© C. Manathunga, 2008 Research Student Virtual Portfolio (RSVP™): experiences in Australia and the UK Dr Catherine Manathunga University of Queensland,

© C. Manathunga, 2008

Research Student Virtual Portfolio (RSVP™): experiences in Australia and the UK

Dr Catherine ManathungaUniversity of Queensland,

Australia

Preparing for Academic Practice: Disciplinary perspectives

Conference, Oxford, April 2008


Research and Innovation Leaders of the future: doctoral graduates Doctoral programs seek to transform students

into independent researchers Importance of preparation not only for

academe but also industry, business and the professions – current research trajectories (Pearson & Brew, 2002; Rip, 2004; Tyler, 1998)

Critique of current doctoral programs as too narrow, despite recent additional coursework (esp. UKGrad program) (Clark, 1996; Cryer, 1998)

Australian doctoral programs mostly continue to have no formal coursework requirements


Graduate Attribute Debate Is the graduate attribute agenda overly narrow

and instrumental? (Gilbert et al., 2004; Sandberg, 2000)

Neo-liberal approach to research ‘training”? Irony of claiming doctoral graduates have

common attributes when the key goal of doctoral programs is that students make an original contribution to knowledge (Gilbert et al., 2004)

However, students are keen to have general career development opportunities during their doctoral studies and are keen to demonstrate their employability (Borthwick & Wissler, 2003; Manathunga et al., 2007)


Developed out of a research project on interdisciplinary research education and academic development (Manathunga et al., 2006)

Developed by Catherine Manathunga, Paul Lant, George Mellick, The University of Queensland

Trademarked in Australia and under application for a UK trademark

Internationally licensed to The University of Sheffield in 2005

RSVP™ online database currently under development Will be available as a commercial product in the

future Details:

http://www.uq.edu.au/grad-school/rsvp-29779


RSVP consists of…

4 step process:1. Set of research students’ graduate attributes.2. Key performance indicators associated with each

graduate attribute.3. Reflective review tool.4. Portfolio based on evidence of achievement of the

key performance indicators (). Resource package for students and advisors. Training program for supervisors.

Our job is to specify these so that they are relevant for you


The Graduate Attributes

Problem-solving and problem-formulation from different perspectives

Communication skills Project management skills Industry-focus and/or professional experience Understanding and applying multiple

disciplinary and international perspectives High quality research skills Expert integrated knowledge Social, ethical and environmental

responsibility


Customising the GA’s and KPI’s: Communication Skills

Description How this could be demonstrated (KPIs)

To express an idea: The student will be able to

present their work in several forms (written, spoken or graphically) in different contexts and to different audiences

The student will have gained experience in teaching/training and advising people

The student has: Effectively presented their work at internal seminars and/or conferences,

congresses, etc. Clearly expressed their ideas and results (orally and in powerpoint), gathered

feedback, and demonstrated how they have improved their presentation skills based on this feedback

Written well-structured, highly effective reports/papers and indicated their attempts to improve their writing skills.

Demonstrated the ability to plan and organise lecture, tutorial or training sessions and develop and deliver effective training materials and activities

Facilitated the successful completion of honours projects as honours supervisors

Disseminated special skills like statistical analysis methods to other students

To understand and value other knowledges:

The student will be able to read, listen to and appreciate other people’s ideas

The student has: Compiled an interdisciplinary literature review that will provide them with

ways to expand their own work applied other disciplines’ languages and concepts to their work actively participated in meetings and seminars showing that they understand

other people’s perspectives emailed other experts in their field after being introduced by their supervisor,

keeping the supervisor in the loop with email communications. Received tutor training and been involved in teaching and postgraduate

advising.


Customising the GA’s and KPI’s: Communication Skills

Working in interdisciplinary teams to develop social skills, self-confidence and conflict resolution and negotiation skills

The student has: shown effective participation in team work, by giving

input to the general project and applying the outcomes to their own work

established a bridge between different perspectives as a result of their developing interdisciplinary knowledge


Applying RSVP™ in your discipline

Reflective review and action planning process: Supervisors and students each reflect on the student’s

existing skills and areas for improvement under each graduate attribute and develop an action plan

Portfolio – evidence of student’s achievement of each graduate attribute

Activity: (10 mins) Join your disciplinary group Look at several lists of graduate attributes and descriptions Are there any additional attributes you would need? Do the descriptions match the concerns of your discipline? Discuss the key performance indicators/ways of

demonstrating one graduate attribute.


Evaluation in Australia Advanced Wastewater Management Centre – microbiologists, chemical

engineers and some social scientists Evaluation strategy – embedded in the process; student and staff

focus groups, interviews, industry evaluation, Cooperative Research Centre evaluation

Pedagogical outcomes: Assist students to: manage their research projects effectively through reflection and

action planning Manage their relationships with their supervisors through dialogue

and negotiation Plan their career goals and strategies for compiling evidence of

their graduate attributes Prepare for a range of employment options in academe, industry

and the professions Barriers to success – time and supervisor commitment (issue of

contracts) Won a UQ and a national Carrick Award for Programs that Enhance

Student Learning in 2005 and 2006


Evaluation in the UK Piloted in the Department of Chemical & Process Engineering,

The University of Sheffield – Dr Catherine Biggs Evaluation strategy – embedded; review by educational

development staff at Sheffield (staff and student survey, observations, meetings with project leader)

Main findings: Students and staff found it a valuable and are beginning to

take a more holistic view of doctoral studies Positive learning experience for student in identifying

strengths and areas for further development Systematic and practical approach to identifying

development needs and formulating a practical action plan Students value the collaborative and inclusive approach to

developing disciplinary-based attributes and KPIs and working closely with supervisors

Barriers to success – staff and student commitment, time constraints, inertia, takes time away from research project


Pedagogical implications Importance of ensuring that supervisors

and students engage in an active dialogue about the student’s career development

Effectiveness of incorporating structured reflective and experiential learning activities into doctoral programs

Encourages widespread debate in departments about the purpose of doctoral education, the roles of supervisors and the disciplinary-based practices of experienced researchers


References Clark, J. (1996). Postgraduate skills: A view from industry. Meeting the demands of R,

D & E leadership in a rapidly changing social and business environment (Report on graduate skills and industry): Faulding.

Cryer, P. (1998). Transferable skills, marketability and lifelong learning: The particular case of postgraduate research students. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 207-216.

Borthwick, J., & Wissler, R. (2003). Postgraduate research students and generic capabilities: Online directions. Canberra: DEST.

Gilbert, R, Balatti, J., Turner, P., & Whitehouse, H. (2004). The generic skills debate in research higher degrees. Higher Education Research & Development, 23(3), 375-388.

Manathunga, C., Lant, P., & Mellick, G. (2006). Imagining an interdisciplinary doctoral pedagogy. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 365-379.

Manathunga, C.; Lant, P. & Mellick, G. (2007). Developing professional researchers: research students’ graduate attributes. Studies in Continuing Education, 29:1, 19-36.

Pearson, M., & Brew, A. (2002). Research training and supervision development. Studies in Higher Education, 27(2), 135-150.

Rip, A. (2004). Strategic research, post-modern universities and research training. Higher Education Policy, 17, 153-166.

Sandberg, J. (2000). Understanding human competence at work: An interpretative approach. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 9-25.

Tyler, J. (1998). Research training for the 21st century. Governmental report in 'Higher Education Series'. No. 33. Canberra, ACT: Higher Education Division, Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.

Documents

© C. Manathunga, 2008 Research Student Virtual Portfolio (RSVP™): experiences in Australia and the UK Dr Catherine Manathunga University of Queensland,