGR induction ...... 102 V. PGR isolation ...... 102 Appendix E: Destinations and formats ...... 103
5
Background and aims of the project
Over the summer of 2015, the University of Bath Students’ Union carried out a dedicated research project investigating postgraduate issues. The project was commissioned to look at various areas of the postgraduate experience – research postgraduate (PGR) and taught postgraduate (PGT) induction, PGR supervision and PGT dissertation supervision, PGR and PGT lifestyles, teaching work carried out by PGRs, isolation in PGR study, and engagement with the Students’ Union. The project was envisaged as part of a year of renewed postgraduate focus for the Students’ Union from 2014-15, with the introduction of Postgraduate Forums for all postgraduates to raise concerns, the development of postgraduate campaigns and improvements in sports, social events, and a range of other Students’ Union provision for postgraduates.
The project aims to gather qualitative data in a new depth on a broad range of postgraduate issues, which could then form a strong evidence base for developing future campaigns, working with the University and helping to determine the Students’ Union’s representative priorities. The issues addressed in the project had been highlighted through representative forums like Research Academic Council and Postgraduate Association Executive, as well as University committees and postgraduate surveys such as Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES) and Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey (PTES).
It was clear that the differences in PGT and PGR experience needed to be reflected in the project, and PGTs and PGRs were interviewed in separate groups, with PGT and PGR issues explored separately throughout the project. The interviews and analyses were conducted by a current PGR (Sahand Malek, PhD Mechanical Engineering) and PGTs (Charlotte Miles, MRes Social Policy and Sarah King, MRes Education) at the University of Bath, to ensure a detailed understanding of the themes discussed.
Qualitative data was sought because of its value in building narratives and developing new perspectives, with existing survey results already providing strong source of current quantitative data. The main research method was semi-structured focus groups, with in- depth interviews used instead on topics where a degree of anonymity might be preferred. Where relevant, PRES and PTES response as well as policy and practice of the University of Bath and GW4 and other comparators are related to discussions from these focus groups and interviews. On the basis of the project reports, sets of recommendations will be made on each topic, and it is planned that these will directly inform the approach the Students’ Union takes on those issues.
6
I. PGR isolation
1. Background
Doctoral research is an intensive, demanding experience, and for many PGRs conducting original research can often be a solitary pursuit. The cohort experience which is generally an integral part of undergraduate and taught postgraduate life is usually absent in doctoral research, although in the sciences PGRs may work in small research teams and Doctoral Training Partnerships (DTPs), Centres for Doctoral Training (CDTs) and Doctoral Training Centres (DTCs) now offer a growing minority of PGRs something of this cohort experience. The pressure not only to produce the highest quality work for successful completion of the research degree, but also for conference papers and publication, as well as managing the supervisory relationship and starting to build a career, is considerable. PGRs undoubtedly approach research study differently from most undergraduates or PGTs: those who have chosen research study are often more focused and driven, while the average PGR is several years older than the average undergraduate and has already experienced university life, and sometimes career and family life as well. However, in recent years across the sector it has been highlighted that many PGRs find their research degrees to be profoundly isolating experiences, for a significant number leading to long periods of anxiety and depression. There are features which are common to research degrees across the sector, but supervision, institutional arrangements and even subject spread may play a part. The term ‘PGR isolation’ is used across the sector to describe to these experiences as an issue particular to PGRs. Currently no University of Bath policies explicitly address PGR isolation, but social activities, research events, and support services address some of its possible causes and consequences. This study seeks qualitative data to develop the picture of research study at the University of Bath, conducting fourteen face-to-face interviews in a semi-structured format and one email response to hear in depth about their PGRs’ experiences of managing the pressures of doctoral research. Although the interviews were open to all PGRs, all those who came forward to participate were MPhil or PhD students. In addition to PhD students forming the majority of PGRs, it is possible that the structure of PhD programmes may lend themselves to isolating experiences than professional doctorates or integrated PhDs.
2. Types of isolation
7
The participants all agreed that the term ‘isolation’, was an accurate description of their experiences as PGRs, although to differing extents. Others said that the feeling of detachment had left them with a sense of loneliness, which exacerbated their levels of anxiety and stress. However, distinction was made between different forms of isolation. 2.1 Social isolation The most common issues participants reported related to their social interaction. Participants related being able to meet acquaintances and some friends, but struggled with developing deeper relationships or truly close friendships. This was regarded as affecting their wellbeing, without access to the informal support that is provided by a network of friends. This isolation was described by participants as a new experience that was not a feature of undergraduate or PGT study:
‘When you do an undergraduate or a taught degree you have regular classes and you get to meet people on a regular basis. Even if you don’t talk…at least they’re there. You feel like you’re part of something. When you’re doing a PhD…you don’t have a lot of people to talk to except your supervisor and maybe a couple of friends. I mostly miss my social life.’ PGR isolation interview
Participants characterised the isolation as a product of the disparate PGR population on campus, with few opportunities to meet each other and those that exist having low attendance. 2.2 Isolation from the rest of the University Participants saw PGRs as being separate from the rest of the University, commenting that they were a secondary consideration for the University. This perception of the University prioritising undergraduate students was seen as evidenced by undergraduates having greater access to resources and social spaces on campus. This perceived status of PGRs as a marginalised cohort is a collective isolation rather than personal, but still affected the extent to which individual PGRs felt part of the university community. 2.3 Self-imposed isolation Some participants noted that they chose to deliberately isolate themselves from the university community. Most participants who identified themselves self-isolating did so for one of two reasons: firstly, to take a break from their work and to reset
8
themselves to stay motivated, and secondly to focus on work coming up for a deadline.
‘Your subject requires so much of you…which you can’t share with others.’ PGR isolation interview
However, in four cases, this self-imposed isolation was longer-term. Developing specific skillsets for their research, such as the use of a new software package, was noted as time-consuming and limiting available time for socialising and being with family. Secondly, given the high cost of living in Bath and for self-funded PGRs the high fees, there are significant financial demands on PGRS. As a result, there is an additional pressure to complete their research degree as quickly as possible and an additional reason for PGRs to isolate themselves as they focus on work.
3. Differences of PGR study
3.1 Solitary work pattern Participants agreed that the nature of research study, with PGRs focusing on a single topic that is different to that of their peers, can mean that most of their work time is spent alone with minimal social interaction which can lead to feelings of isolation. There was an acceptance that this is how their work would be conducted, but it was observed that it also impacts on their free time. 3.2 Campus culture It was noted that PGTs are far more included in campus life and social events in the University. Although PGTs are time-pressured it was felt that they have more time to participate in organised and ad hoc social activities., and that this type of activity does not take place as often for PGRs. 3.3 Social opportunities The more frequent opportunities for undergraduate students to interact socially were contrasted with PGRs’ need to find or create their own. Several participants expressed the view that PGRs are an afterthought in planning, often needing to fit into existing provision. 3.4 Communication with peers The level of specialism that is required to undertake a research degree limits the extent to which it is a shared experience compared to undergraduate and PGT programmes, or even many workplaces. It was agreed that this affects
9
communication, and as PGRs spend around 40 hours a week in research study, this change in their working environment can lead to feelings of isolation. 3.5 Programme duration The timescale of PGT programmes was cited as a key difference between the two cohorts. Participants noted that during a one-year course the focus is more intensive, whereas the longer duration of a research degree provided more time to enjoy other aspects of university life.
4. Mental health
There has been extensive discussion in national media and higher education sector about the potential of the PGR experience to impact on mental health, particularly stress, anxiety, and depression. Various factors have been discussed, including the more isolated work patterns of research study1, a work culture that accepts and demands long and unsociable hours, and support services not being accessed as often and as early as they should.2
The University of Bath introduced questions in PRES 2015 and PTES 2015 to track the number of PGRs and PGTs who had concerns about their own mental health while a student, and what support service they contacted, if any. The PGR response was concerning (20.6%)3 and was notably markedly higher than for PGTs (14.7%),4 although the data cannot be benchmarked with other universities. A survey of PGR mental health and wellbeing by Exeter University Students’ Guild reported high levels of ill health, including stress and anxiety, with 14% of respondents feeling isolated and alone with no help available.5
5. Contributory factors
5.1 Self-imposed and external pressure All participants saw the main source of pressure as coming from themselves, discussing high levels of self-motivation and the desire to complete their research
1 Times Higher Education, 11 July 2015, Tackling isolation amongst PhD students, https://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/blog/tackling-isolation-among-phd-students (accessed 26 August 2015). 2 The Guardian, 1 March 2014, There is a culture of acceptance around mental health issues in academia, http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2014/mar/01/mental-health-issue-phd- research-university (accessed 26 August 2014). 3 PRES 2015, Q42.b Have you had concerns about your mental health whilst a student at the University? 4 PTES 2015, Q54 Have you had concerns about your mental health whilst a student at the University? 5 Times Higher Education, 9 April 2015, Forty per cent of PhDs at Exeter suffer ill health, study reveals, https://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/forty-per-cent-of-phds-at-exeter-suffer-ill-health- study-reveals/2019540.article (accessed 26 August 2015).
10
degree. This level of academic study was found to be enjoyable and motivating. However, most expressed experiencing feelings of acute guilt if they were not working, even if this was outside office hours. One participant referred to experiencing ‘imposter syndrome,’ a constant feeling of despite their achievements not deserving to be doing the research degree, and having to work harder to mask or make up for this:
‘I am very self-critical… All this work pressure is me trying to prove to myself and to everyone else that actually I am smart enough… then no-one will ever notice that actually I’m not smart enough.’
PGR isolation interview
Imposter syndrome is a recognised psychological state, and it is widely acknowledged that a significant number of PGRs experience it. The sense of being a fraud can stop them building open and supportive relationships with other PGRs6 Two participants referred to their supervisor as a source of pressure to complete their work, one noting that weekly meetings and goals helped to keep them motivated. 5.2 Times of increased stress
There were three key transition points within the research degree that participants identified as having, or were anticipated to have, increased levels of pressure, stress and the need for self-isolation. The first of these stages is the beginning of the research degree, when the PGR is aware of the sheer volume of work in front of them and has a lack of a clear vision of where they were going had increased their levels of anxiety and stress. PGR induction seeks to go some way to address this, providing “clear and accessible information at the time of their registration to make them aware of, and to assist them in taking full advantage of, the academic and social environment in which they will be undertaking their studies”, 7 emphasising the value of networking and offering opportunities for this. However, research degrees can start at any time of the year and so those not arriving by October may have to navigate University life
6 The Guardian, 25 March 2014, Studying a PhD: don't suffer in silence, http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2014/mar/25/studying-phd-dont- suffer-in-silence-seek-support (accessed 27 August 2015). 7 QA7 University of Bath Quality Assurance Code of Practice: Research Degrees, 5.1 (Induction). 11
without comprehensive signposting, information or introduction to other PGRs that help them feel a part of the University. Secondly, confirmation and the start of the second year was seen as the start of a new phase of the research degree, with the need for work and self-motivation becoming more pressing than before. The third point identified as a period of detachment from the University was the writing-up stage. Long hours are spent working alone and intensively, and a PGR’s contact with their supervisor and many University services and activities reduce dramatically. However, without the structured commitments of laboratory work, fieldwork or supervisory meetings, PGRs often find the writing-up period enables them to renew social ties in a way not possible for most of their research degree. Pressure and stress were regarded as exacerbated by being at different stages to other PGRs sharing office space. When working at the same rate, colleagues are able to provide a sense of solidarity and support, but experiencing it alone can be isolating.
‘We tend to work together, those of us at the same level and stage of our PhD… we tend to stick together and work together… Then we motivate each other, if one person is working really hard and you are slacking you feel really guilty so you start working at their level so it works.’ PGR isolation interview
It was acknowledged that there are peaks and troughs of stress between these stages, defined by PGRs’ personal goals or additional projects they take on. One PGR had become a co-ordinator for a project and this was causing her to work up to twelve hours a day. Preparing to speak at conferences or writing articles for journal publication also increased workload, but these were seen as an aspect of research and not an additional burden. 5.3 Different start dates Social interaction was found to be even more difficult to achieve for PGRs who did not start in September or October. As well as missing out on induction events, fewer PGRs begin later in the academic year8, reducing the sense of a shared experience further. 5.4. Types of research
8 PRES 2015, Q24a. 30.6% (Bath). 12
Participants also reported their feelings of isolation varying depending on the nature of their research. Those carrying out laboratory-based research, or working on their own in a specialist research area felt more disconnected from their social network than those working as a team on a larger research project, collaborating with other research institutions or doing research that was fieldwork-based.
‘If you’re the only person doing the project, it’s just your supervisor and you… if you just sit at a desk for 12 hours a day you don’t see a lot of people.’ PGR isolation interview
This distinction is recognised across the sector, with PGRs in the humanities identified by many commentators as more likely to be more personally directed, solitary and potentially isolating.9 However, PGRs in some other disciplines, such as computing and maths, could also involve solitary research and potentially some of the difficulties of isolation. 5.5 Part-time study A high proportion (32.6%) 10 of PGRs are part-time, but these PGRs are at a disadvantage in a number of ways. Juggling the commitments of paid work with research study is a significant distraction and prevents it being the immersive experience that it is for most full-time PGRs. Accessing equipment, other resources and even desk space can also be a problem:
‘The other students in the lab tend to assume that my desk is a good dumping ground for stuff, is not occupied or is a hot desk…There is no understanding among the full time students that they are sharing with part time students.’ PGR interview
Part-time PGRs often miss out on induction sessions, networking and social events, and researcher development activities which enhance the PGR experience and their
9 The Guardian, 8 July 2014, Studying for a humanities PhD can make you feel cut off from humanity, http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2014/jul/08/humanities-phd-students- isolation, (accessed 26 August 2015). 10 Student Records & Examinations Office (SREO), Student numbers as at 1 December 2014, http://www.bath.ac.uk/student-records/statistics/stats-20141201-all.pdf (accessed 27 August 2015).
13
effectiveness as researchers. Their peers will finish sooner and move on, and the long duration of part-time study requires further commitment.
‘[It would be good to see] a community for students who are part-time and balancing a job with a PhD. Clearly support is needed as so many people don't finish.’ PGR isolation interview
5.6 Accessing resources Some participants commented that limited resources for researchers has meant they sometimes need to work antisocial hours in order get access to sufficient access to equipment, which often entails working alone at times when socialising would
normally be possible.
‘For the last four years, I can say, I have certainly been detached from a healthy balanced social life, there were periods of time that I was working for 16 or 18 hours a day week on week, and usually during the night because the equipment I needed was not available during the day.’ PGR isolation interview
5.7 Working environment Most participants worked alone, either in an office or a laboratory. There were differing experiences of working in shared offices, both causing and alleviating feelings of isolation. Some found their offices to be social workplaces with PGRs socialising together both on and off-campus, although this was not the experience of all participants.
5.8 Keeping in contact Some participants noted that they often lost contact with people they briefly met around the University, citing Freshers’ Week and induction events in particular. They would welcome opportunities to develop these friendships, suggesting that the frequency of postgraduate events at the start of the year should continue, at least for a few weeks.
6. Work-life balance
14
6.1 Flexibility The participants discussed how control of their own research and work schedule was different to both PGT study and to employment, allowing them to have the flexibility to define their own work/life balance. This allowed some to take time away from the office to make it up afterwards.
6.2 Organising a social life The full-time participants were already or were trying to treat their research degree as they would a full-time job, with office hours during the day and social activities tending to take place in the evenings or at weekends.
7. Types of social interaction
7.1 University contacts For most participants most of their social interaction took place on campus. As meeting people was found to be difficult by most participants, most of their friendships were developed with PGRs they shared offices with. This was where they spent the majority of their time, and determined the nature of the activities they engaged in, such as taking coffee breaks together.
It was commented that although most full-time PGRs spent most of their time on campus they spent very little of it interacting with other people. Some of the participants had engaged with Students’ Union societies during their research, noting that as postgraduates they were aware of being in a minority and found this off-putting.
7.2 Pre-existing relationships While pre-existing relationships were a part of the participants’ social lives, most of the contact took place electronically as often they did not live in the UK. One participant lived with their partner having moved to the UK for their study. Another PGR moved to Bath in her third year but still spends most weekends visiting friends and family. These relationships were described as offering an escape from the pressures of research as they are less accepting of weekend work. Although all of the interviewees had been in long-term relationships, they did not always consider these as being positive contributors to their progress, because whilst having to work continually hard this could lead to tensions between partners that then needed extra effort to ensure that good relations were maintained. During what is already a stressful time additional problems are raised with significant others that can increase anxiety levels as well as creating feelings of guilt that lead to barriers in communication. In contrast, two participants who had partners who are
15
PGRs or have already completed a research degree, found their partners understanding and accepting of the commitments of PGR study. 7.3 Social events Freshers’ Week was seen as a valuable opportunity to meet people, but few of the participants managed to maintain contact once it was over. It was suggested that similar events could be run throughout the year to help foster those friendships. Participants would like to see more postgraduate social events run by the Postgraduate Association (PGA) and other groups, and strongly supported having more regular and varied activities, with roller-skating and pub quizzes particularly enjoyed and recommended to be run again. It was felt that most of the events that were on offer from the Students’ Union were targeted at undergraduates and that this was off-putting for PGRs, as the types of activity did not always meet their needs and they did not want to be the lone PGR at the event.
