Policy

The University's Supervision Policy for Postgraduate Research Degrees provides guidance for postgraduate research students, as well as academic and administrative staff in Schools and Faculties, regarding the procedure and policy concerning the supervision of postgraduate research students. The policy covers various aspects such as supervisory teams, appointment of supervisors, supervision responsibilities, supervision for collaborative research degrees, managing absences or changes in supervision and staff development for supervisors. 

PGR main supervisor must be a University of Manchester member of staff, with at least one co-supervisor from the University of Manchester. In addition to this supervisory team, where there is a requirement for external parties to be appointed to join the supervisory team as external supervisors, the School must ensure external supervisors meet requirements and that the supervisory team is appropriately composed. 

To ensure that external supervisors observe and adhere to the same supervisory standard expected by the University and, in some cases, clarify various legal positions eg intellectual property, it is important to formalise the supervisory relationship by way of an agreement or contract. This will differ depending on the affiliation of the PGR to a consortium, their funding status and the external supervisor role if affiliated with a consortium or institutional agreement. It is important to determine whether the external supervisor agreement or contract needs to be arranged.

External supervisor scenarios and fees

External supervisors for PGRs who are part of institutional agreements (eg DTP, CDT) or collaborative studentships (e.g., ESRC NWSSDTP CASE, AHRC CDA/CDP, EPSRC iCASE etc), dual PhD or a split-site PhD do not receive payments under the external supervisor arrangement.  In some cases, external supervisors may be part of other types of arrangements, such as research grants, where PGR supervision is included in their duties and they are not eligible for payment. 

If a member of the supervisory team leaves the University of Manchester's employ during the PGR's programme, they may remain on the supervisory team as an external supervisor eg through retirement, move to another institution. In some cases, a subject expert external to UoM may be appointed to the supervisory team exceptionally and may be entitled to the external supervisor fee. In both cases, the appointments must be approved by the School PGR Director and budget holder:  

• SALC Head of Department 
• SEED: Head of Department 
• SOSS: PGR Director 
• AMBS: PGR Director 

Process

To initiate a process to appoint an external supervisor, the main supervisor should: 

1. Discuss the requirement with their School PGR Director
2. Liaise with the prospective external supervisor to initiate the agreement using the External Supervisor Engagement Form
3. The form should be sent to Doctoral Academy at hums.doctoralacademy@manchester.ac.uk 
4. Doctoral Academy will liaise with School PGR Director/Head of Department for approval and make necessary arrangements for access to eProg where appropriate

More information and further resources can be found on the following websites:

Vitae

Supervising a doctorate

The 'Supervising a doctorate' section of Vitae's site provides advice and guidance for supervisors. Vitae’s resources also include information from the Premia project on supervising disabled PhD students.

• Supervising a doctorate - Vitae website
• Premia: supervising disabled doctoral researchers

Researcher Development Framework (RDF)

The RDF describes the knowledge, behaviours and attitudes of professional researchers and provides a framework for the development of researchers at all stages of their careers. The RDF will replace the Joint Skills Statement which outlined the research and generic skills that research students ought to develop as part of their PhD experience.

• The Researcher Development Framework

The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA)

• UK Quality Code for Higher Education - Chapter B11: Research degrees

All of the following books and articles are available via the University Library (unless otherwise stated). The books are available to borrow from the library itself, and the link below will take you to the library catalogue entry. The journal articles can be accessed electronically through the link provided (but you may need your username and password if you are working off campus).

Books

• Delamont, S., Atkinson, P. and Parry, O. (2001) Supervising the PhD: A Guide to Success. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.
• Bartlet, Alison and Gina Mercer (2001). Postgraduate Research Supervision: Transforming (R)elations. New York: Peter Lang. (not in JRUL)
• Tinkler, Penny and Carolyn Jackson (2004).The Doctoral Examination Process: A Handbook for Students, Examiners and Supervisors. Maidenhead: Open University Press

Journal articles

Examining the thesis

• Mullins, G., & Kiley, M. (2002). 'It's a PhD, not a Nobel Prize': How experienced examiners assess research theses. Studies in Higher Education, 27(4), 369-386.
• Tinkler, P. & Jackson, C. (2000) Examining the Doctorate: institutional policy and the PhD examination process in Britain. Studies in Higher Education, 25(2), 167-180.
• Joyner, R. W. (2003). The selection of external examiners for research degrees. Quality Assurance in Education, 11(2), 123-127.

