Fostering inclusive and effective doctoral supervisory practice: the Let’s Talk About card game

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi36.1362

Keywords:

doctoral supervision, doctoral supervision communication, expectation alignment, mentorship tools, academic relationships, doctoral support

Abstract

The relationship between doctoral research supervisors and their students is crucial for success during doctoral study. Supervisors face increasing complexity in managing these relationships, compounded by job precarity and the pressure to ensure timely doctoral completion. Equally, doctoral students will navigate a competitive job environment with limited time and funding, exacerbated by structural disparities in gender, race, and class outcomes. Our study explores the need for formalised expectation setting and interpersonal familiarisation within supervisor-doctoral student relationships through the development of the Let’s Talk About (LTA) conversation toolkit. LTA was designed with community input, gathering and refining questions from doctoral students and supervisors to explore key areas including expectations, career development, social dynamics, and policy. The toolkit was trialled with supervisor-student pairs, showing significant improvements in understanding and aligning expectations, particularly regarding personal commitments and required support. Results indicated an 81.8% increase in students’ perception of their supervisors’ awareness of their commitments and a 102.5% increase in supervisors’ awareness of students’ needs. These findings underscore the importance of structured and inclusive communication tools that foster supportive academic environments. The study highlights the effectiveness of formalised conversation prompts in enhancing communication and understanding in doctoral supervision, leading to stronger, more productive relationships. The integration of LTA into supervisory practices offers a promising solution to key challenges in doctoral education.

Author Biographies

Lydia Luise Bach, University of Glasgow

Lydia Luise Bach (she/her) wears two hats: an academic hat and an Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) hat. As an academic, Lydia is interested in the links between biodiversity and ecosystem processes, centring around anthropogenic change. In the EDI space, Lydia’s vision is to create a more inclusive and equitable research environment where diversity is celebrated and all voices are heard. Her work includes co-creating the EDI action plan, supporting Athena SWAN across the College, and running COSE initiatives such as the Disability History Month initiative in 2023. Lydia envisions a future where proactive inclusion is standard practice, fostering genuine diversity, equity, and inclusion within academic and research communities.

Emily May Armstrong, University of Glasgow

Emily May Armstrong (they/them) is an interdisciplinary researcher and Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion co-ordinator. Emily is based in the School of Molecular Biosciences at the University of Glasgow and is responsible for overseeing the School’s Athena Swan awards and action plans, while also managing EDI-focused research projects. Emily researches along intersections of more-than-human belonging in urban greenspace, civic science, and queer approaches to botanies and ecologies, using participatory and community-driven research methods. Recent grants have been awarded by the Royal Society of the Scottish Alliance for Food, Pride in STEM, and the Royal Institution.

Matt Jones, University of Glasgow

Matt Jones is a photobiologist, exploring how plants integrate light signals to optimise responses to abiotic stress. After undertaking a PhD at Glasgow researching phototropin activation, he joined UC Davis to study circadian modulation of light responses, identifying RVE1, RVE8, and JMJD5 as key components. At the University of Essex, supported by a Leverhulme Fellowship, he developed chlorophyll fluorescence methods and studied RNA processing and metabolism in circadian timing, identifying stress-induced metabolites which modulate gene expression. Since 2019, his lab in Glasgow investigates how circadian and light signalling pathways interact to enhance plant resilience to environmental change. Matt was the Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion academic lead in the School of Molecular Biosciences throughout the Let’s Talk About project.

References

Advance HE (2024) Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Conference 2024: The future is now – Building EDI practice for the changing world of HE, 6–7 March, Liverpool. Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/programmes-events/supporting-equality-diversity-inclusion-higher-education/equality-diversity-and-inclusion-conference-2024 (Accessed: 20 May 2025).