8. Support mechanisms
8.1 Supervision Although participants generally accepted a level of solitude and sacrifice were inevitable in research study, several felt supervisors could do more to signpost support services when problems had arisen. It was noted by one interviewee that supervising PGRs was inevitably difficult to prioritise given their heavy workloads:
‘It comes down to the luck of the draw… for a lot of PhD students as to whether or not they get an academic… [who] can understand when they’re stressed out, or when they need some help, or when they need some pressure or when they need them to step back. If you have a supervisor like that, that’s great, if not it can be a pretty isolating time.’ PGR isolation interview
It should be noted that the University of Bath does provide training sessions for supervisors, although these sessions are provided to all supervisors. PGSkills runs courses for new supervisors, and for identifying and managing students in distress.11 Response on supervision in the Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES)
11 PGSkills, ‘Supporting PhD students in distress’ 16
2013 was roughly equivalent with the sector and comparators for contact 12 and feedback 13 , but a significant minority reported a negative experience 14 . More complex aspects of the supervisory relationship are not explored by PRES, and currently detailed supervisee feedback is not collected. However, the significance of the supervisor in PGR life and the supervisor’s weight in the relationship show, there is potential for unreasonable and isolating pressures. Supervision is addressed in further detail in the Supervision chapter. 8.2 Peer monitoring and support Several faculties have different schemes in place that introduce newcomers to senior PGRs for guidance. The interviewees provided positive feedback regarding this support but they did point out that these schemes were largely geared towards helping them with managing procedures, such as admission to the programme and academic formalities, but not assisting in making new friendship ties or stopping them from feeling isolated. 8.3 Networking and departmental events Weekly research seminars and monthly networking events are organised by most university departments, although not all departments’ seminar programmes are well attended. 15 Some departments also run PGR conferences, such as the Department of Psychology’s Research Psychology Conference with presentations by final year DClinPsy students.16 The Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences also runs an annual ‘Research Showcase’17 event for PGR research, and in 2014-15 had a student-led PGR conference.18 Events such as these are provided to improve the
12 Postgraduate Research Experience Survey 2013, Q1b, ‘I have regular contact with my supervisor/s, appropriate for my needs’, 87% at the University of Bath, compared to 87% for the sector, 87% for the Russell Group, 86% for the former 1994 Group. 13 Ibid, Q1c, ‘My supervisor/s provide feedback that helps me direct my research activities’, 88% at the University of Bath, compared to 86% for the sector, 86% for the Russell Group, 87% for the former 1994 Group. 14 Ibid, Q1b, ‘I have regular contact with my supervisor/s, appropriate for my needs’, 9% mostly/definitely disagree at the University of Bath; Q1c, ‘My supervisor/s provide feedback that helps me direct my research activities’, 6% mostly/definitely disagree at the University of Bath. 15 Research Academic Council minutes, 25th February 2015, item 8: PGRs in a research community 16 MPhil/PhD Psychology Annual Monitoring Report 2014-15 17 Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences, Faculty hosts annual Postgraduate Research Showcase, http://www.bath.ac.uk/hss/news/news_0042.html (accessed 25 August 2015). 18 Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences, Faculty hosts postgraduate conference: Changing Lives, Changing Worlds, http://www.bath.ac.uk/hss/news/news_0030.html (accessed 25 August 2015). 17
‘research culture’ which PRES highlights as in need of further development , 19 although Bath is ahead of the sector and Russell Group in this respect.20
‘It would be good if departments could put some more resources into allowing postgraduates to relax and to interact with the other people in their department…I know that in Biology & Biochemistry there’s a [postgraduate] society, PGBio, and they get funding from the department to run…[regular] events for postgraduates, and other members of staff can go along as well.’ PGR isolation interview
Seminars, as well as social events provided by some departments,21 are provided to help promote this culture – the sharing of research and enabling PGRs to build informal networks. However, interviewees point out that because these are purely academic events, rather than putting them at their ease and encouraging them to build friendly relations, they frequently feel intimidated by the formal academic tone of such events. Operating outside of comfort zones is crucial in doctoral study, but in community-building activities a more relaxed approach might be more suitable.
‘I tried to join the Friday drinks with the department, but you get the sense slightly that ‘you are a PhD student, we are staff’. They’re always welcoming but you have this barrier.’
PGR isolation interview
8.4 Postgraduate Research Ombudsman The University of Bath has a confidential Postgraduate Research Ombudsman service to mediate where a PGR is experiencing serious problems with their research degree but feels unable to contact their supervisor or director of studies, or this has
19 PRES 2013, Q5b. ‘I have frequent opportunities to discuss my research with other research students’, 70% at the University of Bath compared to 64% for the sector, 61% for the Russell Group and 61% for the former 1994 Group. 20 Humanities & Social Sciences Graduate School PGR Student-Staff Liaison Committee Report 2013-14 21 MPhil/PhD Psychology Annual Monitoring Report 2014-15; Economics Annual Monitoring Report 2014-15 18
been unproductive. The Ombudsman only acts if the PGR wishes him to, and is not a formal complaints process. 8.5 Counselling & Mental Health The University’s Counselling & Mental Health team offers a wide range of services to staff and students. Two of the interviewees who had been using their services stated that they were pleased with the help and guidance they had received and were happy to recommend them as an effective way of managing their stress and isolation. However, other participants were not fully aware of available support services. 8.6 Advice & Representation Centre (Students’ Union) The Students’ Union’s Advice team offer confidential advice and support on housing, academic and personal issues. These can be accessed by PGRs as they can by all students.
9. Summary
Feelings of isolation were experienced personally by almost all participants, going beyond a detachment from the day-to-day business of the University. The extent to which this was problematic depended partly on whether existing relationships and informal support networks were available, but research study could also place pressure on these. International students in particular found difficulty in separation from family and relationships. Participants felt that isolation could be improved with increased opportunities to meet and socialise with other PGRs, with regular, frequent contact a way to build on contacts made through networking opportunities. Participants accepted that much of their research would be spent working alone, but were generally happy with the demands of their work and found treating it as a job to be a useful structure. Often seeing themselves as in control of their own time, in the management of their work and the setting of their own goals which they enjoyed. Their motivation was generally seen as coming from themselves rather from the University or funders, although for some this could spill into feelings of guilt and anxiety. Support services were generally looked for within their department, whether through their supervisor or office mates. Where specialist advice was needed, better signposting of services would have been appreciated. What participants felt had helped them most, or would liked to have received, was informal help and support from their peers.
10. Recommendations
1. The PGA should run social events open only to PGRs as well as events open to all postgraduates, and increase the number of social events it runs throughout the year.
19
2. More signposting by graduate schools, departments and supervisors could be given on support services for PGRs, including Counselling & Mental Health and the Students’ Union. 3. The PGSkills course for identifying and managing students in distress should be made compulsory for all supervisors. 4. Students’ Union societies should explicitly target PGRs for participation and membership. 5. Departmental research seminars could be developed to include a more informal social element. 6. More information could be made available on stress points throughout the PGR lifecycle, including confirmation and writing-up, with advice on strategies for managing them. 7. Tailored communication, contact and activities for part-time PGRs should be available, and more work done to research their specific needs.
20
II. PGR Induction
1. Background
Induction for PGRs was reviewed in 2014-15, with some changes introduced in 2014- 15 and 2015-16, and a full review underway of QA7, the University of Bath code of practice for research degrees. This will have implications for what PGRs can expect from their university experience, with discussion of making QA7 can be made more engaging and accessible for PGRs. It is widely acknowledged that missing an induction due to a start of studies later in the year, or not having an adequate induction may feed into PGR isolation as well as affecting knowledge and familiarity with University and doctoral study. As with other levels of study, PGR induction is delivered in Week 1 both centrally and through departmental and faculty-level sessions. Separate PGR induction also exists for members of DTPs/DTCs/CDTs, although there is some crossover with departmental and faculty-level PGR induction timetables. In 2014-15 there was a shift in emphasis for central PGR induction towards ‘introduction’ and away from delivery of larger volumes of information. A focus group on PGR induction was conducted with five PGR students from various departments and in various stages of their research degree, with reference also made to the Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES), relevant University committees and the provision at some comparator universities.
2. PGR start dates
Participants that started their research degrees in October all received a formal induction at a departmental level which either lasted a day or an afternoon. Nearly a third of PRES 2015 respondents did not start in September or October22, and many did not consider the timing of the induction was suitable to their needs.23 The experience was quite different for PGRs who did not start in October. These students did not receive a formal induction to their doctorate and experiences ranged from having their supervisor show them around to being ‘given a large folder of
22 PRES 2015, Q24a. 30.6% (Bath).
23 PRES 2015, Q24b.3.a. ‘I received an appropriate interactive induction to my research degree programme’, 12.1% definitely/mostly disagree (Bath).
21
information and then told to attend the induction in September’.24 It was felt that as a result of not having a formal induction, these PGRs were left to follow their ‘own leads and timetable’, were not introduced to the cohort of PGRs and that there was ‘nothing in place’ to support their introduction to the University. This is a message corroborated by late-starting PRES respondents who saw other PGRs as the only source of information for the using the Library and other campus services25, while one complained that:
‘My supervisor just took me around introduced me to a couple of professors who works in our area – to two students to learn something from. From the department I didn’t have any induction at all’ PGR induction focus group
The PGRs within the focus group that had not started with the September/October cohort expressed that they were not given many opportunities to meet other PGRs, one stated that ‘I really felt like I didn’t know any other students for quite a few months….I still feel now as though there are a lot of people I don’t know’. The lack of induction leaves the potential for important gaps in knowledge and a partial dislocation from departmental and university life. One PRES 2013 respondent called for a better system that ‘recognises the multiple entry times for PhD students.’26 This could perhaps involve running the induction events two or three times throughout the year. Since PGRs can start at any time of the year, online induction sessions and information throughout the year would perhaps be the most effective method of reaching later starters. PGRs in Research Academic Council also suggested this as a resource that could provide valuable information to existing students throughout the year.27 Moodle sessions already offer information on some topics, but use of Moodle among PGRs is far lower than among PGTs and undergraduates where sessions are often key course materials.
3. Arrival and desk space
24 Research Academic Council minutes, 10th June 2014.
25 PRES 2015, Q9.
26 PRES 2013.
27 Research Academic Council, 31 October 2013.
22
One participant stated that for the first month and a half of their research degree they did not have a designated desk to work at. Examples were also given of new PGRs arriving at their allocated office and others in the office not aware that they were arriving. One PGR was assigned a desk which was already being used by someone else, an experience described as ‘unwelcoming’, and a daunting experience to arrive at a new place of work when your colleagues are not informed of your arrival.
‘When you try and set yourself up somewhere, you don’t feel very welcome’ PGR induction focus group
It was suggested that beginning a research degree in this way can be ‘isolating’ and possibly affect integration into the office environment. One participant commented that the University ‘wouldn’t do that to academic staff’ and that new PGRs should be treated with the same respect accorded to academic staff starting a new role. It was suggested that the reason behind the problems with other PGRs not being notified when a new PGR is arriving is that since departmental administration moved into the centre of the University the onus is on academic staff to inform PGRs of such information.
4. Provision of information
4.1 Practical information Focus group participants stressed the need for practical information such as campus maps, information about how to get a library card, how to get your post, access training cards, how to access maintenance grants and general information around how the University runs. Pre-arrival website information28 directs PGRs to Graduate Schools and support services, and campus maps are available on the University website but there is not a single page which sets out key information for all PGRs across faculties. Most PRES 2015 respondents felt the University website
28 Postgraduate offer holders, http://www.bath.ac.uk/pg-offer-holders/ (accessed 12 May 2015).
23
provided the information they needed29, but there was also comments that ‘crucial information [is sometimes] well hidden’.30
‘Being a PhD student they thought that we can do it on our own – but would have liked to have that information.’
PGR induction focus group
4.2 Continuing PGRs and non-PGT graduates It was suggested that the PGR induction assumes that PGRs have come straight from a PGT programme, which is often not the case, particularly in STEM subjects where the norm is a four-year undergraduate. Accessing induction information was seen to be ‘really challenging’ by one participant. Online resources would be useful in this area, not to replace this information being delivered face to face at induction, but so that this practical information can be re-accessed after induction. It is understood that for 2015-16 PGR induction, a ‘New to Bath’ session31 for non- continuing PGRs will be run, but a similar tailoring process is not currently planned for PGRs with different academic backgrounds.
4.3 Volume of information The volume of induction information and the current arrangement of multiple sessions was raised in PRES 2015 by several respondents as problematic. Providing an appropriate level of induction information which offers suitable preparation without overloading PGRs is a challenge, but a development of the induction format might make this balance easier to achieve. PG Induction Working Group has already looked at reducing the length of PGR Induction and the amount of information conveyed, shifting something of the focus of induction from information to introduction and meeting staff and fellow PGRs. More content is planned to come from faculties and departments to reduce the potential for repetition and the need for multiple sessions.32
29 PRES 2015, Q24b.1 ‘The University web pages were appropriate to my needs’, 74.8% mostly/definitely agree (Bath).
30 PRES 2015, Q25, ‘additional comments about induction’.
31 PG Induction Working Group action notes, 8 June 2015.
32 PG Induction Working Group action notes, 8 June 2015.
24
One PRES 2015 respondent suggested ‘induction should be not only at the very start but also on each 6 months’ 33 to highlight available facilities. However, although providing some additional information, repeat sessions are likely to present logistical challenges as well as difficulties achieving repeat attendance.
4.4 QA7 Code of Practice QA7, the Code of Practice for Research Degrees, sets out PGR expectations and responsibilities and the processes of research study, so a broad familiarity with it important to all PGRs. One interview participant stated that they did not find out about QA7 until three months after beginning their research degree.
‘I learned that QA7 is a very important document that everyone has to read – I learnt this 3 months after I started… nobody told me.’ PGR induction focus group
As part of a wider review of QA7, the University is considering changes to make the Code of Practice more widely accessed by PGRs.34 This review was discussed in Research Academic Council35 where it was suggested that QA7 should be more clearly laid out in a more engaging format, possibly with colour-coded headings and potentially in a question and answer format. Some Russell Group universities including Bristol,36 UCL37 and Edinburgh38 present their equivalents as a manual or handbook rather than a regulatory framework. 4.5 Checklist A popular idea amongst participants was the suggestion that to ensure that PGRs are getting the support they need when arriving they should be provided with a
33 PRES 2015, Q25.
34 Revised PGR Induction Event Paper – 2015 (2014).
35 Research Academic Council minutes, 10 June 2014.
36 University of Bristol, Regulations and Code of Practice for Research Degree Programmes 2014/15 http://www.bristol.ac.uk/esu/pg/researchcodeonline2014-15.html (accessed 12 May 2015).
37 UCL, Graduate Research Degrees Codes of Practice 2014-15 http://www.grad.ucl.ac.uk/codes/CoP_Research_1415.pdf (accessed 12 May 2015).
38 University of Edinburgh, Code of Practice for Supervisors and Research Students, http://www.ed.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.161884!/fileManager/CoPSupervisorsResearchStudents.pdf (accessed 30 July 2015).
25
checklist that covers what they are meant to know and do when they begin their doctorate. This would help with the general feeling that participants expressed of ‘not knowing what I was meant to be doing’ when they started. 4.6 Designated induction lead Participants also suggested a designated contact in charge of induction to whom PGRs could direct any questions and concerns. This was a popular idea as PGRs felt the only other person they could ask was their supervisor, who they would not want to contact with problems of a more practical nature. Although a staff member would be ideal in this role, PGR peer mentoring would go some way to addressing this function, with an individual PGR able to seek advice on orientation and the procedures of research study. 4.7 Students’ Union It was felt that information about the Students’ Union (SU) and the SU’s Postgraduate Association (PGA) was lacking during the inductions received, with information about provided through leaflets with little commentary. Clarification was requested during the induction, particular by international students within the focus group, of the role of the SU and the PGA, how they work, and interact with the University. It should be noted that an overview of the SU is included in the central PGR induction, and sessions on the SU are held in faculty inductions. 4.8 PG Skills A prominent theme that came out of the focus group was that participants often felt quite displaced during the induction week and the subsequent first few weeks of their research degree. While the participants spent the majority of their time reading around their research area during this time, it was felt that this time could be more effectively used for additional preparation and training. Incorporating PG Skills into induction would benefit PGRs in two ways: first they would be equipped with information that will assist in undertaking the research degree within the first few weeks which are ‘fundamental to being able to access your subject or bits of the university’ , instead of learning such skills ‘six to eight months after starting’, and second through undertaking PG Skills within the first few weeks it would ‘take some of the pressure off the rest of the PhD’ when work pressures become more intense and it is harder to fit in training sessions. 4.9 Paid work The majority of PGRs teach or demonstrate,39 and several participants felt that this aspect of the PGR experience was not adequately covered in the induction.
39 PRES 2015, Q17, ‘taught (or demonstrated) … during your research degree programme’, 53.9% (Bath).
26
One PRES 2013 respondent stated that ‘I would have found it useful to be told the hours the university expects you to work and the number of hours/holiday the average student works’. 5. Defining expectations of PGR study
The duration, intensity and pattern of research study can present new challenges and potential pressures, and a fifth of PGRs experience stress, anxiety or other mental health concerns at times during their research degree.40 Induction would never be able to fully prepare for these pressures, but participants who did receive a formal induction reported that there was too much focus on ‘why we were really, really lucky and privileged to be doing a PhD’ and not enough around the realities of ‘the tougher sides of it’. It was suggested that more useful would be for PGRs to be informed about the realities of doing a research degree such as ‘at six months you start to feel like you don’t know what you’re doing with it’, ‘stresses to do with your transfer’ and the ‘second year slump where you don’t know what to do’.
PGRs who had not received an induction could face still greater difficulty, with the boundaries of responsibility in the supervisory relationship more likely to be difficult to establish, as well as how to navigate the challenges that may arise during doctoral study:
‘Due to a lack of induction, I'm not quite sure what mine or my supervisor’s responsibilities are. I am also unsure of who to approach when in doubt about any aspects of my PhD.’ PRES 2015 respondent 41
The acknowledgement of the potential difficulties of research study helps a PGR experiencing difficulties to understand that the experience is not unique to them and need not be coped with alone. With this in mind, it was suggested that including the opportunity to talk candidly about the experience of research study with current PGRs as part of induction would be useful if possible to achieve. Improved information needs to be provided about the support services that are available also has a role to play here.
40 PRES 2015, Q42.b, ‘Have you had concerns about your mental health whilst a student at the University?’ 20.6% (Bath).
41 PRES 2015, Q11, ‘comments about feedback mechanisms and student/staff responsibilities’.
27
The University of Birmingham Graduate School ran a ‘Starting out as a PhD researcher’ panel session as a part of its PGR induction. This addressed specific queries about all areas of the PGR experience, and as well as being more interactive and responsive than the conventional session format, was posted on YouTube for later access.42 6. Lifecycle of the research degree
Participants of the focus group felt that the lifecycle and key progression points of the research degree were not adequately covered in the induction they received. For the participants who did not start their research degree with the September/October cohort information around the transfer was particularly lacking with one participant stating that they were unprepared for their confirmation:
‘It was a shock when I was told I had to write my transfer report a week before.’
PGR induction focus group
This lack of clarity around key elements of PGR study was also reported in comments within the PRES 2013 survey, with assumptions that PGRs were already familiar with what a transfer and vivas were, and the lack of information on confirmation reports and six month reports. Bath PRES respondents reported less clarity on the requirements and deadlines of progress monitoring than both sector as a whole and pre-92 universities.43 However, a focus group participant from the department of Architecture & Civil Engineering, had a more promising experience stating that they were informed about ‘what a doctorate is and milestones and progression guide’. The UCL Code of Practice also includes a ‘Typical Timetable for a Full-time PhD Student’ with progression points and normally expected development over four years.44 Information is available in QA7 and Regulation 16, but an overview of the structure of the research degree could be a standard element of departmental induction. The national researcher development
42 University of Birmingham Graduate School, ‘Starting out as a PhD researcher - Q&A session’, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-1IJJ6qJOg (published 7 November 2013, accessed 25 June 2015).