The viva

• Murray, R. (2003). Students' questions and their implications for the viva. Quality Assurance in Education, 11(2), 109.
• Carter, Susan. (2008) Examining the doctoral thesis: a discussion, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(4), 365-374
• Jackson, C., & Tinkler, P. (2001). Back to basics: A consideration of the purposes of the PhD viva. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(4), 355-366.
• Wallace, Sue (2003). Figuratively Speaking: Six accounts of the PhD viva. Quality Assurance in Education, 11(2), 100-108.

Selecting external examiners

• Kiley, Margaret (2009) "You don't want a smart Alec": selecting examiners to assess doctoral dissertations. Studies in Higher Education, 34(8), 889-903.
• Kiley, M. and Mullins, G. (2004) Examining the examiners: How inexperienced examiners approach the assessment of research theses. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(2), 121-135.
• Joyner, Richard W. (2003). The selection of external examiners for research degrees. Quality Assurance in Education, 11(2), 123-7

Approaches to supervision

• Johnson, L., Lee, A.,& Green, B. (2000). The PhD and the autonomous self: gender, rationality and postgraduate pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education, 25(2), 135-147.
• Mainhard, T., van der Rijst, R. & van Tartwijk, J. (2009). A model for the supervisor-doctoral student relationship. Higher Education, 58(3), 359-373.
• Brew, Angela (2001). 'Conceptions of Research: a phenomenographic study'. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), 271-285.
• Acker, Sandra, Tim Hill and Edith Black (1994). 'Thesis supervision in the social sciences: managed or negotiated'. Higher Education, 28, 483-498.
• Deuchar, Ross (2008). 'Facilitator, director or critical friend? Contradiction and congruence in doctoral supervision styles'. Teaching in Higher 'Education, 13(4), 489-500
• Lee, Ann (2008). 'How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision'. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3), 267-281.
• Hopwood, Nick (2010). Doctoral experience and learning from a sociocultural perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 35(7), 829-843.

Co-supervision

• Spooner-Lane, R., Henderson, D., Price, R., & Hill, G. (2007). Practice to theory: Co-supervision stories. The International Journal of Research Supervision, 1(1), 39-51.

Avoiding problems

• Levecque, K., Anseel, F., Beuckelaer, A., Van der Heyden, J., Gisle, L. (2017). Work organization and mental health problems in PhD students. Research Policy, 46(4), 868-879.
• Wright, T. and Cochrane, R. (2000) Factors influencing successful submission of PhD theses. Studies in Higher Education, 25(2), 181-195.
• Deem, R. & Brehony, K. (2000) Doctoral Students' Access to Research Cultures - are some more unequal than others? Studies in Higher Education, 25(2), 149-165.
• Wright, T. and Lodwick, R. (1989) The process of the PhD: a study of the first year of doctoral study. Research Papers in Education, 4(1), 22-56.
• Leonard, D., Metcalfe, J., Becker, R. and Evans, J. (2006) The Impact of Working Context and Support on the Postgraduate Research Student Learning Experience, Higher Education Academy commissioned literature review.

What is the purpose of a PhD?

• Enders, J. (2005). Border crossings: Research training, knowledge dissemination and the transformation of academic work. Higher Education, 49(1-2), 119-133.
• Halse, Christine and Janne Malfroy (2009). Retheorising doctoral supervision as professional work. Studies in Higher Education, 35(1), 79-92.
• Barnacle, Robyn and Gloria Dall’Alba (2010). Research Degrees as professional education?. Studies in Higher Education (iFirst).
• Kamler, Barbara (2008). Rethinking doctoral publication practices: writing from and beyond the thesis. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3), 283 – 294.

Reports

• League of European Research Universities (LERU). Doctoral degrees beyond 2010: Training talented researchers for society
• European University Association. Salzburg II Recommendations: European Universities' Achievements Since 2005 In Implementing The Salzburg Principles