Recieved: 08/23/2021 20:20:00
Accepted: 01/27/2022 18:59:00
Published: 04/14/2022 19:01:00
Keywords: postgraduate education; scientific management of postgraduate students; relations with the supervisor; social capital; demographic factors; socio-stratification factors; correlation analysis
p.: 3-14
DOI: 10.11621/npj.2022.0101
Sobkin, V.S., Smyslova, M.M. , Kolomiets, Yurij O.. Postgraduate student in the field of education: on the relationship with the scientific supervisor. // National Psychological Journal 2022. 1. p.3-14. doi: 10.11621/npj.2022.0101
Copied to Clipboard
CopyBackground. In connection with the crisis noted by researchers in the system of training scientific and pedagogical personnel for higher and postgraduate education (one of the indicators of which is the low percentage of postgraduate students defending a PhD thesis), it is extremely important to study the problems of scientific leadership of postgraduate students.
Objective. The study of the features of interaction of postgraduate students with their scientific supervisors, depending on the influence of socio-stratification factors, motivation for admission to graduate school and self-assessment of their capabilities in the successful defense of a dissertation research.
Design. The article is based on the materials of a monitoring questionnaire survey of 803 postgraduate students of organizations engaged in the training of postgraduate students in the field of education sciences. The study involved students of postgraduate research organizations engaged in the training of postgraduate students in the field of education sciences, as well as pedagogical universities in Moscow and the regions of the Russian Federation. In this paper, the influence of socio-demographic and socio-stratification factors on the relationship between scientific supervisors and postgraduate students is considered. The empirical data were processed using the methods of mathematical statistics (statistical software packages SPSS and StatSoft Statistica).
Results. The study showed the influence of socio-demographic and socio-stratification factors on the assessment of the features of interaction with the supervisor by postgraduate students. A special correlation analysis of the motives for admission to graduate school showed that there is a connection between the motivation of postgraduate students and the character of interaction with the supervisor. The connection between the features of interaction of graduate students with the supervisor and the availability of obtaining his advice with the confidence of postgraduate students in the successful defense of the candidate’s thesis is shown.
Conclusion. The study allowed us to characterize a number of significant aspects concerning the socio-psychological features of the relationship between postgraduate students and their scientific supervisors. These include: the importance of the experience of working with the supervisor of the dissertation at the stage of writing the graduate work at university, as a special mechanism for recruiting in the field of science; the influence of socio-stratification factors on building relationships with the supervisor about the dissertation research; the influence of the graduate student’s involvement in the scientific activities of the supervisor on the motivation of training in graduate school; the influence of the availability of professional contacts with the supervisor on the confidence of the postgraduate student in the successful defense of his dissertation. In general, the research materials allow us to conclude that the relationship with the supervisor is an important indicator of the “social capital” that a graduate student acquires during his postgraduate studies
Anikin, V.M., Poizner, B.N. (2015). Scientific management of graduate students: “Internal” and “External” regulators. Izv. Sarat. un-ta Nov. ser. (Izvestiya of Saratov University. New Series, Physics), 1, 83–88. (Retrieved from https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/nauchnoe-rukovodstvo-aspirantami-vnutrennie-i-vneshnie-regulyatory (review date: 02.06.2021). (In Russ.).
Bednyĭ, B.I. (2016). On the question of the purpose of postgraduate training (dissertation vs qualification). Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii (Higher education in Russia), 3, 44–52. (In Russ.).
Bednyĭ, B.I. (2017). A new model of postgraduate studies: pros and cons. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii (Higher education in Russia), 4, 5–16. (In Russ.).
Bednyĭ, B.I., Rybakov, N.V., Sapunov, M.B. (2017). Russian postgraduate studies in the educational field: interdisciplinary discourse. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya (Sociological research), 9, 125–134. doi: 10.7868/S0132162517090148 (In Russ.).
Bednyi, B.I., Mironos, A.A. (2008). Training of scientific personnel in higher education. The state and trends in the development of postgraduate studies. Monograph. Nizhny Novgorod: NNGU, 219. (In Russ.). Graduate students’ graduation in the areas of training. Rosstat: ofitsial’nyĭ saĭt. (Rosstat: official website). (Retrieved from https://rosstat.gov.ru/folder/13398 (review date: 02.06.2021). (In Russ.).
Gokhberg, L.M., Kitova, G.A., Kuznetsova, T.E., Shuvalova, O.R. (2010). Russian scientists: strokes to a sociological portrait. Moscow: NIU–VShE, 140. (In Russ.).
Kapshutar’, M.A. (2016). Motivation as a factor of the quality of postgraduate training. Tsennosti i smysly (Values and meanings), 5 (45), 39–47. (In Russ.).