Al Makhamreh, M. and Stockley, D. (2020) ‘Mentorship and well-being: examining doctoral students’ lived experiences in doctoral supervision context’, International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 9(1), pp.1–20. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-02-2019-0013

Alsawaier, R.S. (2018) ‘The effect of gamification on motivation and engagement’, The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 35(1), pp.56–79. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-02-2017-0009

Bagakas, J.G., Badillo, N., Bransteter, I. and Rispinto, S. (2015) ‘Exploring student success in a doctoral program: the power of mentorship and research engagement’, International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 10, pp.1–18. Available at: https://doi.org/10.28945/2291

Bastalich, W. (2015) ‘Content and context in knowledge production: a critical review of doctoral supervision literature’, Studies in Higher Education, 42(7), pp.1145–1157. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1079702

Buirski, N. (2022) ‘“Ways of being”: a model for supportive doctoral supervisory relationships and supervision’, Higher Education Research and Development, 41(5), pp.1387–1401. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.1910209

Chans, G.M. and Portuguez Castro, M. (2021) ‘Gamification as a strategy to increase motivation and engagement in higher education chemistry students’, Computers, 10(9), pp.132–156. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/computers10100132

Deuchar, R. (2008) ‘Facilitator, director or critical friend?: Contradiction and congruence in doctoral supervision styles’, Teaching in Higher Education, 13(4), pp.489–500. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510802193905

Fitzgerald, M.M., Shipman, K., Pauletic, M., Ellesworth, K. and Dymnicki, A. (2022) ‘Promoting educator social emotional competence, well-being, and student–educator relationships: a pilot study’, Mental Health & Prevention, 26, pp.1–11. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mhp.2022.200234

Gakhal, S. (2024) Enhancing the mental wellbeing of PhD students. PhD thesis. Coventry University. Available at: https://pure.coventry.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/94422831/Gakhal2024PhD.pdf

Gardner, S.K. (2008) ‘“What’s too much and what’s too little?”: The process of becoming an independent researcher in doctoral education’, The Journal of Higher Education, 79(3), pp.326–350. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2008.11772101

Gill, P. and Burnard, P. (2008) ‘The student–supervisor relationship in the PhD/doctoral process’, British Journal of Nursing, 17(10), pp.668–671. Available at: https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2008.17.10.668

Golde, C.M. and Dore, T.M. (2001) At cross purposes: what the experiences of today’s doctoral students reveal about doctoral education. Philadelphia: The Pew Charitable Trusts.

Green, H. and Powell, S. (2005) Doctoral study in contemporary higher education. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.

Hamari, J. Koivisto, J. and Sarsa, H. (2014) ‘Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical studies on gamification’, in 47th Hawaii International Conference of System Sciences. Waikoloa, HA, 6–9 January, pp.3025–3034. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377

Hirschy, A.S., and Wilson, M.E. (2002) ‘The sociology of the classroom and its influence on student learning’, Peabody Journal of Education, 77(3), pp.85–100. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1493277

Hutchinson, S. and Lawrence, H. (2017) Enhancing the doctoral experience: a guide for supervisors and their international students. Abingdon: Routledge.

Huwe, J.M. and Johnson, W.B. (2003) ‘On being an excellent protégé: what graduate students need to know’, Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 17(3), pp.41–57. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1300/J035v17n03_04

Ives, G. and Rowley, G. (2005) ‘Supervisor selection or allocation and continuity of supervision: Ph.D. students’ progress and outcomes’, Studies in Higher Education, 30(5), pp.535–555. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500249161

Johansson, C. and Yerrabati, S. (2017) ‘A review of the literature on professional doctorate supervisory styles’, Management in Education, 31(4), pp.166–171. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020617734821

Laufer, M. and Gorup, M. (2019) ‘The invisible others: stories of international doctoral student dropout’, Higher Education, 78(1), pp.165–181. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0337-z

Lee, N.J. (2009) ‘Professional doctorate supervision: exploring student and supervisor experiences’, Nurse Education Today, 29(6), pp.641–648. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2008.07.005

Lovitts, B.E. (2001) Leaving the ivory tower: the causes and consequences of departure from doctoral study. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

Lundgren, O. and Osika, W. (2021) ‘Cultivating the interpersonal domain: compassion in the supervisor–doctoral student relationship’, Frontiers in Psychology, 12, p.1–7. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.567664

