Intergenerational reflections on doctoral supervision in nursing
Debra Jackson
Professor, Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Health, University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), Broadway NSW
Philip Darbyshire
Philip Darbyshire Consulting Pty Ltd, Adelaide SA; University of Western Sydney, Sydney NSW; School of Health Science, University of Swansea, Swansea; Bournemouth University, Poole, United Kingdom
Lauretta Luck
School of Nursing and Midwifery, Family and Community Health Research Group, University of Western Sydney, Penrith NSW
Kathleen Peters
School of Nursing and Midwifery, College of Health and Science, University of Western Sydney, Sydney NSW
PP: 83 - 91
Abstract
Increasing numbers of nurses seek to undertake doctoral education as nursing continues to develop as a discrete area of clinical and theoretical scholarship.
Effective supervision is a crucial aspect of doctoral education and has been identified as essential to successful completion of doctoral training. Relatively little, however, is written about the relationship aspects of doctoral supervision in nursing.
This paper presents some reflections on doctoral education in nursing from the perspective of four people who have established intergenerational supervisory relationships.
Keywords
doctoral education, nursing, supervision, mentoring, professional relationship
References
Anderson C (2000) Current strengths and limitations of doctoral education in nursing: Are we prepared for the future? Journal of Professional Nursing 16(4): 191-200.
Diekelmann N and Magnussen Ironside P (1998) Preserving writing in doctoral education: Exploring the concernful practices of schooling learning teaching, Journal of Advanced Nursing 28(6): 1347-1355.
Deuchar R (2008) Facilitator, director or critical friend? Contradiction and congruence in doctoral supervision styles, Teaching in Higher Education 13(4): 489-500.
Evans C (2007) The experience of international doctoral education in nursing: An exploratory survey of staff and international nursing students in a British university, Nurse Education Today 27(5): 499-505.
Fridlund B (2005) 10 challenges in supervision of doctoral students, European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing 4: 97-98.
Holligan C (2005) Fact or fiction: A case history of doctoral supervision, Educational Research 47(3): 267-278.
Jackson D (2008) Servant leadership: A framework for developing sustainable research capacity in nursing. Collegian 15(1): 27-33.
Jolley J (2007) Choose your doctorate, Journal of Clinical Nursing 16: 225-233.
Malfroy J (2005) Doctoral supervision, workplace research and changing pedagogic practices, Higher Education Research & Development 24(2): 165-178.
Mitchell T and Carroll J (2008. Academic and research misconduct in the PhD: Issues for students and supervisors, Nurse Education Today 28: 218-226.
Park C (2005) New Variant PhD: The changing nature of the doctorate in the UK, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 27(2): 189-207.
Thompson DR and Kirkman S (2005) Improving research supervision in nursing, Nurse Education Today 25(4): 283-290.
Waldspurger Robb W (2005) The ABCs of doctoral degrees, Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing 24(2): 89-96.
eContent Home
