Conduct

“We can help students sustain their will to learn if we take supervising students as the big responsibility that it is. We can choose to care about the student and his or her project. We can be mindful when we provide feedback. Not only that, but we can ask a student, encourage the student, motivate the student by saying, “Yes, this is a difficult job—but everyone before and after you faces these difficulties.” It is not only about the students who benefit from a growth mindset, but also the supervisors. If we take an encouraging and mindful approach, maybe we can create a spark in the students. A kind of fire. Potentially, that will energize him or her to go forward. I don’t like to be pessimistic in a challenging situation. I’d rather like to say: ‘We can make a difference!’ ” (Madhu Neupane Bastola)

— Madhu Neupane Bastola

“During the process of writing or conducting their research, students will also develop their communication skills, e.g. collecting data, talking to people, seeking sources, seeking help from learning centres, academic advisors, utilizing their networks. So, communication skills become key. During the writing, they also need to present their thesis or their research multiple times. They may have to make a presentation when defending their proposal. Often, they need to defend their thesis several times. Communication skills and presentations skills are critical here.” (Madhu Neupane Bastola)

— Madhu Neupane Bastola

“When I was a doctoral student, we had one doctoral seminar, which was likely the most painful seminar I took as a student. There were five of us, and we were assigned one paper at the very top of our field. Each week, we would meet and one of us would be assigned a paper to discuss, peel open, critique—but the expectation was that we would also read all the other four papers. So that we could discuss, contribute, ask questions that the person who was assigned to do it had missed and ask his understanding of what they thought about it. It was painful because these papers did not often open themselves on first sight. It required a bit of time to get into it—and you had to be able to discuss the merits and critique it. But that course has given me so much. There was only limited time, so you had to be efficient. The most valuable skill I took away was that I can read an academic text and on the first read get to the guts of it and comment on it. When I supervise, when I referee, when I do any of these tasks, this has been a huge time-saver. It was painful while it lasted, but it really paid dividends. When we get into academic jobs, a big part of that is reading other people’s work and provide feedback on it.” (Timo Korkeamäki)

— Timo Korkeamäki

“When taking the role of co-reader or co-supervisor, I can pass on some encouragement to more junior supervisors. The way to get them into a different mindset is to expose ourselves with our own work. One practice, that I fostered, was called “The Writing Workshop”. In these writing workshops, we invited everyone to come and subject their papers to discussion. There were no presentations; the only ground rule was that whenever you attend a workshop, you must have read in advance the paper to be discussed. Second, you must come with your written comments on the paper. The author gives a few sentences of introduction, and then it is open for discussion. Everyone contributes their comments and discusses the paper in a very honest way—obviously in the anticipation that their own paper may be next in line. Afterwards, all the workshop participants hand over their comments to the author of the paper discussed. So, as an author, you get a stack of papers with others’ comments. Essentially, this is a frank review for the author. It doesn’t matter who you are, what matters is the discussion. You step out of the role of an accomplished professor. You are just an author. This is very beneficial and motivating. And so, the writing workshop creates a huge boost of energy. It always involves doctoral students, and you can simulate it at the MA level as well by bringing together your mentees and letting them learn from each other. This is a way to create more opportunities at our institutions. We should take these opportunities, and we have the freedom to do this.” (Ansgar Richter)

— Ansgar Richter

“While I am a strong proponent of structural change for the better in universities, I want to emphasize the power and agency that students themselves can have within the system. This begins with recognizing the agency that you have to create change for yourself. And I think if we put students in a position of disempowerment and oppression through an academic system, that’s not a very productive or a good feeling. Then they are just trapped and there is not much they can do. While I think the university structure needs to change, agency is equally important, and the student voice in advocating that change and leading some of it is not only important but is also one of the most effective ways to create change within institutions. We know that academic senates and academic committees and, you know, institutional managers tend not to listen to academic staff. But if the customers—that is, the students—have something to say and can rally around a particular issue with enough voice and enough impetus, then it is possible to create change that way. And I think in terms of how do you not get chewed up at the other end? It’s about advocating for your rights and, where there is an issue, trying to ensure students don’t feel powerless about whatever is happening.” (Kim Beasy)