43 PRES 2015, Q8.2.a ‘I understand the requirements and deadlines of formal monitoring of my progress’, 81.0% (Bath), 85.2% (sector), 85.1% (pre-92).
44 UCL, Graduate Research Degrees Codes of Practice 2014-15, p.16.
28
body Vitae now produces PGR induction resources for universities, including ‘routemaps for new researchers’45 and provides general advice to new PGRs which could be made available at induction.46 7. Student handbook
Several members of the focus group raised the idea of PGRs being provided with a Student Handbook that would outline the lifecycle of their research degree. The idea of a handbook for PGRs was also raised in PRES 2013 with one respondent suggesting that it could ‘serve as an actual reference in every step of the PhD programme and on every issue relevant to PhD students’47. It should be noted that the Faculty of Science provides departmental PGR handbooks48, although these addressed different aspects of research study, examples were not found that tracked the research degree lifecycle. This topic was discussed in Research Academic Council, in which it was raised that the National Union of Students (NUS) and Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) produced a guide for PGRs on the fundamental elements of research study: ‘The UK Doctorate: a guide for current and perspective students’. It was agreed within this meeting that a document which set out basic expectations in a similar way would be useful to include in PGR induction.49 8. Networking opportunities
Focus group participants highlighted was that some of the events during the official induction were mixed with PGTs. It was suggested that this could mean that PGRs miss out on a pivotal chance to network with other PGRs, as one participant remarked:
45 Vitae, Routemaps for new researchers, https://www.vitae.ac.uk/membership/vitae-members- area/researcher-developers-at-member-organisations/make-the-most-of-vitae-membership- 1/routemap-for-new-researchers (accessed 7 August 2015).
46 Vitae, Starting a doctorate, https://www.vitae.ac.uk/doing-research/doing-a-doctorate/starting-a- doctorate/starting-a-doctorate#induction-to-your-department (accessed 7 August 2015).
47 PRES 2013.
48 Faculty of Science, Handbooks: postgraduate programmes, http://www.bath.ac.uk/science/handbooks/ (accessed 7 July 2015).
49 Research Academic Council minutes, 10 June 2014.
29
‘I don’t have anything against the Master’s students but at the same time you start talking to people… then you realise “actually I’ve not spoken to a single other PhD student, I’m probably never going to see you again, as nice as it is to meet you it’s not that helpful for me for the rest of the year”.’ PGR induction focus group
The impression given from participants within the focus group was that they would appreciate having separate events for PGRs, perhaps at a faculty level, to enhance the opportunity to meet people with whom they have a shared experience. The University is now collaborating with the Students’ Union Postgraduate Association to deliver a networking social event as part of PGR Induction in 2015-16.50 The Freshers’ Week social programme run by the Students’ Union includes a separate programme of postgraduate events. PGR-specific social events were also included for the first time.
9. Recommendations
1. A dedicated PGR induction webpage with comprehensive information on orientation and PGR study, supervision, QA7, progression points and support services. A page that is maintained throughout the year would provide a valuable means of accessing key information to PGRs who do not start in or just before Week 1, as well as benefitting existing PGRs. 2. It would be useful for a session to outline the distinct characteristics of research study, including progression points and QA7. 3. A checklist of what PGRs should be aware of when they begin their research degree would be welcomed, including items addressing QA7, Graduate Schools, office space and supervision. 4. Some clarification beyond QA7 on the general responsibilities of PGRs and supervisors would go some way to resolve ambiguities, even if it would be
50 PG Induction Working Group action notes, 8 June 2015
30
unrealistic and undesirable to expect simple answers to how an individual PGR should work. 5. Candid discussion of the challenging aspects of research study that may be encountered would be useful, with a need to communicate the role of support services in addressing them more fully, including the Research Postgraduate Ombudsman and the Advice & Representation Centre in the Students’ Union. 6. A panel session that enabled new PGRs to ask staff and alumni questions on key topics of research study would go some way to addressing concerns and queries. The session could be uploaded to an induction webpage. 7. Increased PGR-specific networking opportunities would be beneficial.
31
III. PGT induction
1. Background
While PGT induction featured less prominently than PGR provision in reviews and planning of induction for 2015-16 by the University of Bath, it was also acknowledged that PGT induction is in need of development in some areas with the cohort having specific needs which require separate attention. The short period of PGT study leaves little time for orientation and highly pressured timetables, and the need to communicate information on University services, academic processes and campus life and is made more pressing by the high number of international students in the cohort. Part of the function of PGT induction to prepare for the transitioning from undergraduate to PGT study, even if the difference is not as pronounced as the start of PGR study. PGT induction has been modelled closely on undergraduate induction, and although the information provided is tailored for a PGT audience, there is far less differentiation than for PGRs. Similarly to undergraduates and PGRs, PGT induction is delivered primarily through departments with some content delivered through central induction sessions. The School of Management has separate induction provision for MSc and MBA students. University-wide review of PGT induction, alongside PGR induction, is overseen by PG Induction Working Group. Some PGTs will be continuing from earlier study in an undergraduate programme at the University of Bath, with these students likely to have less need for orientation. This is less common in the Faculty of Engineering & Design and Faculty of Science in which four-year undergraduate programmes provide a Master’s exit qualification, 51 although standalone PGT programmes (MSc and MRes) also exist in these faculties. In the Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences the route for Master’s study is through a separate PGT qualification (MA, MSc or MRes), or MSc or MBA in the School of Management. The University of Bath Students’ Union held a focus group of four PGT participants, with the intention of building a more detailed picture of the current PGT induction experience and PGT preferences for development of the induction programme. Where appropriate, reference has been made to PRES 2015 response and the provision of comparator universities.
51 Four-year undergraduate degree qualifications at the University of Bath for 2015-16 include MMath, MPhys, MEng, MChem, MSci, MComp, MPharm, MPharmacology.
32
2. Central induction
Departmental and faculty inductions were seen by as having been more effective than central induction by respondents to the Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey (PTES) 2013. 52 Separate University-level, departmental and faculty induction questions were not included in PRES 2015. Group members reported that little was provided in terms of university-wide induction, apart from a talk about the Library. It was suggested that the first day of induction could be a university-wide induction for all PGTs with a tour of the University – perhaps undertaken by PGRs, it was discussed that this would be a good idea to ‘bring people to together’. This would be favourable as one participant said that they ‘spent weeks looking for other postgraduates’, and an opportunity to network with other PGTs was lost. The University of Birmingham PGT induction session was developed ‘in close consultation’ with PGTs at the institution, and includes content on effectively transitioning from undergraduate to PGT study as well as information on accessing University services.53 Participants suggested that the University of Bath PGT induction should include tours of the University, tour of the city, information about buses, information about specific postgraduate facilities and a better introduction to the Students’ Union (SU), the Postgraduate Association (PGA) and support services at the University. Participants commented that they would have welcomed the opportunity to meet more PGTs as part of the induction process. It should be noted that campus tours and information about the SU and the PGA, as well as some orientation information are already provided in departmental and faculty induction sessions, but attendance is variable. A more detailed PGT induction page with this information easily accessible would be likely to reach more students.
3. Central induction website
The PGT induction website has relatively little information for new PGTs, functioning mainly as a landing page for departmental inductions, a side panel menu also including links to information on registration, accommodation, international induction, central
52 PTES 2013, Q18.3.a, ‘I received an appropriate Department-level induction to my degree programme’: 73%; Q18.4.a, ‘…appropriate faculty/school-level induction’: 67%; Q18.5.a, ‘…appropriate University-level induction’: 63%.
53 University of Birmingham, Induction sessions, https://intranet.birmingham.ac.uk/as/studentservices/pgt/inductions/index.aspx (accessed 4 Aug 2015).
33
induction sessions, SU Freshers’ Week, and support services.54 The PGT induction web presence has improved in recent years, now consisting of a dedicated PGT webpage rather than an area on a general induction page. PTES 2015 largely confirms this, with 84.9% satisfied with induction webpages, 55 although notably this refers to departmental as well as central induction pages. However, some universities have developed more accessible, visually engaging induction webpages. King’s College London offers information engagingly and comprehensively for ‘your first weeks essentials’,56 covering navigating the campus, useful checklist, student services and the SU. The University of Bath’s School of Management MSc57 and MBA induction pages58 are a move towards this approach, with fresh, attractive layout and induction checklist.
4. Faculty/ departmental inductions
Participants reported significant variation in the duration, depth and scope of induction provision across departments and faculties. This ranged from a formal induction week with activities from 9-5 every day (Department of Biology & Biochemistry), one that was three days long (Department of Mathematical Sciences) to one lasting just a few hours (Department for Health).
Departmental induction timetables for most departments link from the University’s PGT induction page, but the Department for Health is not included.59 It was agreed by participants that although disciplinary differences required differentiation, PGTs across departments should all be provided with appropriate induction sessions and be provided with similar basic information, provided in their
54 University of Bath, Taught Induction, http://www.bath.ac.uk/pg-offer-holders/when-you- arrive/taught-induction/ (accessed 4 August 2015).
55 PTES 2015, Q30.1.a ‘The University web pages were appropriate to my needs’, 84.9% definitely/mostly agree, 3.7% definitely/mostly disagree.
56 King’s College London, When You Arrive Step 4 – PGT induction, http://www.kcl.ac.uk/ioppn/study/prospective-students/studsupport/WhenYouArriveStep4/PGT- Induction-Step-4.aspx (accessed 3 August 2015).
57 School of Management, Induction activities, http://www.bath.ac.uk/management/postgraduate/induction/induction.html (accessed 5 August 2015).
58 School of Management, Induction activities: full-time MBA Induction Week, http://www.bath.ac.uk/management/courses/mba/induction/induction.html (accessed 5 August 2015).
59 University of Bath, Taught Induction (accessed 5 August 2015).
34
induction pack and awareness around specific events. One participant expressed frustration that the opportunity to participate seemed to be dependent on ‘what e- mail list you are on’.
5. Advance communication
Inadequate communication prior to induction taking place was a common experience amongst participants. Two PGTs from the Department of Biology & Biochemistry were informed that they had to do a presentation in their induction week on their first day of induction and would have appreciated more preparation time as it ‘was a bit thrown at us’. It is understood that most University of Bath communication is by e-mail to University of Bath account and students are directed to use this account. However, it is clear that currently not all students are being reached, and if practical additional emails to personal accounts on key topics might achieve greater contact. The participant from the Department of Mathematical Sciences reported being informed that they needed to get to Bath for a designated arrival time when their induction did not start until three days later. They related a feeling of ‘hanging around and waiting’ for something to happen which can be a difficult experience when moving to a place where you do not know anyone and have not had the opportunity to meet anyone yet. The participant undertaking an MRes in the Department for Health also reported that ‘there were specific events that I should have gone to but I wasn’t… aware.’
6. Relevance of induction
Those that received a lengthier induction at a departmental level found that the information provided was useful and appropriate, however more needed to be done at the university level. However, the participant who received an induction that lasted just for a few hours (Health) did not, reporting that academics were introduced who ‘I have never seen again since.’
‘We did not feel like we were there for a purpose other than just to say we’ve arrived and to tick us off the list’. PGT induction focus group
Unsurprisingly, those that received a fuller induction from their department said that they felt it was made clear that the year ahead would be challenging and that they ‘needed to be prepared mentally’, however, the participant who received a short induction stated that ‘I didn’t know what was expected of me…I felt even more lost than when I went into it’ and that without information on to shape expectations and 35
inform them of opportunities, students from the course ‘grouped together as students, rather than with the University, to help each other struggle along.’ The response from those that received a fuller induction suggests that such an experience set them up on a positive start to the year ahead. PTES 2015 respondents were largely (80.7%) satisfied with their programme induction,60 but significant minority (10.5%) felt strongly that they did not and it is possible that satisfaction is spread unevenly across departments.
7. Support services
Information received about services such as the SU, Student Services and the PGA was variable, ranging from the informative to the superficial. One participant (Biology & Biochemistry) had received an induction pack in the post which included information about Student Services, the SU, Freshers’ Week, buses and city life which was ‘really useful’. However, the other three participants had not received this induction pack which was seen to be a lost opportunity for them to have learnt about the university before arriving and that everyone should be receiving this pack. There was agreement that it would be useful to include information about support services in the university-wide induction, and it was apparent that currently not all PGTs are accessing that information. One participant remarked that ‘you feel like a bit of an idiot asking who is the SU, is it a person?’ when such information is not provided. The need for more information on support services including the SU was echoed in the Social & Policy Sciences Staff/Student Liaison Committee (SSLC), where it was suggested that induction could benefit from inclusion of information on the Advice & Representation Centre 61 , which provides confidential advice and support on mitigating circumstances and assessment offences, housing, personal issues and academic complaints. There is an understandable reluctance to overload PGTs with information during Induction Week, but the content for September 2015 has been agreed to include brief talks from Student Services, ICIA, Student Opinion, Academic Skills Centre, Computing Services, Sport, Foreign Language Centre and Careers.62 The recording of sessions that could be hosted on central, faculty or departmental PGT induction pages would mean key information could be easily accessed and re-accessed. The University of
60 PTES 2015, Q30.2.a, ‘I received an appropriate interactive induction to my programme,’ 80.7% definitely/mostly agree, 10.5% definitely/mostly disagree.
61 Department of Social & Policy Sciences, Student/Staff Liaison Committee minutes, 3 March 2015.
62 PG Induction Working Group action notes, 9 March 2015.
36
Birmingham has recorded PGT induction sessions for support services63 on its website and YouTube to increase accessibility. It was also suggested by participants that PGTs need to be informed about postgraduate facilities on campus, such as the Graduate Centre and the computer room in the Library. Three of the four participants only found out about such facilities through ‘word of mouth’, with one participating that they found out ‘too late’ to make the most of them. Being informed of postgraduate-specific facilities was regarded as important by participants as it distinguishes their experience from undergraduates, something that the induction did not provide.
‘You are seeking out where [you are] different from an undergraduate, where are the differences?’
PGT induction focus group
8. Alumni
Participants suggested that their induction could have been improved if they had had the opportunity to speak to previous PGTs (possibly through the Alumni Office) and current PGRs. Creating course-specific Facebook groups would be a good way of making those connections and creating such events.
9. Community and networking
Induction should also welcome PGTs to the University as a community, but the as the majority of PGTs are part-time (56.3%)64 and distance-learning, attending timetabled sessions may be difficult. One PRES 2013 respondent identified distance learners as a particular focus, suggesting that ‘This should go beyond a technical and administrative intro to the course requirements and to Moodle. One should feel one is joining a community of learning.’65 Specific distance-learning programmes, such as MSc Sport
63 University of Birmingham, Postgraduate taught induction recordings, https://intranet.birmingham.ac.uk/as/studentservices/pgt/pgtvids.aspx (accessed 25 June 2015)
64 SREO, Student numbers statistics: December 2014, http://www.bath.ac.uk/student- records/statistics/stats-20141201-all.pdf (accessed 5 August 2015).
65 PTES 2013, Q19, ‘additional comments which could help us to design a better induction programme and process for future postgraduate students’.
37
& Exercise Medicine66 and MSc Sports Physiotherapy67 run ‘face-to-face’ induction events for their cohort. Again, online resources and recorded sessions could play an important part. Participants from the Department of Biology & Biochemistry found that buffet lunches provided throughout their induction week gave them a good opportunity to speak with other students from their course. However, participants from other departments were not given this opportunity. Freshers’ Week itself, run by the Students’ Union, includes a separate programme of events for new postgraduates, with high participation from PGTs. However, all participants reported that the postgraduate-specific events that took place in Freshers’ Week were not well advertised, with two of the participants not aware of them until towards the end of the week and one not aware of them at all until after they took place, the only participant fully aware of such events was the person who received the induction pack.
‘In hindsight it’s not too late, it’s only the first week you’ve got such a long time here, but at the time [it seems that] everyone will have made friends already and those kind of thoughts put you off’. PGT induction focus group
The Postgraduate Big Welcome Party at the end of Freshers’ Week, open to all new postgraduates and run by the Students’ Union with University support, attracts around 500 new postgraduates, largely PGTs. The event provides an opportunity to network with PGTs from all departments, but departmental networking events are useful to build PGT communities within those departments. Participants suggested that having a Facebook group for a PGT programme is a good way of organising events and for prospective PGTs to contact and speak to previous PGTs. Several PGT programmes already use Facebook events for community building, sometimes set up by a PGT course member. It is worth noting that not all PGTs use Facebook, and over-reliance on any social media can exclude non-users. 10. Summary
66 Department for Health, MSc Sport & Exercise Medicine, http://www.bath.ac.uk/study/pg/programmes/spor-and-exer-medi/ (accessed 5 August 2015).
67 Department for Health, MSc Sports Physiotherapy, http://www.bath.ac.uk/study/pg/programmes/spor-phys/ (accessed 5 August 2015).
38
The intensity, level and shortness of PGT study presents new challenges for orientation and community building, and PGT induction should reflect this and address the needs of the cohort, including distance learners. Faculty-level and departmental induction is crucial to cover significant disciplinary differences, but important too are the shared experiences of central induction which assists day-to- day university life and the development of informal networks. SU Freshers’ Week plays a pivotal role in building this PGT community, and increased publicity of this and SU and other support services should be integral to the induction programme. 11. Recommendations
1. A more comprehensive and engaging PGT central induction page with information about buses, specific postgraduate facilities and a better introduction to the SU, PGA and other support services.
2. Use of personal email accounts where possible for pre-arrival information.
3. Alumni could be used more for induction sessions, giving new PGTs the opportunity to speak directly to peers about course experiences.
4. Facebook groups could be set up for specific programme/years, enabling community building by course members communicating directly and informally before Week 1.
5. Improved promotion by departments of PG Freshers’ Week.
6. Clearer communication of support services, including the SU.
7. Improved provision for distance-learning students that specifically include distance learners in the university community.
8. Recording of sessions and posting them would benefit distance learners and those unable to attend sessions, increasing the reach and effect of induction.
39
IV. PGR lifestyle
1. Background
Focus groups discussing the PGR lifestyle were run to develop understanding of how PGRs spend their time and the ways in which this is affected by their research. The following topics of daily life were chosen for the focus groups: socialising habits, views on non-academic events, academic events and networking, campus services, sport and non-sport activities and accommodation. Two focus groups run with a total of 10 participants were run, with PGRs from the Faculty of Science, Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences, and School of Management. 9 participants were PhD students, with one DBA student. 5 participants international students, and there was one part-time student.
