Jane Pritchard Jane MacKenzie and Maggie Cusack University of Glasgow

1. The response of Physical Science post-graduates to training courses and their relation to their PhD studies Jane Pritchard Jane MacKenzie and Maggie Cusack University of Glasgow

2. Outline • Roberts training at Glasgow in PSGS • Roberts review – why and what training • PSGS 2003 response and why this study arose • Methodology for reviewing training provision • Outcomes • Summary and suggestions • Some additional questions around Roberts training and PhD life. • Lunch - hurrah

3. Don’t call it training!

4. Roberts - 1 • Why • strategy for improving UK productivity and performance • link made between demand for graduates and their transferable skills • At least 2 weeks dedicated transferable skills training each year • For PhD students starting on/after 2003/04 and PDRAs in post from October 2003

5. Roberts -2 …moves to improve the quality of PhD training are welcome but institutions are not adapting quickly enough to the needs of industry or the expectations of potential students. The review therefore believes that the training elements of a PhD, particularly training in transferable skills, needs to be improved considerably.

6. Background to study • Current training informed by a survey in 2003 PGR students and PDRAs • what training they would value and in response to suggestions from academic staff in the Faculty of Physical Sciences. • A number of existing courses – build on current activities and include those they want. • Keep impact on research time to a minimum.

7. ‘Data collection’ • Email questionnaire sent out to all 1st Yr, 2nd Yr and 3rd Yr PGs and PDRA’s. • 6 focus groups (semi-structured interviews) held with 1st and 2nd year PGs AND 3rd Yr PGs and PDRA’s. (about 1 hour each) • Links to core PhD studies, effectiveness, timing, desired skills, • Collation and comparisons between interviews and questionnaires • Themes identified and suggestions from the students identified

8. Skills identified by all as important for PhD – no great surprises • Time management • Writing skills – reports, papers • Oral presentations • Research skills – data gathering • Teaching • Interpersonal skills • Computer skills (not PDRAs)

9. Notable differences between years • 2nd years • technical skills, learn how to operate new equipment • 3rd yrs • specific computing skills, thesis writing, communication with people outside - crucial • PDRA’s • People management, web design skills, how to run meetings

10. Where do the identify the develop their skills • Sessions, supervisors, groups, peers, self • giving presentations, writing papers, • Teaching, collaborations, life! • ‘I believe Postdocs play a significant role in an efficient research group. They are the ones who can spend the time teaching new students’. (Yr 1 PG)

11. Current training provision • 1st yr • One day introduction • time management, introduction to PhD, PhD then what, • First aid • GTA statutory training • Library skills • Frontiers – away couple of days • team building and presentation skills • Data analysis • Radiation training • 2nd • Poster design & preparation leading to Faculty poster session • Small group sessions on voice projection & commanding an audience • 3rd • Myers Briggs • Using Word to prepare your thesis • Career planning • PDRA • Management training being piloted • Media training to be offered

12. What do the say: links to PhD and learning thought that it would be good to give you some feedback on the courses that we had, especially in October because I don’t feel that they covered the amount of things that they should have at the start of the course. I don’t think they prepared us adequately for really the first 3 or 4 months of the PhD. (yr 1 PG)

13. Roberts to PhD links (PG Yr 2) • Q. What sort of skills do you want to develop during your PhD? • Research skills. To know what to do next or where to go because I don’t. I say to my supervisor what should I do now. I’ve done all this, but I don’t know where to take it next? And she’s like oh we could look at this and we could at this and I don’t know that because that’s just not something I’ve learned yet. I don’t know the field well enough. But that’s not a transferable skill that an employer’s going to look for, that’s a research skill. It’s different.

14. Perceptions of training 1 PG Yr 2: ….which doesn’t seem to be very relevant to PhD’s at all so far. I:Why not? PG Yr 2 : It’s just HR speak. • because we’re doing a Science PhD and the training that we get should be relevant to doing a Science PhD not just like training that I could go to any other job and get.

