Supervisor selection or allocation and continuity of supervision: Ph.D. students’ progress and outcomes

By G. Ives, G. Rowley. 2005

330 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, General Health Professions, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/420d77fe9ae37471cefc37808dd5a291c7d902e8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

In General Health Professions

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Citations in the corpus

A model for the supervisor–doctoral student relationship (2009, background): “Ives and Rowley (2005) for example reported that good interpersonal working relationships between supervisors and their PhD students were associated with good progress and student satisfaction.”
Student satisfaction with graduate supervision in doctoral programs primarily delivered in distance education settings (2014, background): “Ives and Rowley (2005) state that the communication between the supervisor and student is the most important component in the development of graduate students, while Lee (2008) writes, ‘We know that the supervisor can make or break a PhD student’ (267).”
Master's thesis supervision: relations between perceptions of the supervisor–student relationship, final grade, perceived supervisor contribution to learning and student satisfaction (2012, background): “Drennan and Clarke 2009 ; Ives and Rowley 2005 ; Seagram, Gould, and Pyke 1998 ).”
Factors that influence PhD candidates’ success: the importance of PhD project characteristics (2019, background): “This shows that – in addition to the importance of a good relationship – a good academic match between PhD candidate and supervisor is important, as Ives and Rowley (2005) and Gube et al. (2017) also emphasise.”
Negotiating academicity: postgraduate research supervision as category boundary work (2007, background): “Much research has explored the characteristics of ‘effective’ supervision, and much has focused on collecting information about postgraduate research students’ positive and negative experiences that can inform guidelines about supervision, and improve supervisory arrangements and practices (see, for”
Improving the Development of Postgraduates' Research and Supervision (2011, background): “Various studies have reported on the importance of interpersonal relationships between graduate students and their supervisors as a determinant of student success (Lessing & Schulze, 2002; Ives & Rowley, 2005; Lin & Cranton, 2005).”
Towards understanding international graduate student isolation in traditional and online environments (2011, background): “Lee (2008) nevertheless, writes, ‘‘We know that the supervisor can make or break a PhD student’’ (p. 267) and Ives and Rowley (2005) state that the communication between the supervisor and student is the most important component in the development of graduate students.”
Fit matters in the supervisory relationship: doctoral students and supervisors perceptions about the supervisory activities (2015, unknown): “Both the quantity and the quality of supervision have been shown to have a signi ﬁ - cant impact on the doctoral experience (e.g. Basturkmen, East, & Bitchener, 2012; Ives & Rowley, 2005; Woodward, 1993).”
Informality, power and relationships in postgraduate supervision: supervising PhD candidates over coffee (2012, background): “The relationship between a postgraduate supervisor and candidate has been recognised to be a crucial element in the successful completion of a PhD, in an era where timely completions have become a key focus (Adkins, 2009; Ives & Rowley, 2005).”
Doctoral students’ experiences leading to completion or attrition: a matter of sense, progress and distress (2017, unknown): “Overall, these studies show a significant, although complex, influence of the supervising style on PhD students’ outcomes (Bair and Haworth 2004; Bell-Ellison and Dedrick 2008; Jairam and Kahl 2012; Ives and Rowley 2005; Litalien 2014; McAlpine and McKinnon 2013; Paglis et al. 2006).”
Research supervisors’ different ways of experiencing supervision of doctoral students (2011, background): “Doctoral students who feel involved in the choice of supervisor, have a supervisor with expert knowledge of their subject, and develop a good working relationship with him or her tend to succeed better and be more satisfied with their postgraduate studies (Ives and Rowley 2005 ).”
Exploring the Fit between Doctoral Students' and Supervisors' Perceptions of Resources and Challenges vis-à-vis the Doctoral Journey (2012, background): “Introduction Supervisory relationships are central determinants that contribute to the success of the doctoral journey (Ives & Rowley, 2005; Sambrook, Stewart, & Roberts, 2008; Styles & Radloff, 2001; Zhao, Golde, & McCormick, 2007).”