2. Wider student experience
2.1 Academic staff The participants noted that the high quality of the academic staff at the University of Bath, and the positive effect this had on PGR life. 2.2 Disciplinary diversity The diversity of disciplinary knowledge of students and staff at the University was cited as a positive aspect of the student experience, offering the opportunity to meet people with different specialisms within the same discipline or outside of it. with other people’s passion and enthusiasm for their subject and studies being an important factor. This was especially interesting for PGRs returning to study after being in the workplace.
‘Meeting other people who have that same academic passion, doing work in their fields.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
2.3 Lab space The pressure on space on campus due to increases in the student population was also found to impact on lab space availability for PGRs. This problem is
40
exacerbated by the need for PGRs to share this lab space between research staff, undergraduates and PGTs. The majority (77.8%) of PRES respondents felt they had suitable access to specialist resources,68 slightly lower than other pre-1992 universities (79.9%).
‘For a leading, research-intensive University, the provision of space for PGRs is extremely poor.’ PRES 2015 respondent
2.4 Ambiguous status PGRs felt separate from the staff, partly due to age but also status, and felt that they could not attend staff events in much the same way that they felt different and separate to the undergraduate population.
‘We’re not quite staff but we’re not like undergraduates either. It’s a weird king of limbo, trying to relate to either one.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
2.5 Language One overseas PGR with English as an additional language highlighted how non- native speakers in the the latter part of their research are faced with the additional challenge of having to achieve a standard of academic English that will allow them to graduate successfully, which means that time for socialising is squeezed even further that it:
68 PRES 2015, Q4.4.a, ‘I have access to the specialist resources necessary for my research’, 77.8% definitely/mostly agree, 7.8% definitely/mostly disagree (Bath); 79.9% definitely/mostly agree, 8.6% definitely/mostly disagree (pre-1992 universities excluding Bath).
41
‘I am not a native speaker, so need to spend more time …to make study meaningful… to work a little bit more, [and] you have to stop your social life to go back to work and study… Your previous social life was better, but you get used to it. You feel you have to work more, and you adjust to it without feeling you are sacrificing anything’
PGR lifestyle focus group
2.6 Students’ Union societies The participants had found Students’ Union (SU) societies and groups useful and enjoyable ways of meeting people, and WineSoc, the wine-tasting society, was picked out for particular praise. However, it was noted that because of their largely undergraduate membership, societies were not always available in ways that fitted around their working hours. Some participants also found the predominantly undergraduate membership off-putting.
‘The vast majority of them [societies] are undergrad-based. Because the undergrad population is so much higher, they tend to flood everything. If we had the equivalent societies, but for postgrads, it would be quite helpful.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
Although comprising about a tenth of the student population, PGRs only make up 2.0% of SU societies membership.69
3. Differences from other levels of study
The PGR lifestyle was often compared to situations in either the PGT or undergraduate experiences to illustrate difference or to highlight areas for improvement.
69 SU societies – all members 2014-15 demographic report
42
Lectures, which for undergraduates provide a means to make and develop relationships with peers, are not generally attended by PGRs.70 Without the structured community of lectures and seminars, PGRs found it harder to meet their peers and it was felt to be a difficult transition.
‘[As] undergraduates, you spend a lot of time together and form some kind of community because of that… whereas [PGRs]… don’t have the same spaces to meet people in a similar field. You don’t spend as much time in those groups. That’s a big difference.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
It was also commented that PGRs’ differing needs for space were often not addressed. PGRs have different social requirements and are at a different stage to undergraduates, and would not normally relax in an area used by high numbers of undergraduates. Participants felt they had very limited options on campus, with entertainments and social space apparently geared predominantly to undergraduates.
‘The SU promotes undergrads more than postgrads. Postgrads are not ignored by the SU but not as much resources are given as are given to undergrads.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
It was felt that the postgraduate community is not as cohesive as it could be, with the size of the population relative to the rest of the university cited as a possible reason together with the perception of many University services and the SU being aimed at undergraduates. It was thought that more attention could be paid to them.
70 PGRs in integrated PhDs are likely to attend lectures, and other PhD students may also attend lectures for specific modules during their first year, although this is often sitting in in a PGT lecture rather than with PGR peers.
43
‘It’s quite isolating doing a PhD, being specialised in your field. It’s quite hard to … [go] out and say, “here’s a group of people that are also doing a PhD, I’m going to try and find friends in that group.” I find that quite hard.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
The different experiences of PGRs had led to isolation due to specialised nature of the research and most participants spoke about how this was different to their previous studies at Bath and other universities.
4. Work pattern
4.1 Research as employment Participants were in general agreement that they came to approach their PhD as a 9 to 5 job with regular working hours, although often they might work for much longer.
4.2 Increased flexibility With PGR programmes structured so differently to those of undergraduates and PGTs, without timetabled lectures and seminars, and no exams or assignments. Another aspect that is specific to the PGR experience is the increased flexibility when compared to either PGTs or undergraduates that comes from managing your own workload and from the length of the project. This allows PGRs to set their own working hours and to adjust them where necessary, at points of high pressure or to enable them to attend an activity.
‘The flexibility is just… awesome. I can go to whatever I want and do the work later… as long as the work is done.’
PGR lifestyle focus group
However, other PGRs adapted their working hours to fit in with what they were doing, changing when they arrived at and left university while still doing the hours of a full-time job. For example during the summer when there is nice weather a
44
day could be taken off during the week and replaced by working at the weekend. These students still preferred the 9–5 structure and sought to impose this themselves. 4.3 Paid employment Two participants reported strugglinmg with having to work either full time or in two part time jobs to support themselves. This has an inevitable impact on the available time for study and for having a social life or relaxing. Many PGRs71 also mark or invigilate which limits the amount of free time they have to spend on social activities or affects when they are available. Participants commented that part time study or the low levels of some studentships meant for many PGRs it was necessary to have enough paid work to for living expenses and engage with social activities outside of research. The strain of this differed between participants but for some PGRs this was the secondary aspect to their lives after the research degree, taking time away from social lives and time spent not doing research.
5. Work-life balance
PGR participants commented that achieving their personal work-life balance was a continuous learning process. Although many spent long hours carrying out individual research, they reported that they felt guilty that they were not doing enough. This meant that during their free time when socialising they were often uncomfortable as they had a sense that they should still be working.
‘Most of the time we do not have time to socialise, you have that guilt, you cannot spend five hours socialising’ PGR lifestyle focus group
‘I want to talk about the guilt; it is not from anyone, it [stems] from yourself.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
71 PRES 2015, Q17, ‘taught (or demonstrated) … during your research degree programme’, 53.9% (Bath).
45
5.1 Setting goals and milestones The participants discussed the importance of setting goals in their research to enable them to progress at the rate they intended to. These goals could be weekly or quarterly, with extra hours being done if needed to ensure that they were met, including coming onto campus at the weekends. 5.2 Changes throughout the research The participants discussed how at certain points in the research pressure increases and the balance shifts, the example mostly commonly given was the transition from year one that requires time spent on preparation. It was noted that this can lead to a period of self-imposed isolation due to the increase in, and importance of, the workload. It was also noted that despite being at university all year the term dates affect how they choose to structure their time. During the summer PGRs have more access to labs and resources without the undergraduates being on campus and that this acts as an incentive to get a higher proportion of their work done. The PGRs also have fewer commitments to teaching during this time, allowing them to focus on their own research. 5.3 Pressure to study and research The participants had found that the pressure to undertake their work came mostly from themselves rather than from external sources such as supervisors or funding bodies72. There was an understanding of the importance of their projects and the need to impose their own structures and timelines to the work in order to be successful. In regards to their supervisors the most participants reported that they had regular, often weekly meetings, but that they had a relaxed approach.
6. Networking
6.1 Meeting People The most important obstacle to socialising was the seen as the lack of opportunity for PGRs to meet new people and develop close friendships. Most friendships were made through other friends, often in the same department although the PGRs hoped to make friends from across the university. One part time participant had found it particularly difficult to meet people and felt very isolated despite working full time on campus.
72 This was also found in the data collected for the reports on PGR isolation and PGR engagement with the SU.
46
The events and activities that are run were seen to be largely used by undergraduates and the participants did not want to be the only PGR attending. Meeting people through the existing structure of events or sports was seen to be infrequent and fractured, often not developing further outside of the activity. Several participants made a clear distinction between socialising and networking for personal advancement and wished that the SU would help facilitate this.
‘Your ideal socialising is not meeting random people anymore. You want to meet people that are in a similar situation to you and have similar research interests’
PGR lifestyle focus group
It was also suggested that these activities should be organised departmental level or within a specific research topic.
6.3 Networking within departments There was general satisfaction with the opportunities received within the department to network with other PGRs on an academic basis, which they recognised as important for their development as researchers.
Networking within departments was seen as easier, facilitated by proximity and smaller scale events such as coffee or cake hours. Meeting PGRs was seen as more difficult, partly due to a lack of awareness of what is going on across the University73.
7. Socialising
7.1 Community The lack of a designated postgraduate space was seen as a significant barrier to building a postgraduate community74. The Graduate Centre in 4 West was seen to be more of a study space for PGTs rather than PGRs and the Claverton Rooms was seen as being for staff, both of which restrict the use of the space for social activities.
73 This was also found in the data collected for the report on PGR isolation.
74 This was also found in the data collected for the report on PGR engagement with the SU.
47
The Fresher’s Week postgraduate events were seen a good example of how to meet people from other departments, but following that initial week the contact dropped too quickly before lasting friendships could be established. PGRs who started mid-way through the year did not have this opportunity.
‘Freshers’ Week was amazing. We had postgraduate events every day… But after that there was a drop-off.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
The participants sometimes attended the extra lectures or seminars that are put on around the university, but on the whole these were seen to be largely extracurricular and not necessary to find time for. Reading groups were viewed as a way to interact with people, but only in a structured, formal and academic context that did not necessarily meet their needs. One of the main values of meeting other PGRs was being able to informally talk through problems and receive support and advice from peers. This was seen as a vital tool in learning about accessing resources or developing data management systems as well as keeping perspective and feeling less isolated. 7.2 Timing Despite variations in workload most PGRs will stop working at some point in the evening and would be able to participate in events, more so than at any other time, especially on Friday as it marks the end of the work week, which is how most PGRs view their studies. It was therefore suggested that these would be the optimum times to have events or activities to encourage people to attend. 7.3 Impact on social life The differing schedules of PGRs result from the increased flexibility were seen as another potential barrier to socialising. The participants felt able to adjust their time spent working to accommodate ad hoc social activities as long as they met their targets and made up the hours. However, there is an understanding that their research is the priority and social activities could be sacrificed.
‘I’m more concentrated on my work… because of the funding, because of needing [lab] resources… my social life is limited.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
48
Age and life experience were seen as significant reasons for socialising differently to undergraduates, noting that heavy drinking was now less frequent and activities more relaxed.
Activities that involve both PGRs and undergraduates were seen as potentially difficult due to work schedules. If these occur during the day then the PGRs may not be able to attend due to their workload.
It was suggested that the financial cost of having a social life can be a barrier for PGRs with smaller scholarships or additional pulls on their resources such as paying off loans that were used to pay for their master’s. 7.3 The importance of an active social life Having an active social life was seen to be a very important aspect of the participants’ lives. Human contact and social interaction were seen as a way to improve mood and maintain focus. 7.4 Encouraging PGRs to attend events Email was seen to be a useful tool for reaching PGRs, but there was also an understanding that PGRs already receive too many emails. The PGA Facebook page was also seen as useful, and one participant mentioned that they would even be happy to receive text messages as a reminder about important events. Participants felt that suitable timing was a key factor for increasing participation in events, with evenings and weekends are the best times as people will not be working. An example was given of the Mechanical Engineering Department who offered a free dinner at Christmas to the 120 PhD students, of which 20 signed up and 11 actually attended the event. This was put forward as a typical example of the systemic low levels of participation from PhD students. It was also noted that many PGRs talk about how they would like to meet more people, but the reasons for not attending are unclear. Again it was mentioned that this could be an effect of having infrequent events and that more frequent and regular events might attract more people. Participants also suggested that a social representative could be elected in each department whose responsibility it would be to distribute information about events and to encourage participation, noting that face-to-face contact can be more persuasive than email. 7.5 Specific events for PGR or mature students There was support for mature student or PGR- specific events, with participants thinking that this would encourage them to attend. It was mentioned that the 49
international student events that took place in the first weeks of semester 1 had been successful by focusing on one section of the population. One participant was critical of the term ‘mature student’, commenting that it further separated them from the main student body. The importance of meeting and spending time with people who are in a similar situation as yourself was recognised and targeted events were seen a good mechanism for achieving this.
‘You could go to a uni wide event, but would really want to meet other postgrads. There is something significant and important about meeting someone in a similar stage of life.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
7.6 Preferred events Departmental coffee hours were popular events with participants, despite taking place during office hours. These were seen as enjoyable as they took place near the offices, fairly brief at between half an hour to an hour, and allowed a short break from work to talk to colleagues. The pub quiz was also mentioned as being a favoured activity. Participants had also attended the Christmas events that were run.
‘The Postgrad Barbecue (PGA) was good… but everyone came in their departments and sat in their departments… but it was nice to see everyone.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
One participant noted that he would attend anything that was labelled as a postgraduate event, but that is was important to offer a range to attract people who wouldn’t. The summer sports events that were run by the 3:Thirty Club on a Thursday afternoon were seen as a positive step and fun to attend, with attendance building. These events, which have included volleyball, badminton, rounders, table tennis and frisbee, were seen as being helped by establishing a regular time and venue, with participants hoping that this could be extended to other events.
50
‘You have Score and Klass [for undergraduates]… it would be good to have a postgraduate club night… maybe every other Friday… in The Tub.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
The type of event was seen as a secondary consideration to who was going, one participant used the example of how you go to dinner to be with friends not with strangers, suggesting that it will be necessary to build a community, probably slowly, before attendance will increase. More postgraduate events with more communication of these events was emphasised.
‘Lack of events and opportunity to get together in different situations… [PGRs need] lots of events… pub nights, sports events, quizzes.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
7.7 Structured events It was commented that not all PGRs will be able to attend an unstructured event such as a barbecue and be able to make new friends, and some people prefer structured activities that create conversation and contact and it was this type of event that was seen to be lacking. The group members felt strongly that other PGRs would share their experience of wanting to make more friends but that they did not know how to find them.75
8. Sports
8.1 University facilities It was mentioned that the cost of the University Sports Pass is now included in fees over £7000 and that this was beneficial to PGRs. 8.2 Postgraduate only sports opportunities There was support for postgraduate sports, referencing the football league that is for PGRs and staff. Also the sports days offered over the summer. 8.3 Encouraging participation in sports
75 This was also found in the data collected for the report on PGR isolation.
51
It was discussed that a wider range of postgraduate opportunities for sports might encourage participation, also catering for a wider range of abilities as the University of Bath attracts people with a high level of ability which can be off putting for recreational players. The 3:Thirty sports activities were referred to, as were the postgraduate/staff cricket team 76 and postgraduate/staff football league at the University.77
9. Campus services, transport and accommodation
9.1 Food and Drink on Campus The participants used the food and drinks services on campus regularly for both food and drinks. Although the Claverton Rooms is only for the use of staff and PGRs, participants preferred the Lime Tree to the Claverton Rooms, as the food was seen to be of better quality and cheaper. However, the opening times vary during the summer period and it was noted that it is not always open during term-time, limiting the options available.
‘The Claverton Rooms is more expensive but the quality at the Lime Tree is higher… So there’s this postgraduate place [the Claverton Rooms]… that we don’t really want to get food at.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
Views on price were mixed: some saw prices as inflated in comparison to city centre equivalents, but others were less critical:
‘At least you have some options, prices maybe a little bit expensive, but in terms of choices it’s OK, quality is OK.’
PGR lifestyle focus group
76 University of Bath, Bath Venturers Cricket Team, http://www.bath.ac.uk/internal/staff/cricket/ (accessed 3 September 2015).
77 University of Bath, Staff / PostGrad 7-a-side Footy League, http://www.bath.ac.uk/internal/clubs/football/rules.html (accessed 3 September 2015).
52
They felt that the options met their dietary requirements but that they were boring and cost too much to have frequently. This meant that they often chose to cook themselves at home and bring it on to campus. They would like to see more microwaves to heat up food as this can often be a problem. It was seen as difficult to find somewhere to eat the food, as the Student Centre has large numbers of undergraduate students in term, a problem worsening every year with the increase in student intake. There was also discussion around the small availability of healthy options, noting that there is more space given to chocolate and crisps and that sandwiches are often heavy with mayonnaise. The fruit and vegetable stall during term time was used regularly and it was missed during the summer period. 9.2 Parking All of the participants lived in the city with four occasionally driving to campus, preferring not to because for environmental reasons, Bathwick Hill’s effect on their car’s performance and difficulty finding parking on campus. It was agreed that there was very little space in either the permit holder areas or pay and display, noting that they have sometimes driven around for 45 minutes trying to park.
‘It took me quite a long time to get to know I can get parking permit, for a few months I paid and displayed and then I find out [about] the parking permit. It seems expensive when you pay in the start of August but when you park everyday it’s OK’
PGR lifestyle focus group
PGR attendees and the PGA PG Forum also raised concerns about parking on campus, complaining that difficulties in parking had led to cancelled meetings.78
9.3 Buses Most participants were strongly critical of the bus service to the University, finding walking or cycling a more reliable option. The only participant happy with the bus got on at 7:50am before large numbers of students were using it. The bus was seen to be very busy, with long queues in term-time to get on buses that were often late.
78 PG Forum minutes, 24 November 2014.
53
As PGRs come to campus during vacation time as well, lack of reliability during this time was a particular issue. There was also confusion with the change in timetable when not in term time, noting that the buses often do not arrive at the time stated.
‘I think the price is fine, but the timing is not good… buses are never on time, especially during summer vacation they are less frequent.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
One participant did not feel safe cycling up the hills to the University because of the volume of traffic on the narrow road, but another enjoyed cycling and was happy to do so. The participants were not aware of what the University was doing to improve transport. 9.4 Accommodation The other participants lived in the city of Bath and privately rented, which they found quite expensive. They had used property websites, estate agents and personal contacts to find their accommodation.