15. Perceptions of training 2 • You would take what you learned from it and you could transfer it to something else….. ….I mean you have to learn what you’re going to do first before you can learn how to transfer it to something else, especially when we’re not going to be worried about doing that for another 2 years. It’s like, well this is what’s important now, which I think should be the case. (PG Yr 2)

16. Perceptions of training 3 • I:The notion of the training that you’re receiving is to enhance your employability and your personal development profile, your PDP. • Well that’s all very well, but how are the employers going to know we’ve done it and are they going to care because you’re like, oh I went to an hour long course, or a 4 hour long course 3 years ago and people management for instance? They’ll be like, so, that doesn’t prove anything to us? (PG Yr 2)

17. PDRA’s • I honestly think that the pressure of being – the change in responsibilities from going from PhD to RA means that I have to be much better. I didn’t feel that, despite wanting to in my PhD and there was no training, so we didn’t have any type of management training.

18. Examples of suggested ‘sessions’ • How to write abstracts • How to read papers – critical reading skills • How to take minutes and run meetings

19. Summary • GU Physical Sciences 2003 response very instrumental • no ‘quality’ linked to training programme, • Glasgow a typical response to Roberts agenda • PGs asking for MORE feedback (like NSS data) • Certificate of ‘transferable skills’ • Staged programme over 3 years • PDRA’s – feel unrecognised, under-developed, could act as mentors for PGs.

20. Roberts – again! • describes PhD training – concerning? • looked at ‘perceived’ skills gap, however how real is it to PhD students? • This has potential long term consequences on the nature of a PhD • worthy cause but has encouraged an instrumental response to supporting the learning of PhD students and is an apparent response to the increased number of PhD students • Also adds fuel to the Reseach:Teaching tension as some PGs already becoming aware of time away from their research on ‘non-PhD’ things

21. Communities of practice and Roberts • If a research group works ‘well’ it can behave as a ‘community of practice’ and maybe Roberts training is not applicable. • However, if no community then MAYBE Roberts serves a vital function (or instrumentalises) those PhD students (departments, institutions) approaches to development of transferable skills

22. Suggestions from PGs and PDRAs for enhancing current provision - 1 • A certificate of PDP • Negotiated ‘curriculum’ – Roberts training doesn’t appear very ‘student-centred’ • No single shots of training – need to be built on year on year • 2 phases of training • Yrs 1&2 – discipline based, communication I • Yr 3 – interdisciplinary, communication II

23. Suggestions from PGs and PDRAs for enhancing current provision - 2 • Introduction of a tutorial system run by PDRA’s (provides PDRAs built-in Roberts training) around PDP for PGs. • PDRA’s can provide feedback that is much asked for by PGs for their development • Educational development units can support the PDRAs in developing their skills and identifying good practice. - Training the trainers

24. Conclusions and suggestions • If the research group is ‘good’ then acts as a community of practice – negates explicit Roberts training agenda. • The ‘life’ of the communities members will link the core PhD research with the transferable skills training and the skills wont be isolated from their context • A lot more needs to be done to look at the role of the group (PGs, PDRAs and supervisors) in supporting the development of the PhD student • Not a centralised training programme – one size doesn’t fit all

25. UG – PG – Roberts (and learning) • How much is UG preparing PGs for research? • how is the transition from UG learning (learning what's new for oneself) to PG learning (learning what is new for the world) being supported? • UG research-like learning (EBL etc) supports learning through groups. However, PGs talk about the individual researcher and their project. • This is like Engineering PGs • So is PG research learning individual or collective?

26. PG - PDRA – Roberts (and learning) • What support is there for the transition to PDRA? • What are the different learning experiences for PDRA’s compared with PhD life? • How is Roberts training supporting PhD/PDRA learning? • We know so little about learning at these levels perhaps we need to focus on the PhD/PDRA learning experiences first before we identify ‘ transferable skills training’ programmes.