[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-594830-105":59,"doc-detail-594830-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","australian-universities-review-doctoral-supervisory-quality-from-the-perspective-of-senior-academic-managers-margaret-kiley","Australian Universities’ Review - Doctoral supervisory quality from the perspective of senior academic managers - Margaret Kiley","","Australian Universities’ Review presents research on doctoral supervisory quality from the perspective of senior academic managers at an Australian university context. The study analyzes interviews with 34 senior staff to understand how they identify doctoral supervisors they view as less than ideal and how they respond to the multiple issues involved. It focuses on supervisory behaviors rather than publication counts, reviews ethical and “toxic” supervision typologies, and highlights barriers to identifying underperformance while emphasizing supportive advising for timely completion.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/australian-universities-review-doctoral-supervisory-quality-from-the-perspective-of-senior-academic-managers-margaret-kiley/594830/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/australian-universities-review-doctoral-supervisory-quality-from-the-perspective-of-senior-academic-managers-margaret-kiley/594830.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Mary Man","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":44},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What was the purpose of the study described in the document?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The study aimed to identify barriers and supports for heads of department when working with doctoral supervisors who might be considered less than ideal, focusing on how they define troubling or poorly performing supervision and what they do in response.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How did the researchers gather the evidence for the findings?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The findings are based on interviews with 34 senior staff, examining how they identified supervisors they considered less than ideal and how they addressed the issues involved.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What does the document say performance means in the supervisory context?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Performance is not defined by publication and grant numbers. It refers to how staff carry out supervisory work with candidates and colleagues.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},594830,1792171463,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":44,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":52,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},7421720224475,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","A U S T R A L I A N U N I V E R S I T I E S ’ R E V I E W  \nDoctoral supervisory quality from the perspective of senior academic managers  \nMargaret Kiley  \nAustralian National University  \nIt has been suggested in the literature that the relationship with a doctoral supervisor is the predominant factor in student decisions to continue or withdraw from their candidatures. However, anecdotally it is not uncommon to hear heads of department, faculty deans and those in similar positions say that they know who the poorly-performing doctoral supervisors are, but often they are not sure what they, or others can do to remedy the situation. This study is based on interviews with 34 senior staff in order to understand how they identified supervisors who they generally considered less than ideal in the way they supervised doctoral candidates. This was followed by how they addressed, often, the multiple issues involved. The results provide helpful insights for staff in leadership positions as well as those whose role it is to support doctoral education, and particularly candidates and supervisors.  \nKeywords: doctoral education, PhD supervision  \nAim  \nThe aim of this study was to identify the barriers and supports for heads of department or similar when they are working with doctoral supervisors who might be deemed less than ideal, for example: unskilled or neglectful.The research questions addressed were:Within an Australian context how do Heads of Department define troublesome, unprofessional or poorly performing research supervisors and what, if anything they do about them? In the Australian situation the role of the head of department is critical given that generally the dean of graduate research has little or no authority over staff in departments. Note, this study was particularly from the perspective of senior academic managers. While there is no doubt that a broader study involving candidates and  \nsupervisors would have revealed a more comprehensive picture, this modest beginning presents one aspect of this complex picture.  \nContext  \nThere is substantial research to indicate that poor research supervision is associated with doctoral delays and noncompletions (see for exampleAmundsen & McAlpine,2009; Gardner, 2009; Platow, 2011).Therefore, identifying ways in which senior staff can identify and then respond to issues of poor performance in supervisors was deemed to be oneway of addressing the issue of unprofessional supervision. Of note, performance here was not referring to numbers of publications and grants, but rather the way staff performed their supervisory work with candidates and colleagues. At  \n12 Doctoral supervisory quality from the perspective of senior academic managers Margaret Kiley vol. 61, no. 1, 2019  \nA U S T R A L I A N U N I V E R S I T I E S ’ R E V I E W  \nthe coursework teaching level (bachelor’s and master’s) it is often possible to identify poorly-performing lecturers through course and teaching evaluations. However, it is generally recognised that it is much more difficult to identify and quantify supervisory performance.  \nDespite the difficulty in identifying supervisors of concern there are reports such as the article by Grove (2016) who writes about the ‘toxic’ supervisor and‘students from hell’ and Grant (2004) the master/ slave relationship. Specifically related to supervisors, Chamberlain (2016 pp.1-3) proposes a number of different types of unprofessional behaviour such as: cheap labour; the ‘ghost supervisor’; collateral damage; the combatant; creepy crawlers; and the captivate and con supervisor.  \nIn their study of supervisory quality Lofstrom and Pyhalto (2017) used a model of ethical principles based on Kitchener (1985, 2000) with the qualities: ‘1 . respect for autonomy, 2. avoiding harm (non-maleficence), 3. benefiting others (beneficence), 4. being just (justice) and 5. being faithful (fidelity)’(Italics in the original p. 233). The framework was applied to data they collected from Fi","cbCaihsGwV1hcG2n","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaihsGwV1hcG2n","pdf",187689,"English","# Aim\n## Context\n## Identifying unprofessional supervision\n## Ethical principles and supervision quality\n## Supportive advising and effective supervision","[{\"question\":\"What was the purpose of the study described in the document?\",\"answer\":\"The study aimed to identify barriers and supports for heads of department when working with doctoral supervisors who might be considered less than ideal, focusing on how they define troubling or poorly performing supervision and what they do in response.\"},{\"question\":\"How did the researchers gather the evidence for the findings?\",\"answer\":\"The findings are based on interviews with 34 senior staff, examining how they identified supervisors they considered less than ideal and how they addressed the issues involved.\"},{\"question\":\"What does the document say performance means in the supervisory context?\",\"answer\":\"Performance is not defined by publication and grant numbers. It refers to how staff carry out supervisory work with candidates and colleagues.\"}]","Australian Universities’ Review - Doctoral supervisory quality from the perspective of senior academic managers - Margaret Kiley | PDF",1792079923,25]