‘Finding people to share accommodation… was my worry. Not knowing anyone to share with… Even though I was an undergraduate here, knew all the good places to live… it’s [just] finding people to share it with because it’s so expensive.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
One participant was having to move out of their current accommodation because they had started living there while they were working and were no longer able to afford the rent. They thought that living with other PGRs would be the preference of many PGRs, although most only three participants did this. The remainder either lived alone, with their partner or with professionals, and none lived with undergraduates. One
54
participant was living in student accommodation as a resident tutor and was happy with what was provided. The House Hunting Weekend was mentioned and all participants were aware of it and had heard it was well regarded, although none had been able to attend.
‘I used the university website [StudentPad] to find student accommodation, where I find my house I am moving next month; the website was good.’ PGR lifestyle focus group
The participants welcomed the idea of more events where PGRs could meet to discuss living together, as well as more information on good areas to live, where is convenient for travel and where other PGRs live.
9.5 SU services Although PGRs are registered students for longer than any other cohort, they probably use SU services and facilities less than any other. Participants suggested that because PGRs work at home or in an office with few other people, they do not generally have extended networks of peers who can inform them about events, societies, and other activities.
‘When you… are an undergrad or a PGT, you have classes so you have friends, so you will be informed. But when you are doing research you are either in your office or at your home studying, so there’s not enough time to check out what the SU offers you. I am sure they have things for PGTs and PGRs, but we do not have time to go and have a look’ PGR lifestyle focus group
10. Summary
Overall it was felt that being a PGR offered more flexibility that other forms of study or employment, regarded as a positive feature of research study, allowing them more time for social interaction or other activities than PGTs, whose workload was seen as more intensive.
55
However, socialising presented other key challenges for PGRs, with difficulties in meeting people being the main factor. The participants wanted more opportunities to meet people, having little contact with PGRs from other departments or faculties. PGR-only events were welcomed.
56
V. PGT lifestyle
1. Background
Focus groups discussing the taught postgraduate (PGT) lifestyle were run to develop understanding of how PGTs spend their time and the ways in which this is affected by their study. The following topics of daily life were chosen for the focus groups: socialising habits, views on non-academic events, academic events and networking, campus services, sport and non-sport activities and accommodation. Two focus groups run with a total of 9 participants were run, with PGTs from the Faculty of Science, Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences, Faculty of Engineering & Design and School of Management. 8 participants were MSc students, with one MRes student. 4 participants were international students. Reference is also made to the Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey (PTES) 2015 where appropriate.
2. Wider student experience
2.1 Small cohorts The participants enjoyed being part of a small programme with a diverse range of students, noting that this had contributed significantly to their experience. This also extended to the relationships they developed with staff, with these considerably improved by spending more time with them than if they were a larger cohort. 2.2 Application process It was mentioned that the application process at the University was easy to use and that they received a very fast response with details about the start of the programme. 2.3 Flexibility One student had found that the MRes programme had allowed them to choose units that tailored the programme to their own interests, and that this had improved their experience.
57
Participants were positive about their university experience, and this is borne out by PRES respondents with 93.8% prepared to recommend the University to friends.79
3. Differences to other levels of study
One participant noted that returning to postgraduate study after working and saving to self-fund produced a different and more appreciative perspective. It was felt by the group that the experience was more self-determined than undergraduate study, with students having to work harder to achieve what they wanted. The differences in contact hours between PGTs and undergraduates and the effect this has on making friends and meeting people was seen to be a key distinction. The greater volume and intensity of work was seen as giving less time to spend on friendships or other relationships, but this was accepted as a necessary part of PGT study.
4. Challenges
4.1 Accommodation Finding housing when moving to Bath to study had proved a challenge for some participants, with one living in a hostel for the first week or so before they found accommodation. It was a struggle for housing that was both affordable and close to the University. The focus group was conducted prior to the start of the 2015- 16 academic year, in which students at all levels of study experienced severe difficulties in securing accommodation. 4.2 Workload Most participants had struggled with managing their time during their studies and that focusing on their work meant that they were not always able to take part in other activities or spend as much time socialising as they would have liked. There was general agreement that during the first semester PGTs tend to be focus on familiarising themselves with their course and so had little time to attend events or join societies. By the second semester when they had got used to the intensive workload, they managed to find time to become more involved. However, they still found it hard to get a healthy balance between their personal and academic life.
79 PTES 2015, Q64, ‘I would recommend the University of Bath to a friend or relative’, 93.8% yes, 6.2% no.
58
‘My lifestyle changed… Because workload makes it change heavily, [with] long hours a day… at the University.’
PGT lifestyle focus group
Although like undergraduate programmes, PGT programmes are structured and reasonably large, and so conducive to forming friendships as people meet in lectures and seminars, participants reported that PGTs are less able to develop these networks to socialise and form friendships. As PGTs they found it hard to coordinate busy work schedules to meet socially as often as they were accustomed to.
‘I think my ideal socialising is to go out with a friend for dinner and catch up, [but at] times that you are busy, it becomes a coffee for 30 minutes’
PGT lifestyle focus group
Despite the pressures limiting social contact, respondents were all active online to build and maintain friendship and academic networks. Social networks were used to keep updated on developments in their academic field, as all were clear that they saw their course as a means to advance their career. This also extended to attending departmental conferences, networking events and learning new skills through training courses in the hope of getting a good job.
‘In biology we have PG Bio [departmental postgraduate social group] where they have regular events’ PGT lifestyle focus group
4.3 Communication of support It was mentioned that the personal tutor system was unclear and that students were unsure how to access this. One participant had felt that as an older student it was assumed that she knew what she was doing and may not need as much support, but at times needed to access additional guidance. 59
Bath has similar scores to other pre-92 universities and the sector as a whole in PTES 2015 for PGT awareness of support services, including health, finance, careers, and accommodation.80 4.4 University administration It was felt that there was often a lack of clarity of the processes used between departments, or the programme itself and that in an interdisciplinary degree programme this caused minor disruption and took time away from focusing on their work. There was also confusion around what exactly was expected of students in their assignments and the lecturers were not always clear about what they wanted. Feedback was seen to be a major issue, noting that it is often vague and offering few suggestions. One participant noted that their personal tutor was responsible for around 50 students and that this meant they felt uncomfortable going to see them, this was significantly different their undergraduate experience at the University of Bath where they had received a lot of support. Another student had found that as their course was small they did not have a personal tutor assigned to them. 4.5 Information for international students One student had found that there was a level of assumed knowledge that they did not have being an international student and that no provision was made for this. This included topics such as an overview of the UK higher education system.
5. Work-life balance
In contrast to PGRs, PGT participants reported using Students’ Union (SU) and University services extensively. This may be partly due to the PGT cohort structures enabling greater peer-to-peer communication than PGRs, access to University communication, and more time spoent on campus. International students are eligible for university accommodation and this can mean contact with students who communicate about University or SU provision.
5.1 Prioritising work The short duration of their PGT programme was a factor that participants were deeply aware of and this informed much of their student experience. This meant they were more ready to sacrifice social activities or other commitments to work
80 PTES 2015, Q14.4.a, ‘I am aware of how to access the support services at my institution (e.g. health, finance, careers, accommodation)’, 76.2% definitely/mostly agree, 6.8% definitely/mostly disagree (Bath); 78.4% definitely/mostly agree, 7.2% definitely/mostly disagree (pre-92); 77.0% definitely/mostly agree, 7.9% definitely/mostly disagree (sector).
60
for academic achievement. Participants reported accepting this without regret, acknowledging this from the start of their study.
‘I chose it… you either sacrifice your time or your grade, that was my choice, I could have not done that but I would not get the marks I wanted.’ PGT lifestyle focus group
5.2 Time management Participants identified points of higher pressure and increased workload, such as when assignments are due in and that at these times the time spent working increases proportionally but that this was manageable with suitable planning. It was important not only to know when hand-in dates are but to consider how much time beforehand should be spent preparing as the course is short the time can appear to be moving very quickly. 5.3 Dissertations and projects Participants also observed that when undergraduates leave in June, PGTs are expected to complete their research and then write up their dissertation for submission at the end of the summer. This means that they are busy throughout the whole year and so find it hard to find time to socialise or become involved in other aspects of university life. Towards the end of the year PGTs have the additional pressure of planning their career or further study. 5.4 Contact hours Due to the small number of contact hours required of PGTs, participants found that they could choose how they spent their time around these, allowing them to find a balance that suits them.
6. Social activities and networking
6.1 Postgraduate life The experience of PGT study was described by participants as putting their life on hold while also progressing in a different direction. One participant used the word ‘temporary’ to refer to their life as a PGT, discussing how it was a break from what they had been doing previously which would resume shortly, or the next step in career terms or doctoral study. 79.0% of PTES respondents reported their main
61
reasons for PGT study as being career development or research study requirements.81 Focus group members described their student experience as focused on academic achievement and learning, separate from ‘real life’ to which they would return afterwards and when social lives would take on greater importance again. It was suggested that this view is shared by the University and SU, and a reason there was less emphasis on the PGT social life than that of undergraduates. 6.2 The importance of an active social life Having an active social life was seen as being very important, noting that it can be counterproductive to try to constantly try and study and that breaks away from work can help the thinking process. Most of the time participants felt able to take time away from their studies to relax, apart from when assignments are due, but recognised this as a manageable inevitability of PGT study. Participants reported having to be more discerning about the social events they chose to participate in due to work commitments. However, unlike the PGR participants, PGT focus group members did not experience guilt at any time at which they were not working. Their studies were highly structured, involved a full timetable and a heavy workload, so they felt they were working hard enough, and so any free time they got was well earned. Although they had to limit social arrangements, they were able to relax and socialise when opportunities arose.
‘It is easier to feel less guilty because you have done a lot… and you feel when you go home [that] you have done enough and can relax or go out.’ PGT lifestyle focus group
6.3 Preferred events After the first few weeks the participants had not attended any events run by the university or SU, choosing instead to arrange activities with friends from their course such as playing board games, sports or going to the pub. The PGA Postgraduate Barbecue at the end of term was seen to be a good idea as people could attend straight after work and the sport afternoons on Thursday
81 PTES 2015, Q65, ‘My main motivations for taking this postgraduate programme were:’ To enable me to progress to a higher level qualification (e.g. PhD) 13.9%, career qualification/ career change/ improved carrer prospects/ professional requirements/ current job requirements 65.3%.
62
were to be both attractive and off-putting to different members of the groups, depending on their sporting ability. One student enjoyed their departmental coffee morning and found that this was a good way to meet people that didn’t take too much time. Another enjoyed the Global Café International Student Lunch that takes place in the Chaplaincy on Wednesdays for the same reasons, especially as they would be taking that break from working anyway. 6.4 Meeting people The participants felt that most of their friends came from their programme, and did not actively seek friends from other departments It was noted that the current range of provision for societies is already extensive, but they had preferred not to join societies as they found that they were often the only postgraduate when attending. There was consensus that it would more events early on in the academic year would be a welcome opportunity to meet people, but noted that later in the year friendship groups have become cemented with less need to meet other people. One participant noted that they had found it difficult to make friends and that the postgraduate events in Freshers’ Week were of limited help. The wine and cheese tour was seen to be a good option, but too expensive. It was also felt that many of the events were aimed at a younger age group and that this was not appropriate for students in their thirties.
7. Sports
7.1 University facilities Several participants had hoped to use the swimming pool but had been unable to do so due to its closure for most of the year. Only one participant regularly used the gym at the university and they had also used the pitches to play football especially as these are free to use during the summer period. The sports classes were felt to be used mostly by younger students and this combined with the high level of sporting ability of many of the users created an unfriendly and intimidating atmosphere for casual users. 7.2 Postgraduate only sports opportunities The participants had not heard about any specifically postgraduate sports opportunities provided by the 3:Thirty Club, but felt that they could encourage them to participate. 7.3 Off-campus sports facilities
63
Several participants had used off-campus sports facilities, for swimming, the gym and yoga. The benefit of using these was the range of other users and the feeling of inclusivity. The times of the fitness classes were also better suited to their timetables, noting that the ones in the city were based around working hours.
8. Campus services, transport and accommodation
8.1 Food and drink on campus It was felt that the food and drinks that are available on campus were able to meet the students’ needs, with coffee outlets being the most popular. It was mentioned that the food in the Fountain canteen was often higher priced but lower quality that the options upstairs in the Claverton Rooms, to which PGTs no longer have access. Overall the price was seen to be reasonable, but students did favour bringing in their own food. The choice of foods was seen as limited, even across all the different providers and there was support for the salad bar in the Lime Tree. 8.2 Transport Two participants drove to campus, finding parking to be adequate if arriving on campus early in the morning, with Wednesday seen as being the worst time of the week. The cost was also seen by one participant to be too high without buying a year’s pass, although another was using the occasional parking permit and found this to be suitable for their lifestyle. Several students chose to walk, as bus services either do not offer a direct service or proved late and unreliable. Walking allowed students to know exactly when they would be arriving to campus and to return home which was not possible with the buses. The new path through the woods to Combe Down was well liked by several participants as it had previously been muddy in wet weather. One participant cycled and despite having had their bicycle stolen from campus was otherwise happy with the provided resources. Other students had chosen not to cycle due to the difficulty in riding up the hills surrounding the campus. 8.3 Accommodation All the students were living in rented accommodation, 7 privately and 2 in university accommodation. It was mentioned that viewings of properties are often cancelled due to properties being taken. One participant commented that would prefer to live on campus, but could not afford the prices. One participant who did not have their university e-mail account in time had been unable to access the accommodation website Studentpad which is recommended to students by the SU and University, but all other participants had used it with success. The Postgraduate House Hunting Weekend, run jointly 64
by the SU and University Accommodation Office at been attended by one participant who had used it to find their house. All students mentioned the high cost living in Bath, but acknowledged that the University was not able to influence this.
As noted, this research was conducted before the autumn term of 2015-16, in which a large number of students including PGTs experienced great difficulty in finding rented accommodation in Bath. With the increase in student numbers, accommodation is an issue that will require separate research and action.
9. Summary
The short duration of taught programmes was a key determinant of the PGT student experience that informs how they socialise, use University and SU services. With an intense workload with frequent deadlines, PGTs they were less inclined to become involved with activities, and an acceptance of the need to focus on academic achievement more than at undergraduate level and an acute awareness of the transience of PGT student life. Participants would like greater opportunities to meet students from other departments at the start of the year, but tended to socialise with coursemates.
65
VI. PGR supervision
1. Background
Apart from the research itself, the supervisory relationship is probably the single most important factor in PGR study. Supervisors generally enable the PGRs they supervise to develop as researchers and often provide crucial guidance to help their work to progress. Yet if problems arise in supervision, the PGR can feel their research degree has stalled and resolution can seem impossible. The University of Bath scored reasonably well in the Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES) 2015, although it was still an area that more concerns were raised. A PGR’s reliance on their supervisor for success in their research degree and building a successful research career creates implicit pressures that make it difficult for them to openly communicate difficulties in the supervisory relationship, even when these become so serious that risk negatively impacting on their research. It is the University of Bath’s acknowledgment of this sector-wide issue that prompted the introduction of the Postgraduate Research Ombudsman, but the significance of the supervisory relationship and its inherent power imbalance mean there is still a reluctance among some PGRs to highlight problems. The general requirements for supervisors and PGRs at the University of Bath in the supervisory relationship are laid out in QA7 Code of Practice (Research Degrees) and University of Bath Regulation 16 (Admissions regulations and conditions for the award of higher degrees). To explore the PGR experience of supervision, the Students’ Union undertook 3 semi- structured interviews with PGRs, with a further survey of 9 PGRs. Participants were from the faculties of Science, Humanities & Social Sciences, and Engineering & Design. Reference is also made to good practice at some Russell Group universities, PRES 2015 and PRES 2013 response and Research Academic Council discussions where appropriate.
2. Expectations of supervisors and PGRs
2.1 Defining expectations QA7 states that ‘it is important that the student and lead supervisor establish early in the student’s studies clear expectations about the timing and requirements of these significant academic milestones in order to minimise
66
difficulties later.’82 However, this is not always carried out and the role of the supervisor in defining their expectations of students was raised in Research Academic Council in 2013-14.83 Unclear expectations from supervisors were also reported in these interviews to be a distressing experience for some participants with one respondent commenting that throughout their course they became ‘less and less understanding’ of what their supervisor wanted from them. Another respondent had a similar experience:
‘I have dealt with a year of ambiguity. Time after time I think there have been successful and clear communications only to be told otherwise AFTER projects have been handed in. It has been extremely frustrating and a source of large stress for me.’ PGR supervision interview
Initial expectations of supervision, particularly for PGRs from different academic cultures, may need to be reviewed for the independence of research degree and the approaches of individual supervisors. Several participants requested clarification on the roles of supervisor and PGR and reasonable expectations of communication and guidance.
‘There ought to be a CLEAR document detailing what students and supervisors ought to expect, with a day workshop for supervisors to realise what exactly they are signing up for… it would be silly to introduce rules and regulations regarding how work is critiqued BEFORE assignment due dates, but the level of discretion at the moment seems unfair.’ PGR supervision survey (part of SU research project)
82 QA7 University of Bath Quality Assurance Code of Practice: Research Degrees, 9.1 Establishing a programme of work 83 Research Academic Council minutes, 10 June 2014. 67
PGRs at the Students’ Union PG Forum acknowledged the complexities of the ‘negotiated agreement’ of the supervisory relationship, but commented that ‘it would be good to have an accurate idea of what reasonable expectations are.’84 QA7 sets out broad responsibilities for both supervisors and PGRs, but it does not deal explicitly with many of the specifics of the supervisory relationship, does not seem to be regularly accessed by PGRs, and in some cases does not appear to have been supplemented by guidance within departments about what constitutes appropriate levels of supervision. 2.2 Monitoring of supervision Monitoring of supervisory responsibilities other than tracking completion of annual reports and confirmation, submission and completion rates were raised by several PGRs. One participant suggested that the University needs to be making more effort to monitor the progress and happiness of PGRs as well as the ‘interaction between supervisors and students’.
Comments in PRES 2013 were largely positive, but the need to address supervisory problems was raised: ‘[there] needs to be more independent monitoring or options for recourse for research students. Life as a postgraduate researcher is very dependent on the relationship with your supervisor. If this breaks down, it can be a lonely place and I don’t feel there are adequate avenues of support’. Another PRES 2013 respondent suggested a more robust monitoring regime for supervisors, noting that ‘[my problems were] horrible and went unnoticed for a very long time. When my supervisor left the university no one notified me. There needs to be a third party looking out for the student more.’85 This was a view echoed by two of the participants:
‘[There should be] stricter regulations for the supervisors… It should be clear to everyone, what’s allowed and what’s not allowed.’ PGR supervision interview
Monitoring of supervision is a controversial topic, implying a prescriptive approach which some academics feel would be inappropriate to the supervisory relationship and might even reduce its effectiveness. Clearly the form any
84 PG Forum minutes, 16 February 2015.
85 Postgraduate Research Experience Survey 2013, Q2. 68
monitoring process took would have to be flexible enough to consider the wide variation in supervisory styles and ‘light touch’ enough to allow PGR-supervisor relationship to develop organically.