Kotlyarov, I.D. (2010). Problems of the implementation of scientific guidance by applicants for the academic degree of Candidate of Sciences. Universitetskoe upravlenie: praktika i analiz (University management: practice and analysis), 4, 50–54. (In Russ.).
Osipov, G.V., Savinkov, V.I. (2014). Dynamics of postgraduate studies and prospects until 2030: Statistical and sociological analysis. Moscow: TsSP i M. (In Russ.).
Reznik, S.D. (2012). Scientific management of graduate students: practical guide. Moscow: INFRA-M, 477. (In Russ.).
Reznik, S.D., Makarova, S.N. (2013). Increasing the role of scientific management of graduate students in ensuring the quality of training of young scientists in Russia. Monograph. Penza: PGUAS, 176. (In Russ.).
Sobkin, V.S., Smyslova, M.M. (2020). Features of motivation for admission to graduate school. Pedagogika (Pedagogy), 7, 36–44. (In Russ.).
Sobkin, V.S., Smyslova, M.M. (2021). Well-being of Postgraduate Students: Emotional Assessment of Life Prospects. Psikhologopedagogicheskie issledovaniya (Psychological-Educational Studies), 13 (1), 72–83. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17759/psyedu.2021130105
Terent’ev, E.A., Bekova, S.K., Maloshonok, N.G. (2018). The crisis of the Russian postgraduate school: sources of problems and opportunities to overcome them. Universitetskoe upravlenie: praktika i analiz (University management: practice and analysis), 22 (5), 54–66. (In Russ.). doi: 10.15826/umpa.2018.05.049
Shestak, V.P., Shestak, N.V. (2015). Postgraduate studies as the third level of higher education: a discursive field. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii (Higher education in Russia), 12, 22–34. (In Russ.)
Ershteĭn, L.B. (2011). Scientific guidance: theory, principles, practice. Saint-Petersburg: Publ. SPbGUNIPT, 76. (In Russ.).
Ershtein, L.B. (2013). The implementation of the main functions of scientific leadership as a means of success in the preparation of research qualification papers. Gumanitarnye issledovaniya v Vostochnoi Sibiri i na Dal’nem Vostoke (Humanitarian studies in Eastern Siberia and the Far East), 3 (23), 43–47. (In Russ.).
Bekova, S. (2019). Does Employment During Doctoral Training Reduce the PhD Completion Rate? Studies in Higher Education, 1–13. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1672648.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Eds.), New York: Greenwood, 241–258.
Gellert, C. (1993). The German model of research and advanced education. The research foundations of graduate education: Germany, Britain, France, United States, Japan. In B.R. Clark (Eds.), (pp. 5–44). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Golde, C.M. (2000). Should I stay or should I go? Student descriptions of the doctoral attrition process. The Review of Higher Education, 23 (2), 199–227. doi: 10.1353/rhe.2000.0004
Halse, C. (2007). Is the doctorate in crisis? Nagoya. Journal of Higher Education, 7, 321–337.
Kehm, B.M. (2006). Doctoral education in Europe and North America: A comparative analysis. In U. Teichler (Eds.), (pp. 66–78). London: Portland Press.
Kemp, D.A. (1999). Knowledge and innovation: a policy statement on research and research training. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, 29.
Maloshonok, N., Terentev, E. (2019). National Barriers to the Completion of Doctoral Programs at Russian Universities. Higher Education in Russia and Beyond, 3 (9), 18–20. doi: 10.1007/s10734-018-0267-9
Marsh, H.W., Rowe, K.J., Martin, A. (2002). PhD students’ evaluations of research supervision. The Journal of Higher Education, 73 (3), 313–348. doi: 10.1353/jhe.2002.0028
McAlpine, L., Norton, J. (2006). Reframing out approach to doctoral programs: An integrative framework for action and research. Higher Education Research & Development, 25 (1), 3–17. doi: 10.1080/07294360500453012
Nerad, M. (2010). Increase in PhD production and reform in doctoral education worldwide. Higher Education Forum, 7, 69–84.
Neumann, R., Tan, K.K. (2011). From PhD to initial employment: the doctorate in a knowledge economy. Studies in Higher Education, 36 (5), 601–614. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2011.594596
Pearson, M. (2005). Framing research on doctoral education in Australia in a global context. Higher Education Research & Development, 24 (2), 119–134. doi: 10.1080/0729436050006
Sobkin, V.S., Smyslova, M.M. , Kolomiets, Yurij O.. Postgraduate student in the field of education: on the relationship with the scientific supervisor. // National Psychological Journal 2022. 1. p.3-14. doi: 10.11621/npj.2022.0101
Copied to Clipboard
Copy