Mainhard, T., Van Der Rijst, R., Van Tartwijk, J. and Wubbels, T. (2009) ‘A model for the supervisor–doctoral student relationship’, Higher Education, 58(3), pp.359–373. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9199-8

McAlpine, L. and Amundsen, C. (2018) Identity-trajectories of early career researchers. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

Moreau, M.-P., Hoskins, K. and McHugh, E. (2024) ‘Intersectional solidarities and inter-individual affinities: enactments of equity and privilege through doctoral supervision relationships’, International Studies in Sociology of Education, 34(1) pp.30–50. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/09620214.2024.2352711

Morley, L., Alexiadou, N., Garaz, S., González-Monteagudo, J. and Taba, M. (2018) ‘Internationalisation and migrant academics: the hidden narratives of mobility’, Higher Education, 76, pp.537–554. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0224-z

O’Meara, K., Knudsen, K. and Jones, J. (2013) ‘The role of emotional competencies in faculty-doctoral student relationships’, The Review of Higher Education, 36(3), pp.315–347. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2013.0023

Orellana, M.L., Darder, A., Pérez, A. and Salinas, J. (2016) ‘Improving doctoral success by matching PhD students with supervisors’, International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11, pp.87–103. Available at: https://doi.org/10.28945/3404

Parker-Jenkins, M. (2018) ‘Mind the gap: developing the roles, expectations and boundaries in the doctoral supervisor–supervisee relationship’, Studies in Higher Education, 43(1), pp.57–71. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1153622

Pitkin, M. (2020) Postgraduate research experience survey 2020. Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/postgraduate-research-experience-survey-2020 (Accessed: 20 May 2025).

Polkinghorne, M., Taylor, J., Knight, F. and Stewart, N. (2023) ‘Doctoral supervision: a best practice review’, Encyclopedia, 3(1), pp.46–59. Available at: https:doi.org/10/3390/encyclopedia3010004

Sverdlik, A., Hall, N.C., McAlpine, L. and Hubbard, K. (2018) ‘The PhD experience: a review of the factors influencing doctoral students’ completion, achievement, and well-being’, International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, pp.361–388. Available at: https://doi.org/10.28945/4113

Taylor, N. and Beasley, S. (2010) A handbook for doctoral supervisors. London: Routledge.

Van Rooij, E., Fokkens-Bruinsma, M. and Jansen, E. (2010) ‘Factors that influence PhD candidates’ success: the importance of PhD project characteristics’, Studies in Continuing Education, 43(1), pp.48–67. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2019.1652158

Walker, G.E., Golde, C.M., Jones, L., Bueschel, A.C. and Hutchings, P. (2009) The formation of scholars: rethinking doctoral education for the twenty-first century. London: Jossey-Bass.

White, N., Milicev, J., Bradford, D.R.R., Rodger, A. and Gardani, M. (2024) ‘The mental labyrinth of postgraduate research: a qualitative study of postgraduate mental health and wellbeing and the impact of the supervisory relationship’, Higher Education, 87, pp.1211–1226. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01061-5

Wisker, G. and Robinson, G. (2012) ‘Doctoral “orphans”: nurturing and supporting the success of postgraduates who have lost their supervisors’, Higher Education Research & Development, 32(2), pp.300–313. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.657160

Wollast, R., Aelenei, C., Chevalère, J., Van Der Linden, N., Galand, B., Azzi, A., Frenay, M. and Klein, O. (2023) ‘Facing the dropout crisis among PhD candidates: the role of supervisor support in emotional well-being and intended doctoral persistence among men and women’, Studies in Higher Education, 48(5), pp.813–828. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2172151

Downloads

Published

15-06-2025

How to Cite

Bach, L. L., Armstrong, E. M., & Jones, M. (2025). Fostering inclusive and effective doctoral supervisory practice: the Let’s Talk About card game. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (36). https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi36.1362

Issue

No. 36 (2025)

Section

Papers

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).