2.3 Communication and signposting There is not currently a comprehensive webpage for PGRs on the University website that brings together content on a range of issues affecting the PGR experience such as is covered in PGR induction. The PGR page of Postgraduate Guide 2014-15 86 comes closest to this, providing general information and signposting, mostly to QA7 and Regulation 16. The Researcher Development Unit (RDU) also hosts an ‘Advice for new research students’ page87, including general advice on communication with the supervisor, career development and relevant rules and regulations to research degrees.
For supervisors, the Signposting for PGR Supervisors 2014-15 document sets out to signpost to ‘the main principles, processes, rights and responsibilities of postgraduate study at the University of Bath’ 88 but addresses little of the supervisory role other than the procedural. The Postgraduate Research Ombudsman has recommended ‘improving the guidance on the roles and responsibilities of supervisors’ 89 as one of the main areas for development following from the Ombudsman’s 2013-14 Annual Report. 2.4 Varying levels of support PGR supervision was described by one participant as a ‘grey zone’, contrasting it with undergraduate and PGT supervision that ‘is a bit more controlled’ with those cohorts receiving ‘a bit more support because… they also pay for it’. The ambivalent position of PGRs within the university as both staff and students was also seen to foster a feeling that PGRs ‘have to be more appreciative’ of supervision received. This perception, if more widely held, would provide an additional disincentive to report negative experiences of supervision.
86 University of Bath PG Guide, http://www.bath.ac.uk/student- records/pgresources/docs/pgguide2014/pgr.html (accessed 9 April 2015). 87 Researcher Development Unit, Advice for new research students, http://www.bath.ac.uk/learningandteaching/rdu/support_for_students/New_Doctoral_Students.ht ml (accessed 10 April 2015). 88 Signposts for Postgraduate Research Supervisors 2014-15, http://www.bath.ac.uk/student- records/pgresources/docs/SignpostsPGRSups2014.doc (accessed 9 April 2015). 89 University Research Students Committee minutes, 6 November 2014, Minute 311. 69
The PG Skills session ‘Working effectively with your supervisor’90 addresses some of the difficulties of the supervisory relationship. PGR Academic Reps reported finding the session useful and suggested in Research Academic Council that this session would be useful to include in PGR induction, as it is so critical that effective supervisor-student communication is established as early in the research degree as possible.91 2.5 Contact and contact time QA7 states that a supervisor should ‘maintain appropriate contact with a student through regular formal and informal meetings’,92 but does not specify frequency, content or details of arrangement for these meetings. This is understandable, given the wide range of disciplines, modes of study, and approaches to research, with PRES 2015 response around the pre-92 universities average for contact time.93 Most participants in this felt they had an appropriate level of contact although one strongly felt that they had not.
From those that reported negative experiences of supervision, several raised a lack of interest from their supervisor as a concern, manifesting in short meetings, supervisors not attending arranged meetings and, occasionally, no meetings altogether, as well as late or no responses from e-mails. 94 One respondent commented that even when they met their supervisor they would ‘always be doing other things’ during the supervision. Another participant reported their experience of meetings too short to be properly useful:
‘If they [my supervisor] don’t want to meet you then they don’t want to meet you… they just say “five minutes” or “are you OK?” and then cross it off as a meeting.’ PGR supervision interview
90 PG Skills, Working effectively with your supervisor, http://www.bath.ac.uk/learningandteaching/rdu/courses/pgskills/modules/RP00123.htm (accessed 10 April 2015) 91 Research Academic Council minutes, 10 June 2014. 92 QA7, Appendix 1: Supervisory Responsibilities. 93 PRES 2015, Q.2.2a ‘I have regular contact with my supervisor’, 88.0% at the University of Bath ‘definitely’ or ‘mostly agree’, 6.6% ‘definitely’ or ‘mostly disagree’, compared to 90.1%/ for all PRES institutions, 88.6%/8.8% for pre-92 universities. 94 Annual Report (2013-14) of the University Ombudsman & Deputy Ombudsman for Postgraduate Research Students reported 11 cases of ‘breakdown of the supervisor-student relationship’. 70
PGRs are not unsympathetic to the pressures supervisors are placed under. One participant suggested that limited contact time with supervisors may also be a consequence of the pressures of having ‘too many students’ under their supervision or ‘appropriate time/workload balance from teaching hours’.95 2.6 Good practice There was also evidence of good practice from respondents in terms of meeting and contacting supervisors. With PGR respondents commenting that they have ‘regular weekly meetings’ with their supervisor and that they are ‘even available on weekends’, and others stating that their supervisor is ‘very flexible with times to meet me and always available when I needed help’.
3. Supervisor absence
4 out of 9 of the respondents reported that their supervisor would leave for an extended period of time without informing them. Reports were also given of supervisors going away during important deadline periods in which their presence was vital: ‘no alternate supervisory strategies were offered to ease my concerns, I was just ‘left in the lurch’ which is extremely disheartening’. Another example was given of a supervisor going away ‘with no possibility of direct contact by e-mail/Skype for one month’. Regulation 16 stipulates that the Board of Studies should make other supervisory arrangements where a supervisor has ‘left the employ of the University or is on leave of absence or study leave’.96 However, the absences reported were less formalised but sometimes still disruptive. In such situations other members of the supervisory team might be available to provide some support, but this was reported as being unforthcoming. However, some of the participants had positive experiences and being ‘impressed’ with how a supervisor’s move to another University was handled, with contact maintained through Skype and e-mail.
4. Supervisory team
95 Postgraduate Research Experience Survey 2013, Q2. 96 University of Bath, Regulation 16, 16.4 Doctor of Education (EdD), (i) Supervision; 16.5 The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), (j) Supervision; 16.12 The Degree of Doctor of Business Administration (DBA), (i) Supervision; 16.14 The Degree of Doctor of Health (DHealth), (i) Supervision; 16.15 The Degree of Doctor of Engineering (DEng), (k) Supervision; 16.16 The Degree of Doctor of Clinical Psychology (DClinPsy), (h) Supervision; 16.17 The Degree of Doctor of Policy Research & Practice (DPRP), (i) Supervision. 71
QA7 requires that ‘a supervisory team must be appointed for every student’97 and this should consist of a lead supervisor and at least one other person of appropriate academic standing. The role of secondary supervisors and the ‘supervisory team’ was discussed within Research Academic Council in 2013-14 with reservations expressed that there was a ‘feeling of going behind primary supervisors back if contacted the secondary supervisor’ and how the meaning and role of the secondary supervisor ‘needs to be more thoroughly explained’. 98 The University of Warwick provides straightforward online information on the supervisory team, explaining the benefits and some of the challenges it presents.99 Response was mixed on the experience of secondary supervisors. Some respondents reported a positive experience with this relationship with examples given of secondary supervisors providing support ‘every week’, ‘speaking with them often’ and complementing the support given by the lead supervisor.
‘I wasn't even aware that this was an option, there have never been discussions about it… if a 'supervisory team' is supposed to be the norm, I am definitely outside of that group.’ PGR supervision survey (part of SU research project)
Supervisory arrangements will need to vary according to the research area and strengths and approaches of both supervisor and PGR. Very limited contact with a secondary supervisor is not at all problematic if the PGR receives appropriate supervision, but supervisory teams have particular value where the lead supervisor does not offer a suitable level of guidance or expertise. Nevertheless, one PGR participant noted their experience of the secondary’s supervisor’s limited effectiveness where problems exist with the lead supervisor:
97 QA7, 8.1 Supervision. 98 Research Academic Council minutes, 31 October 2013. 99 University of Durham, Graduate School, The Supervisory Team, https://www.dur.ac.uk/graduate.school/research.students/supervision/ (accessed 11 August 2015). 72
‘My second supervisor is aware of the issues between myself and my primary supervisor. He is reluctant to intervene for professional reasons, but has attempted to organise more contact time in an attempt to smooth things out. This hasn't worked all that well as the major issue with my work has been a chronic lack of direction.’
PGR supervision survey (part of SU research project)
Another participant commented that having a second supervisor who is ‘just a name on a piece of paper’ can be frustrating if the PGR feels supervision is lacking from the lead supervisor. This frustration could be at least partly addressed through communication on the function of the supervisory team.
5. Accessing support
Inevitably, PGRs with ineffective supervision are more likely to have difficulties with their research and to struggle to upgrade/confirm or to submit. The University of Bath’s Postgraduate Research Ombudsman (see below) is able to assist with PGRs who seek help but there will be PGRs who choose not to or are unaware of the service. HEFCE projections for research degree starters exiting predict more University of Bath PGRs exiting with a different qualification (usually MPhil rather than PhD) than its sector and Russell Group comparators.100 5.1 Postgraduate Research Ombudsman The University does provide a mechanism for seeking to resolve supervisory difficulties, the Postgraduate Research Ombudsman. The Ombudsman operates outside of any formal complaints process, with the ability to meet supervisors informally if the PGR wishes. The Ombudsman is not only available for serious breakdowns in the PGR-supervisor relationship, and emphasises the benefits of approaching him as early in the research degree as possible, operating as an accessible first contact without the requirement for PGRs to approach departments or Graduate Schools first.101
100 Higher Education Funding Council for England, Rates of qualification from research degrees: projected outcomes of full-time students starting research degrees in 2010-11 (2013). University of Bath PGRs to ‘qualify with other postgraduate research qualification’ were projected at 4.1% over 7 years and 4.7% over 25 years, compared to 2.2% and 2.4% for the sector-adjusted average. Projections were based on the proportion of students who change their status in universities’ annual submissions to the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). 101 University Research Students Committee minutes, 6 November 2014, Minute 311. 73
However, although several PGR participants noted that working relationships between academic staff within departments made or would make it uncomfortable to approach their director of studies or head of department to raise difficulties with their supervisor, none suggested the Ombudsman as an alternative. In Research Academic Council, PGR Academic Reps reported being informed by a PGSkills session that the Ombudsman was a ‘last resort’ and that PGR induction gave the impression that the Ombudsman was intended only for ‘serious problems that can be solved in-house [within a department].’ It was suggested that to make the service more accessible, a post-doctoral researcher 102 could be nominated in each department as an accessible first point of access. 5.2 5.2 Departmental support A problem raised by several participants who had had issues with their supervisor was that when they did report a problem to a member of staff they are often reluctant to intervene due to fears of offending their colleagues. As one PGR participant put it: ‘Usually directors of studies and supervisors work closely together – meaning that ironing out any problems or miscommunications can be slightly unnerving to approach.’ However, while acknowledging that it is a ‘sensitive area’ for a director of studies to intervene in it should not mean that nothing is done to improve the situation. A PGR student explained their experience:
‘I’ve been to see my Director of Studies quite a few times with difficulties around supervision and they are just quite reluctant to be involved… I guess maybe that’s their relationship, you know it’s their department but you would think that if you can’t get support from them than who can you get support from? PGR supervision interview
Similar experiences were explained even where there was a designated figure in the department to report such problems to such as postgraduate administrators. One participant explained having to ‘go through several people’ before anything was done about their situation and another having ‘very little confidence in my department’ to deal with such situations. The frustration evidenced above highlights an assumption that difficulties need to be resolved within the
102 Research Academic Council minutes, 19 November 2014. 74
department, and that this will prove unsatisfactory. As one survey respondent reflected:
‘I believe that I have simply waited too long to actively sort things out, and to speak out formally now would cause even more problems.’ PGR supervision survey (part of SU research project)
Following the 2013-14 Ombudsman’s Report, the Ombudsman recommended that the University should ensure that clear information was made available to PGRs on the available routes for raising supervisory concerns.103 5.3 Good Practice PG Skills provides several workshops to help the development of supervisors, including ‘Issues in Doctoral Supervision’104 which provides discussion and advice on recruiting PGRs, understanding and motivating students, being a co- supervisor, supervising across disciplines and encouraging independence. The Learning & Teaching Enhancement Office (LTEO) has produced a peer review scenario for supervision intended to benefit new and experienced supervisors105. To highlight high quality supervision, The LTEO also runs an annual award, the ‘Excellence in Doctoral Supervision Prize’ 106 , and the Students’ Union runs a student-led ‘Supervisor of the Year Award.’107 Some universities also disseminate good practice guides in addition to their codes of practice. The University of Exeter Code of Good Practice - Supervision of
103 URSC minutes, 6 November 2014, Minute 311. 104 PG Skills, Issues in Doctoral Supervision, http://www.bath.ac.uk/learningandteaching/rdu/courses/pgskills/modules/RSSD.html (accessed 9 April 2015). 105 LTEO, Peer Review Scenario: Supervision of research students, http://www.bath.ac.uk/learningandteaching/advance-your-teaching/scenarios/supervision.html (accessed 9 April 2015). 106 LTEO, Excellence in Doctoral Supervision Prize, http://www.bath.ac.uk/learningandteaching/progressing-your-career/teaching-awards/doctoral- supervision-award/index.html (accessed 10 April 2015). 107 University of Bath Students’ Union, Supervisor of the Year, http://www.bathstudent.com/education/awards/ (accessed 10 April 2015). 75
Postgraduate Research Students is a comprehensive guide that emphasises the reasonable expectations of PGRs as a positive feature of early-stage research.108
‘Supervision is a relationship requiring trust and respect. Students have the right to expect regular, high quality advice, support and direction in their quest for academic excellence.’ University of Exeter Code of Good Practice
6. Supervisory interest
Only 6 out of 11 of the PGR participants (5 surveyed, 1 interviewed) considered the guidance that they received from their supervisor to have been sufficient. Several participants commented that the guidance they received suffered because their supervisor seemed ‘uninterested’ in their work and progression.
‘When we do meet, it can be very difficult to get points across as anything I say that does not align perfectly with his vision is dismissed immediately… There have been huge jumps between meetings, even with the same data, so it would be impossible to say what he wanted even if I wanted to, without being clairvoyant!’
PGR supervision survey (part of SU research project)
The sense that their supervisor was disengaged from their research was explained by one participant that as leaving the PGR without clear direction and lacking in confidence in their own research:
108 University of Exeter, Code of Good Practice - Supervision of Postgraduate Research Students, http://admin.exeter.ac.uk/academic/tls/tqa/Part%207/7Epgsuper.pdf (accessed 14 August 2015).
76
‘You are not getting the interest in your approach, you do not get comfortable with it and you don’t get enough education in what you are doing.’
PGR supervision interview
Another respondent described how this failure to engage had an emotional effect on the PGR:
‘I wish my supervisor actually cared about my research…when you are trying your best with no recognition or even advice… it is very draining.’ PGR supervision interview
PRES 2015 response was more positive (88.4%)109, although a number of part-time PGRs raised concerns about receiving less attention and support than full-time peers.110 As noted in the PGR isolation chapter, supervisor can have a significant role in helping to mitigate the sometimes isolating experience of research study. With PGRs so emotionally invested in their personal research, a supervisor’s failure to engage with it could be seen as a further isolating factor in some cases.
7. Research environment
The RDU provides general online guidance for supervisors setting out their responsibilities for their students’ development as researchers, including to ‘actively encourage researchers to undertake Continuing Professional Development (CPD) activity, as far as it is possible within the research project.’ 111 However, some respondents voiced concern at their lack of opportunities for development. Examples
109 PRES 2015, Q2.3.a, ‘My supervisor/s provide feedback that helps me direct my research activities’, 88.4% definitely/mostly agree, 6.7% definitely/mostly disagree (Bath); compared to 87.7% definitely/mostly agree, 6.8% definitely/mostly disagree (all responding pre-92 universities). 110 PRES 2015, Q3, ‘additional comments’, Bath comments included ‘As a part-time PGR, I do feel somewhat neglected compared to full-time students’, ‘I am part time and hence perhaps not as visible as other students’, ‘As a PT student, contact with supervisors is critical as you need a lot of direction…In my case, [not receiving it] has already delayed me by at least 6 months’. 111 RDU, Supporting your researchers, http://www.bath.ac.uk/learningandteaching/rdu/researchsupervisors/requirements.html (accessed 10 April 2015). 77
were given of PGRs presenting at conferences with supervisors providing no guidance or assistance, and a lack of encouragement in attempting to publish work:
‘I have received nothing. No markers of upcoming conferences, no encouragement to submit poster abstracts and no inkling that anyone anywhere will even read my work in this lifetime.’
PGR supervision interview
Another PGR participant complained of active resistance to conference attendance and publication from their supervisor:
‘I have overruled my supervisor to attend a conference, successfully getting an oral presentation at a major conference... Judging from other people's experiences within the group I am expecting a fight to get published, due to my supervisor.’
PGR supervision survey (part of SU research project)
It is not clear if the reasons for this were the supervisor’s overriding commitment to the success of a research project, but it suggests that some supervisors are willing to ignore or actively compromise the development needs of the PGR.
8. Summary
Supervision is generally highly effective at the University of Bath, but too many PGRs are unsure of how supervision and interaction with their supervisor works. In some cases, this leads PGRs to not work as effectively with their PGR as they could even where no problem exists, and in the minority of instances where suitable guidance and support is not given PGRs may find themselves unable to progress as they should. Where this is the case, the Postgraduate Research Ombudsman is available to help reach a workable solution, but currently not all PGRs understand the position or what could be achieved. Clearer, more engaging communication can address some of these issues to help PGRs understand existing provision more fully, but the closer monitoring of supervision by directors of studies to ensure satisfactory progress, wider dissemination of good practice for supervisors, and comparable attention given to 78
part-time PGRs as their full-time counterparts would help would also enhance supervision for many PGRs.
9. Recommendations
1. Clear communication on the responsibilities and reasonable expectations of supervisors, including but not only a revised QA7 document that is more accessible and widely read.
2. Clear guidance from departments on the implementation of QA7 for supervisory responsibilities for specific disciplines.
3. Increased monitoring of supervision by directors of studies or heads of department to ensure minimum reasonable standards are being met.
4. Production of a good practice guide for supervisors covering all areas of supervision, including contact time, use of Skype when absent from the University for extended periods, engaging with the research of the PGR and developing a working relationship with them. This good practice guide should be widely communicated to established as well as new supervisors.