— Kim Beasy

“A single phrase might hurt a student a lot. There is already a huge power gap between a supervisor and students—even if we are friendly with our students. They are being evaluated for their work. In this situation, they already feel slightly awkward. In such a situation, if we are not mindful of the type of language that we use, we might unintentionally damage their confidence. There is also a cultural difference here: what might be slightly more carefully phrased in some contexts can be very critically framed in other contexts. Even softening slightly—“this could have happened to me as well”—can already help. Then, combine with developmental feedback. Avoid a harsh tone. Be careful about your language.” (Madhu Neupane Bastola)

— Madhu Neupane Bastola

“ Students need to report their thesis in language. This means that another critical skill employed is academic writing. This skill is discipline-specific. Each discipline has its own way of constructing knowledge, be it humanities, education, science, engineering, or any other discipline. Each discipline has its own way of constructing knowledge, and what is considered to be knowledge differs from discipline to discipline. Graduate students need to be able to communicate in that acceptable manner that is respected in their discipline.” (Madhu Neupane Bastola)

— Madhu Neupane Bastola

“We write with the goal of showing things. We write with the goal of showing what we know about the literature, describing a process that hasn’t been described before, or just describing a theory as accurately or precisely as we can. However, those goals all differ from the goal of merely being understood. So being accurate or precise, for example, if that’s your overriding goal, then that is going to lead you to use a lot more jargon. Jargon feels like a very precise way to write about our research. Instead of saying “the process through which countries develop a market system”, you could just say “marketization”. Speaking of “marketization” is more precise . It’s denser and shorter, fitting, but it’s also less accessible. It can only be understood if someone happens to know what “marketization” means. By distancing language from the common day-to-day language that even academics use, you just make it a lot harder for people to understand what you’re saying. The best theory, the best thinking, the best contributions are not going to be seen or understood by most people unless you are writing about it in a clear way. I’m an advocate of that.” (Matt Farmer)

— Matt Farmer

“First of all, the worst thing to do is to look for a research gap. That’s because maybe there are good reasons that there is a research gap: maybe there is simply no one interested in finding an answer to the so-called research gap. Often, people follow a research gap which is perhaps mentioned in the last paragraph of an article. That’s what I’d never recommend following.” (Günter Müller-Stewens)

— Günter Müller-Stewens

“Finding papers can be daunting, especially if you’re in a very crowded discipline because basically, you’re trying to drink from a fire hose. And of course there are new papers being published every day. So, you’ve decades worth of papers to try to wrap your head around while also keeping up with current developments. It can be overwhelming. One useful tactic is to find others who have done an outstanding job of reading through that theory and attempt to use them as a starting-point. So instead of just diving into the deep end, you start with others who have plumbed those depths a lot, and use those as entry points. This way you can get your head around some of the initial ideas and topics. Textbook chapters are helpful for this kind of thing. And then you just go from there. And that way you’re starting off at the most important parts and then branching out into the rest of the material. Just like a tree: you start with the trunk, and then you branch out, instead of just trying to take it all in at once.” (Matt Farmer)

— Matt Farmer

“Think of it as if it were a ladder where you are first describing the concrete, real world, what actually happened. What did these participants or subjects do when you did this manipulation? What was their response to it? These are your results. Then, you are taking a step back, to ask what these results mean on their own? You’re still just in the context. You’re standing there, the participants have just left the room, and you wonder what does that actually mean, what you just witnessed? What does this gathered insight, this data mean? How do I interpret that result? How do I translate that into the language that I’m using in the paper? Instead of recounting what happened, you use the more abstract terminology for it.” (Matt Farmer)

— Matt Farmer

“The discussion is where you’re taking a further step back. And now you are looking at your results as a single piece of evidence in full detail. Now, taken together with the other findings, how does it fit into the larger group of studies or pieces of evidence of what you’re writing? You are ultimately writing for a critical audience that you are trying to convince. You are constantly moving up and down what we call the ladder of abstraction. Having those levels of abstraction along the way of explaining your ideas, it helps your audience. And it helps yourself to clarify your own thinking, too.” (Matt Farmer)

— Matt Farmer