5. Clear communication of the role of other members of the supervisory team.
6. Consideration and suitable contact and support of part-time PGRs, including guidance on skills development, attending conferences and publishing work.
7. Clear communication on the function of the Postgraduate Research Ombudsman and the circumstances where speaking with him would be beneficial, emphasising that where problems might exist an early resolution is far more effective.
8. The benefits for researcher development of attending conferences and publishing work should be encouraged and facilitated by the supervisor in line with RDU guidance.
79
VII. Teaching by Postgraduates
1. Background
The majority of Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES) respondents at the University of Bath teach or demonstrate during their research degree 112 . The experience of these postgraduates has been raised as a issue by both the Students’ Union and nationally by the National Union of Students (NUS), as currently this group fall between a representational gap as both staff and students.113 In response to this, the University College Union (UCU), in conjunction with NUS, launched the Postgraduate Employment Charter to call for minimum standards of pay, conditions, opportunity and professional development and to raise the profile of postgraduate employment issues. Training for postgraduates who teach was reviewed by the University of Bath in 2013, leading to the introduction of ‘Teaching Introduction for Postgraduates’ (TIPS) a PG Skills session with separate strands for lab-based and seminar-based teaching. In 2014 the Bath Scheme was also introduced for the professional development of teaching staff, including postgraduates. A focus group was undertaken by the Students’ Union with five PGRs from various departments who have carried out teaching work to discuss their experience of teaching at the University of Bath. Teaching issues highlighted in Research Academic Council, University of Bath response to the PRES 2013 and the NUS Postgraduate Teaching Survey (2013), as well as the NUS/UCU Postgraduate Employment Charter were also discussed. For simplicity, the term ‘GTA’ (Graduate Teaching Assistants) is used throughout this paper to refer to postgraduates engaged in teaching or demonstrating, rather than the standard University of Bath term ‘postgraduates who teach’. GTA is widely used across the sector, including in PRES 2015.
2. Allocation of work
Allocation of teaching work to PGRs apparently varies across department, and participants were concerned at the informality and lack of transparency. It was reported that often teaching was assigned by contacting the head of teaching
112 PRES 2015, Q17, ‘taught (or demonstrated) … during your research degree programme’, 53.9% (Bath).
113 Sally Williamson (SU Education Officer 2013-14), Improving the Experience of Postgraduates who Teach or Demonstrate, 2014.
80
personally, rather than a system that gave suitable candidates an equal opportunity of having work assigned to them. One student commented that teaching allocation can be done ‘quite sneakily’ and may be subject to ‘knowing the right people’ rather than being transparent and equitable. This was echoed by discussions in Research Academic Council, with one PGR describing allocation as ‘dependent on which PGRs are in which office on which day’.114
‘In my department they send out e-mails to certain people who have been recommended.’ PGR teaching focus group
Increasingly, universities are introducing a clear policy on the allocation of PGR teaching posts to ensure fairness and transparency in recruitment including a requirement to advertise all posts and the form this should take. The University of York specifies the form this advertising should take and makes it a key priority of the selection process to ‘increase the number of PGRs who can participate in paid teaching,’115 as well as individual suitability for the post. Among GW4 partners, the University of Exeter requires the advertising of all posts to comply with the University’s equal opportunities standards,116 while the University of Bristol states that ‘all PGR students should be made aware of any teaching opportunities available to them and the process for application.’117 The University of Bath does not currently have a similar policy in QA9 or other Code of Practice.
3. Training
The spread of the PGRs within the focus group means that some of the training they received will have differed depending on the year they started their research degree. However, all participants expressed criticisms about the training they had received.
114 Research Academic Council minutes, 26 June 2015.
115 University of York, University Policy on Postgraduates who Teach (PGWT), http://www.york.ac.uk/admin/hr/resources/policy/postgraduates-who-teach.htm#2 (accessed 6 July 2015)
116 University of Exeter, Code of Good Practice - Employment of Postgraduate Students, http://admin.exeter.ac.uk/academic/tls/tqa/Part%207/7Nteacher1415.pdf (accessed 6 July 2015).
117 University of Bristol, Policy on Postgraduate Research Students who Teach, http://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/academic- quality/migrated/documents/pgrswhoteach.pdf (accessed 6 July 2015).
81
3.1 Centralised nature of training ‘Teaching Introduction for Postgraduates who teach’ (TIPS), the PG Skills training session for postgraduates new to teaching118, was criticised for not taking into account the ‘massive variation in how people teach’. Its centralised nature means that it does not accommodate for the variety of subject areas that postgraduate teachers are coming from. Splitting the training up between ‘lab-based’ and ‘seminar-based’ was seen to be ‘confusing’ as not every non-lab subject is the same. It was also seen as containing a large proportion of pedagogical theory that had ‘very little practical merit’. Most participants believed that current training does not adequately prepare postgraduate students to teach and they are left to ‘learn as they go along’. This was echoed in PRES 2015 response, with some respondents not finding the session useful, including comments calling for more specific, practical training.119 3.2 Departmental training The Postgraduate Employment Charter calls for GTAs to receive an ‘induction into discipline-specific teaching practice and an introduction to course materials, teaching methods, modes of assessment and feedback and student complaint procedure.’120 PRES 2015 response raised the lack of departmental training121, and few respondents had received departmental training. In the Department for Mathematical Sciences, departmental training was provided, which was found to be more useful and relevant, and the Department for Economics notified postgraduates of nationally-run discipline-specific workshops for GTAs in economics.122 It was found to be useful by a participant who went on the training. Participants felt that individual departmental training would be ‘far more productive’ and should involve lecturers giving more ‘hands-on and relevant’ advice. There was seen to be scope for a university-wide teacher training course but that this should run alongside departmental training and should cover best practice on areas such as student confidentiality, how to work with small groups
118 University of Bath, PG Skills, Teaching Introduction (for Postgraduates who Teach), http://www.bath.ac.uk/learningandteaching/rdu/courses/pgskills/modules/RP00136.htm (accessed 30 June 2015).
119 PRES 2015, Q32, ‘additional comments about the formal training you have received from the University for your teaching.’
120 NUS, NUS/UCU Postgraduate Employment Charter, p.2.
121 PRES 2015, Q33, ‘comments about the formal training you have received from your Department for your teaching.’
122 Economics Network, Workshops for postgraduate teaching assistants, http://www.economicsnetwork.ac.uk/events/gta (accessed 15 July 2015).
82
of students, how to deal with problems and information on university-wide policies relating to teaching. Currently, this sort of information is said to be lacking from the course and GTAs only receive this information in ‘off-hand comments’. This lack of clear channels of communication disproportionately affects part-time and distance learning postgraduates. 3.3 Lack of further training Participants had not received any other training after the training they received at the start. It was commented that it was difficult to give a consistent teaching experience when ‘the support you are given isn’t consistent’ and all the materials postgraduate teachers need are not always supplied. Nearly a third of PRES respondents who taught felt they had not received appropriate support and guidance for teaching,123 suggesting the variability of support is more widespread. The proportion of PGRs who reported receiving adequate support was higher among GW4 partners.124 This was seen as directly affecting the ability to provide good tutorials, relating closely to the lecturer whose course the GTA was supporting. Good practice was reported in lecturers sending an e-mail at the end of each week stating what they had covered in lectures that week. Some universities also provide detailed guides for new GTAs, including much of the training content. 125 PGR Academic Reps at Research Academic Council suggested the introduction of a Moodle course containing teaching resources and development opportunities.126 3.4 Effects on undergraduates A prominent theme that came out of this discussion was that through providing inadequate training for GTAs this was likely to reflect badly on undergraduates who are more likely to receive ‘variability of teaching.’ It was noted that due to the increase in fees, undergraduate students are now expecting more from the teaching they receive. One participant warned that unless the process of training postgraduate students was improved and more formalised, the University’s
123 PRES 2015, Q17a, ‘If yes, to what extent do you agree that you have been given appropriate support and guidance for your teaching?’ 28.4% definitely or mostly disagree, 57.2% definitely or mostly agree. (Bath)
124 Ibid., 60% (GW4 response).
125 LSE, Handbook for Graduate Teaching Assistants 2014-15, http://www.lse.ac.uk/intranet/LSEServices/TLC/Publication%20files/Handbooks/Handbook-for- GTAs-2014-15-FINAL.pdf (accessed 1 July 2015).
126 Research Academic Council minutes, 12 February 2014.
83
number one position in National Student Survey (NSS) satisfaction ratings ‘might not last long’.
4. Feedback to GTAs
1.1 Student feedback Feedback for GTAs was seen to be lacking by some participants. Feedback given from students was seen to be ‘not very constructive’ as often all that is provided is a rating from one to five on their overall performance with no qualitative detail. The Department of Mathematical Sciences appears to have more constructive feedback forms with more detail, but felt that it would be helpful for its feedback to be passed on more quickly so that it can be acted on sooner.
1.2 Teaching observation Participants reported that teaching observation of GTAs was rare, with only one participant confirming that their teaching although this would have been welcomed to develop their teaching. It was felt that GTA teaching quality is not effectively monitored by the University and how this, again, will reflect badly in undergraduate student opinion who will expect a high quality of teaching for the increased fees they are now paying. It was recommended that the university have a centralised policy with standards across the university and departmental standards for giving GTAs constructive feedback.
5. Pay
5.1 Pay comparison and preparation time An investigation by the Times Higher Education into rates of pay for GTAs reported that rates of pay varied from £9.96 to £73.44127 The University of Bath pays £13.05 per hour, 128 placing it towards the lower end of responding universities for the sector as a whole. However, the base hourly rate is not the only factor, with preparation time also a consideration. The NUS/UCU Employment Charter calls for each hour of teaching a GTA should be paid for 2.5 hours in total, but the University of Bath currently uses a multiplier of 1.5 to pay for preparation time. There was strong feeling among participants that GTAs are not sufficiently reimbursed for teaching
127 Times Higher, Huge variation in graduate teaching assistants’ pay, 29 April 2014, https://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/huge-variation-in-graduate-teaching-assistants- pay/2012859.article (accessed 7 July 2015).
128 University of Bath, Rates of pay for casual workers, http://www.bath.ac.uk/hr/hrdocuments/casual-pay-rates-2014-2015.pdf (accessed 7 July 2015).
84
preparation. This varied per subject as humanities and social sciences subjects were seen by as requiring more preparation time than the sciences. The University of Bristol has changed its preparation time policy to reflect this variation.129 Among GW4 universities GTA pay is as follows: University of Bristol paying £14.44,130 adjusted rate varies. University of Exeter base pay rate of £15.96, with an adjusted rate of £31.92. 131 University of Cardiff £19.88 for teaching and £10.45 for demonstrating,132 adjusted rate of £40.78133
The University of Bath’s base pay rate £13.05 and pay adjusted for preparation time of £19.58,134 pays the lowest base hourly teaching rate in GW4 and where data is available substantially less than GW4 partners. 5.2 Lack of pay review GTAs do not currently receive an annual pay review because they are on zero- hour contracts. Therefore experience in teaching is not reflected in the payment
129 University of Bristol, Personnel weekly briefing notes: Pay Rates for Part-Time Hourly Paid Teachers, http://www.bristol.ac.uk/hr/weekly-briefings/archive2008/05dec08.html (accessed 15 July 2015).
130 University of Bristol, Hourly-paid teacher pay rates, http://www.bristol.ac.uk/hr/hpt/hpt- payrates.html (accessed 7 July 2015).
131 University of Exeter, Casual workers, rates of pay http://www.exeter.ac.uk/staff/employment/payandconditions/casual/managers/ratesofpay/ (accessed 13 July 2015).
132 University of Cardiff, Student demonstrators, http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/fince/servicesstaff/salaries/studentdemonstrators/ (accessed 13 July 2015).
133 ‘Tutors receive payment calculated on the basis of a nominal two hours ‘preparation’ time (currently £10.45 per hour) for every one hour of teaching (contact) time. Contact hours are paid at the University’s current teaching rate of £19.88 per hour.’ This adjusted rate is for University of Cardiff School of English, Communication and Philosophy, other faculties pay rates not available. University of Cardiff School of English, Communication and Philosophy, Thinking about teaching as a Postgraduate Tutor in ENCAP? http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/encap/degreeprogrammes/postgraduateresearch/thinking_about_teach ing_booklet.pdf
134 University of Bath, Rates of pay for casual workers.
85
received and it was noted that it did not make sense that PG teachers in their first year of teaching are getting paid the same as those in their third year.
‘Fixed at the bottom and can never increase’. PGR GTA focus group
5.3 Unpaid activities Participants also stated that they were required to undertake various unpaid activities in order to fulfil their roles properly, including replying to student e- mails. Participants reported receiving high numbers of e-mails, particularly during the exam period, as often GTAs are seen as ‘more approachable than the lecturer.’ It was noted that GTAs are encouraged to work office hours that they are not paid for, with one participant commenting that there was often a conflict for GTAs in wanting to provide pastoral care for students to ensure their wellbeing, but not paid for this time as it cannot be accounted for in timesheets. Participants agreed that undergraduate students are likely to be more satisfied if they receive more extensive feedback, but felt that the time they are paid for marking does not allow to give their preferred level of feedback.
‘Doesn’t take into account the amount of prep we put in… I don’t think 7 papers in an hour is feasible.’ PGR GTA focus group
Marking class presentations was seen as even more problematic by participants, as GTAs are not reimbursed for the time spent typing up feedback for these. GTAs in the Department of Mathematical Sciences noted that they are not paid for inputting marks and attendance into the system. It was also noted that GTAs are not paid for the training undertaken for teaching roles, with one participants commenting that ‘if you are doing training within a job you get paid for it.’ It was observed that other staff at the University get paid for training and that GTAs should be ‘receiving the same treatment as any other staff’ at the University.
6. Zero-hour contracts
6.1 Lack of employee rights
86
Participants were critical of zero-hour contracts for GTAs. Despite University of Bath policy135 for teaching staff who work 322 hours per annum or 1 day per week over a 12 month period (0.2 FTE) to be given a choice to transfer to a fractional contract, participants were not aware of any GTAs who were not on zero-hour contracts. It was noted in the University of Bath ‘Let’s Talk’ that there is an ongoing move towards fractional contracts ‘where appropriate’ 136 but the number of postgraduates this would potentially affect is not known, and leaves the majority who are not included without any improvement in working conditions. The University of Bristol posts its similar policy online, 137 but the University of Bath policy is not set out in a similar way. The zero-hour status leaves GTAs without sick pay, or maternity and paternity leave. One participant expressed that ‘unless something goes wrong a lot of us don’t know how vulnerable we are’ with the University having ‘no obligation’ to look after GTAs. Participants commented that GTAs ‘have to work through illness no matter what’ and that if such unexpected problems such as family illness occurs there is no financial support for GTAs to take any necessary time off. It was also noted that there are some GTAs who are working almost full-time, have been so for ten years and are ‘petrified of having a child because the University has no legal responsibility to look after them at all’. There were complaints that current contracts were ‘not a reasonable system at all’ and participants commented that that the University of Bath is the second highest user of zero-hour contacts in the country, with the University of Bristol giving a considerable number of GTAs more stable contracts. GTAs are still eligible for statutory sick pay at some universities who use casual contracts.138 The government eligibility criteria for statutory sick pay include the requirement to be classed as an employee by the employer,139 so inclusion in this category would offer GTAs increased protection. Increased communication of the
135 University of Bath, Executive summary of guiding principles for the assimilation of part-time teaching staff (2009).
136 University of Bath Vice-Chancellor’s Office, Let's Talk Q&A: Pay and Conditions, http://blogs.bath.ac.uk/vc-office/2015/05/13/pay-and-conditions/#more-157 (accessed 15 July 2015).
137 University of Bristol, Hourly paid teachers, http://www.bristol.ac.uk/hr/hpt/ (accessed 10 July 2015).
138 Newcastle University, Postgraduate Teaching and Demonstrating: 2013-14 Statement of Arrangements, item 11, Sickness. http://www.ncl.ac.uk/hr/assets/documents/2013- 14_statement_of_arrangements_jj_aug_2013.pdf (accessed 10 July 2015).
139 HM Government, Statutory Sick Pay (SSP): eligibility, https://www.gov.uk/statutory-sick- pay/eligibility (accessed 15 July 2015).
87
terms and conditions of employment for GTAs would be welcomed, with a number of universities now posting postgraduate teaching contracts online. The University of Sheffield has produced the Sheffield Graduate Training Contract specifically for its GTAs, rather than rely on zero-hour contracts.140 Participants expressed that they would be happy to go through a more formal process of recruitment for their postgraduate teaching jobs if it meant it entitled them to a contract and therefore stability and security in their employment. It was also felt that this would improve the quality of teaching as well if combined with a more transparent recruitment process. 6.2 Teaching hours Participants discussed that while there is a clause within their PhD contracts that states that PGR students are expected to ‘reasonably contribute towards the teaching environment’, there is no safety-net in return with ‘nothing to stop the university [not] giving you work’. It should be noted that QA9 states that ‘postgraduate research students will not normally be required to engage in teaching activity that occupies more than six hours of work per week (including contact time and time for marking submitted work) calculated as an average over the teaching year’141 but this would not prevent a specific piece of teaching work. Participants complained of the precariousness of the role. It was reported that GTAs ‘often do not know week to week’ what hours they will receive, so a consistent wage cannot be relied upon. The instability of teaching hours, it was also noted, can lead to a very high turnover of who is teaching a course. As there is no obligation on the part of GTAs to remain on a single course for an entire year or semester, due to the zero-hour contract, a GTA can ‘leave at any time’. This impacts on the consistency of teaching for undergraduate students. Further, the treatment of GTAs was also noted to impact on the quality of teaching undergraduates are getting due to ‘stressed out teachers’ who do are not paid to adequately prepare and may not be focused on it due to the stresses of the job.
7. Balancing teaching and PGR study
7.1 PGR study takes second place Although QA9 covers usual maximum requirements, participants described term- time as an intense period when many GTAs cram in teaching hours to make enough money to get through the university holidays. This means that PGR study
140 University of Sheffield, Sheffield Graduate Training Contract, https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.317580!/file/TermsandConditions.pdf (accessed 10 July 2015).
141 University of Bath, QA9 Code of Practice, 8.5 Students undertaking teaching activities.
88
can get sidelined due to the need to financially survive throughout the year. It was stated that this can cause tension and conflict with supervisors as it is ‘their priority to get me through my PhD, whereas my priority is doing my PhD whilst being able to live’. It was agreed that taking on a GTA role can often mean there is ‘not enough time in term time’ to focus on PGR study. 7.2 Outside the teaching culture Participants were emphatic that they did not feel a part of the teaching community at the University of Bath. One GTA commented that ‘we are not considered staff, we are not considered students, we’re sort of in this [no-man’s land] where they can’t figure out what to do with us’. The university was seen to do ‘absolutely nothing’ to aid GTAs in feeling part of the teaching community. This was seen as a factor that affected teaching, with GTAs seen as an ‘appendage’ to other teaching staff, leading to a lack of communication between academics and GTAs.
‘It affects [our] ability to teach to best standard as we are not given the information we need.’ PGR GTA focus group
GTAs are also not invited to meeting with other academic staff in their department, but participants reported that GTAs in other institutions were included in meetings. It should be noted that as casual teaching staff, GTAs would not be paid for attending meetings. This treatment of GTAs was accounted for in the tendency of other academic staff to regard them as ‘transient characters’ that ‘do bits on the side’ for full-time academics, rather than acknowledging their contribution to teaching. One participant reflected that:
‘I get the impression that sometimes a lot of lecturers feel like they are the ones providing us with the service, the skills … but we are providing a specialised service to students too’.
PGR GTA focus group
In general participants felt ‘taken for granted’ with academic staff thinking they are ‘throwing us a bone’ by giving GTAs a ‘brilliant experience’, but in reality they are not treated as equals with other academic staff, the work is hard, they are not sufficiently rewarded for their time and receive no job stability. 89
The University of York’s policy on GTAs explicitly recognises the value of their work, taking as its starting point the acknowledgment that ‘research students who contribute to the teaching at the university play an important role… enhancing the learning experience of the students they support. The university values this contribution and seeks to maximise the professional development opportunities available to them’.142 The sharing of best practice among departments on the inclusion of GTAs offers the potential to improve their status as teachers. 7.3 Accreditation Nearly a third of Bath respondents of the NUS Teaching Survey 2013 reported that any form of continued professional development, including skills development and mentoring and coaching, were not available. 143 The Higher Education Academy (HEA) 144 provides accreditation for training provision, which many new teaching posts require. The Bath Scheme, introduced in 2014 and run by the University’s Learning & Teaching Enhancement Office (LTEO), is a ‘nationally benchmarked, formal award for… professionalism in teaching’ open to GTAs as well as University staff who teach or support teaching. 145 The scheme fulfils nationally fulfilled benchmarks146, which enable easier individual access to HEA fellowship. However, it is not clear what the level of take-up is among GTAs, or how well entry to it is communicated to them, either in TIPs training or during the course of their teaching work. Participants were not aware of any accreditation for postgraduate teaching, viewing the useful experience that teaching work provided as difficult to quantify on a CV. One participant commented that the ‘experience just goes into a void’ with it difficult to ‘explain what it’s worth when there is very little evidence.’ It would therefore be appreciated to have some form of accreditation for teaching undertaken as it ‘would be an investment for the future.’ The scheme’s
142 University of York, University Policy on Postgraduates who Teach (PGWT).
143 NUS, NUS Teaching Survey 2013, Q30 Have you had the opportunity for continued professional development throughout the year? - 9 out of 25 reported no opportunities (Bath response).
144 HEA, Professional recognition https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/professional-recognition (accessed 30 June 2015).
145 University of Bath, LTEO, The Bath Scheme, http://www.bath.ac.uk/learningandteaching/progressing-your-career/professional- recognition/the-bath-scheme.html (accessed 2 July 2015).
146 HEA, UK Professional Standards Framework (UKFPS), https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/professional- recognition/uk-professional-standards-framework-ukpsf (accessed 2 July 2015).
90
introduction is a positive step, but participants’ concerns suggests that improved communication of the Bath Scheme is needed for GTAs.
8. Support
8.1 Representation Participants noted that they would go to a module leader or a lecturer if they had teaching-related issues. Academic Representatives represent PGTs and PGRs on course issues, but none of the participants felt they had a specific representative they could speak to about problems with teaching and it was noted that there was a general lack action on GTA issues. One participant commented that PGRs suggested that rather than operating through Academic Representatives, a designated GTA contact could be introduced as an effective ‘channel between us and everything else in the institution’ on teaching issues. 8.2 Union membership It was noted by participants that the majority of GTAs do not know what the University College Union (UCU) is and that they have a right to join it. This reflects the findings in the NUS Postgraduate Teaching Survey (2013) that found that only 2 out of 25 respondents were members of the UCU or other trade union.147 Participants expressed that their right to join a union or what a union does had not been adequately explained to them, one participant stated that ‘the University are happy for postgraduate students not to be aware of the union.’ It was also observed that GTAs who strike to attempt to improve pay or conditions would be vulnerable due to zero-hour contracts: ‘there is nothing to stop a department turning around and saying you have got no hours next month.’
9. Recommendations
1. Selection of GTAs should be communicated to all eligible postgraduates, offering equality of opportunity that would enable part-time and distance learning students to apply. 2. The TIPS session should be developed to include more practical training.
3. Introduction of qualitative student feedback forms, with response provided to GTAs promptly.
4. Best practice on the inclusion of GTAs into departmental teaching culture could be added as appendices to QA9.
147 NUS, NUS PG Teaching Survey for University of Bath (2013).
91
5. Teaching observation by a member of academic staff should take place twice in the first six months with feedback provided as soon as possible. 6. An improved hourly rate to bring the University into line with GW4 partners, combined with greater paid preparation time. A multiplier of 2 hours pay for each hour of teaching would take greater consideration of preparation time and unpaid work.
7. The introduction of a contract that recognised the specific circumstances of postgraduate teaching, offering employee status and eligibility for statutory sick pay.
8. Improved communication of the availability and content of the Bath Scheme would be likely to increase the numbers of GTAs who would benefit from the professional development it offers. An increased online presence, inclusion in the TIPS session and promotion by department and supervisors would be important means of achieving this.
92
Appendix A: Executive summary
I. Supervision (PGR)
The supervisory relationship is probably the single most important factor in PGR study other than the research itself. If problems arise in supervision, the PGR can feel unable to make progress with their research degree and it can seem almost impossible to resolve. PGRs are heavily invested in their research and supervision at the University of Bath is usually of high quality. A lack of clarity on the role of the supervisor and the Postgraduate Research Ombudsman were reported by participants. Given the number of part-time PGRs and their less positive experience, there is also a need to review and develop appropriate supervision for part-time PGRs.
II. Teaching by postgraduates (PGR)
Many PGRs carry out teaching, with training, opportunities, pay, contracts, and career development already highlighted by students. The National Union of Students (NUS) have also written a Postgraduate Employment Charter that sets out the issues of national concern. The University is looking at reform of training, but other issues remain to be resolved. Improved pay and conditions could be addressed with a tailored postgraduate teaching contract, communication and selection for teaching opportunities made more systematic, and training developed to include more discipline-specific content. In addition, improved communication of the Bath Scheme would be an important means of professional development for many PGRs. III. Isolation (PGR)
As PGRs do not study in a cohort in the same way undergraduates and PGTs do (although some work in small research teams), their primary contact often be their supervisor. A sense of isolation is common, and this can lead to severe stress, even depression, and problems with their research degree as well as a less positive student experience. This is a complex issue with many factors influencing it – separation from other students, a focus on study without other activities, difficulties with research and self- criticism and self-doubt that often comes with dedication to a long piece of work. Participants saw isolation in different terms, sometimes a self-imposed detachment to work more effectively, but others acknowledging that the limited contact was more problematic at stressful points of their research degree. Most wanted increased 93
opportunities to meet other PGRs, and there was also consensus that research culture within departments was difficult to engage with. The role of the supervisor was also seen as an important factor, with some PGRs acknowledged experiencing anxiety. Better signposting, particularly of support services, would have been appreciated. IV. Induction (PGR)
With research study a significant shift from their previous university experience, PGR induction faces a variety of challenges. This is compounded by the fact that many PGRs start later in the year, so may miss University induction. Lack of induction has the potential to feed into PGR isolation, as well affecting knowledge and familiarity the University and doctoral study. A dedicated PGR induction page, with sessions uploaded, would provide year-round induction content for the 30% of PGRs who do not start in September or October. In addition, more accessible dissemination of themes laid out in QA7 but not widely accessed by PGRs would provide crucial information at an early point on supervision, orientation and the PGR lifecycle. Increased PGR networking opportunities would benefit many PGRs, and late starters in particular. V. Induction (PGT)
PGT induction is also highly important for a cohort which has a short period of study with little time for orientation and highly pressured timetables, including induction timetables. Community-building and shared experience was seen as valuable, but Students’ Union Freshers’ Week needing more advertising through departments. An improved PGT induction page would balance the need for content on a range of topics with PGTs’ pressured timetables. VI. Postgraduate lifestyle (PGT and PGR)
A detailed overview of the wider postgraduate experience. These are mostly not postgraduate-specific issues, but can include campus services, social activities, housing, transport, and other topics experienced by all students.
94
Appendix B: Methodology
1. Aims and objectives The project seeks to explore how key issues in the postgraduate experience directly affect postgraduates, and to gain detailed qualitative data on these issues. Its qualitative research can offer a unifying narrative to student experience that can feed into the policy and practice of the University of Bath and the Students’ Union, as well as Students’ Union campaigns and communication. The research is as much about capturing good practice as identifying problems. The issues selected for the project are: PGR Supervision Teaching by postgraduates (PGR) PGR isolation PGT induction PGR induction PGR lifestyle PGT lifestyle
2. Methodology Quantitative data already exists on these topics, primarily through the Postgraduate Research Experience (PRES) and Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey (PTES). Their higher response rate in 2015 offer datasets which are statistically representative of the cohorts and their experience of postgraduate study. However, while this provides data which can be benchmarked and analysed in terms of department and other variables, its primary use is tracking levels of satisfaction on specific factors. Although free text comments are also included in these surveys, PRES and PTES offer less opportunity to understand in depth the experience of individual PGRs and PGTs. Contextual data was related to the interviews from existing survey response (PRES, PTES), minutes (Research Academic Council, PGA Executive, URSC, PG Forums) and relevant University and Students’ Union papers, arrange semi-structured interviews with postgraduates, both individually and in focus groups. Where group interviews take place for topics such as induction that affect both PGTs and PGRs, PGTs should be interviewed in separate groups from PGRs to reflect the distinct experiences. The sample for these interviews was relatively small, and could not be statistically representative. Their value was in providing a depth of response on specific issues which has not been previously gathered by the Students’ Union.
95
Interviews and focus groups are likely to take time and work to recruit for. Interview participants received small payments (£10) for taking part. The two types of interviews were promoted separately – collecting general feedback in the focus groups, and case studies in the individual interviews. Both sets of interviews were anonymised. It was decided that it was more suitable to conduct the PGR isolation interviews individually, as PGRs may not feel comfortable making frank explorations in a group context about personal circumstances or departmental arrangements.
3. Analysis
The interviews were drawn on for participants’ experiences of each issue, reflecting general opinion but also highlighting points of significant concern. These experiences were related to commentary on current University provision, where possible referenced to the relevant University document or online content. It was also related to postgraduate opinion through PRES and PTES, and discussions in Research Academic Council, PGA Executive, and PG Forums. Contrast was also made with current provision at comparator universities where documentation and detailed information was available.
4. Report and recommendations
The purpose of the research is develop evidence-based policies on key issues for postgraduates. The report needs to convey the unifying narrative of the respondents, and derive themes which can be addressed in concrete, achievable recommendations that will make a significant difference to the postgraduate experience. Recommendations were not produced for PGT and PGR lifestyle, as these interviews were exploring the personal choices of postgraduates rather than identifying issues to be resolved.
5. Topics
The Postgraduates Coordinator provided briefings for each topic, and postgraduate interviewers were apprised of significant PRES and PTES results and key themes.
96
Appendix C: Summary of recommendations
I. PGR isolation
1. The PGA should run social events open only to PGRs as well as events open to all postgraduates, and increase the number of social events it runs throughout the year. 2. More signposting by graduate schools, departments and supervisors could be given on support services for PGRs, including Counselling & Mental Health and the Students’ Union. 3. The PGSkills course for identifying and managing students in distress should be made compulsory for all supervisors. 4. Students’ Union societies should explicitly target PGRs for participation and membership. 5. Departmental research seminars could be developed to include a more informal social element. 6. More information could be made available on stress points throughout the PGR lifecycle, including confirmation and writing-up, with advice on strategies for managing them. 7. Tailored communication, contact and activities for part-time PGRs should be available, and more work done to research their specific needs.
II. PGR induction
1. A dedicated PGR induction webpage with comprehensive information on orientation and PGR study, supervision, QA7, progression points and support services. A page that is maintained throughout the year would provide a valuable means of accessing key information to PGRs who do not start in or just before Week 1, as well as benefitting existing PGRs. 2. It would be useful for a session to outline the distinct characteristics of research study, including progression points and QA7. 3. A checklist of what PGRs should be aware of when they begin their research degree would be welcomed, including items addressing QA7, Graduate Schools, office space and supervision.
97
4. Some clarification beyond QA7 on the general responsibilities of PGRs and supervisors would go some way to resolve ambiguities, even if it would be unrealistic and undesirable to expect simple answers to how an individual PGR should work. 5. Candid discussion of the challenging aspects of research study that may be encountered would be useful, with a need to communicate the role of support services in addressing them more fully, including the Research Postgraduate Ombudsman and the Advice & Representation Centre in the Students’ Union. 6. A panel session that enabled new PGRs to ask staff and alumni questions on key topics of research study would go some way to addressing concerns and queries. The session could be uploaded to an induction webpage. 7. Increased PGR-specific networking opportunities would be beneficial.
III. PGT induction
1. A more comprehensive and engaging PGT central induction page with information about buses, specific postgraduate facilities and a better introduction to the SU, PGA and other support services.
2. Use of personal email accounts where possible for pre-arrival information.
3. Alumni could be used more for induction sessions, giving new PGTs the opportunity to speak directly to peers about course experiences.
4. Facebook groups could be set up for specific programme/years, enabling community building by course members communicating directly and informally before Week 1.
5. Improved promotion by departments of PG Freshers’ Week.
6. Clearer communication of support services, including the SU.
7. Improved provision for distance-learning students that specifically include distance learners in the university community.
8. Recording of sessions and posting them would benefit distance learners and those unable to attend sessions, increasing the reach and effect of induction.
98
IV. Supervision
1. Clear communication on the responsibilities and reasonable expectations of supervisors, including but not only a revised QA7 document that is more accessible and widely read.
2. Clear guidance from departments on the implementation of QA7 for supervisory responsibilities for specific disciplines.
3. Increased monitoring of supervision by directors of studies or heads of department to ensure minimum reasonable standards are being met.
4. Production of a good practice guide for supervisors covering all areas of supervision, including contact time, use of Skype when absent from the University for extended periods, engaging with the research of the PGR and developing a working relationship with them. This good practice guide should be widely communicated to established as well as new supervisors.
5. Clear communication of the role of other members of the supervisory team.
6. Consideration and suitable contact and support of part-time PGRs, including guidance on skills development, attending conferences and publishing work.
7. Clear communication on the function of the Postgraduate Research Ombudsman and the circumstances where speaking with him would be beneficial, emphasising that where problems might exist an early resolution is far more effective.
8. The benefits for researcher development of attending conferences and publishing work should be encouraged and facilitated by the supervisor in line with RDU guidance.
V. Teaching by postgraduates
1. Selection of GTAs should be communicated to all eligible postgraduates, offering equality of opportunity that would enable part-time and distance learning students to apply.
2. The TIPS session should be developed to include more practical training.
3. Introduction of qualitative student feedback forms, with response provided to GTAs promptly.
4. Best practice on the inclusion of GTAs into departmental teaching culture could be added as appendices to QA9.
99
5. Teaching observation by a member of academic staff should take place twice in the first six months with feedback provided as soon as possible.
6. An improved hourly rate to bring the University into line with GW4 partners, combined with greater paid preparation time. A multiplier of 2 hours pay for each hour of teaching would take greater consideration of preparation time and unpaid work.
7. The introduction of a contract that recognised the specific circumstances of postgraduate teaching, offering employee status and eligibility for statutory sick pay.
8. Improved communication of the availability and content of the Bath Scheme would be likely to increase the numbers of GTAs who would benefit from the professional development it offers. An increased online presence, inclusion in the TIPS session and promotion by department and supervisors would be important means of achieving this.
100
Appendix D: Key recommendations and responsibilities
I. PGR supervision
University 1. Clear and widely accessed communication on responsibilities and reasonable expectations of supervisors (poss. PGSkills sessions on supervision made compulsory). 2. Clear guidance from departments on implementation of QA7 for supervisory responsibilities for specific disciplines. 3. Good practice guide for supervisors covering all areas of supervision. 4. Increased monitoring of supervisors by heads of department and directors of study. 5. Conference attendance and publication should be encouraged more widely by supervisors. University and Students’ Union 1. Clear communication of function of PG Ombudsman.
II. Teaching by postgraduates (PGRs)
University 1. Fairer selection of postgraduates who teach 2. TIPS session should have more practical training. 3. Improved hourly rate, plus multiplier of two hours for each hour of teaching. 4. Introduction of a contract for postgraduates who teach, offering employee status and sick pay. University and Students’ Union 1. Improved communication of Bath Scheme.
III. PGT induction
University 1. Improved promotion by departments of Freshers’ Week. 2. Recording sessions and posting online to benefit distance learners. 3. More comprehensive and engaging PGT central induction page. 101
IV. PGR induction
University 1. Dedicated PGR induction page maintained throughout the year for late starters. 2. Checklist of key items to be aware of – including QA7, Graduate Schools, office space, supervision. 3. Clarification of the role of the supervisor. 4. Panel session of staff and alumni, to be uploaded to induction webpage. University and Students’ Union 1. More PGR-specific networking opportunities.
V. PGR isolation
University 1. More information on stress points in the PGR lifecycle, with advice on coping strategies. 2. PG Skills session for identifying and managing PGRs in distress should be made compulsory for supervisors. University and Students’ Union 1. Tailored communications, activities and contact for part-time PGRs. Students’ Union 1. PGA to run PGR-only social events. 2. SU societies to explicitly target PGRs for participation and membership.
102
Appendix E: Destinations and formats
URSC Full report
Research Academic Council Digest with recommendations
Jonathan Knight (PVC Research) Full report Peter Lambert (PVC Learning & Teaching)
Anthony Payne (Head of Student PGR isolation chapter Services)
Induction Working Group PGR and PGT induction chapters
Directors of Studies Forum Full report
FRSC / GSC Full report, highlighting faculty relevance
SU areas Digest with recommendations
Student body Digest with recommendations
103