Guidelines for the doctoral phase

Recruitment in a structured programme

Image: istockphoto.com

The doctoral regulations ensure transparent procedures for the admission of doctoral candidates by the faculties. They ensure both the application of high quality standards and the non-discriminatory admission of graduates who fulfil the minimum requirements for admission in accordance with the Thuringian Higher Education Act. In order to provide security regarding the individual admission requirements, admission should take place right at the beginning of the work on the doctoral project.

The requirements and procedures for the awarding of doctoral positions and doctoral scholarships should also be transparent. Usually these positions and scholarships are offered by announcement, and awarded according to the principles of best selection. For the admission of doctoral candidates to structured programmes, decisions made by selection committees made up of several university professors have proven to be effective.

Doctoral candidate talking with her supervisor

Image: istockphoto.com

Supervisors accompany doctoral researchers on their way through their doctorate. Both parties are responsible for creating a successful supervision situation.

The responsibility for supervising a doctorate lies primarily with one person (first supervisor). This should be supplemented by a co-supervisor or a supervisory team (‘thesis committee’), as it is already practised frequently within the framework of structured doctoral programmes.

The doctoral regulations of the faculties determine who is entitled to supervise. Traditionally, the supervision of doctoral candidates is one of the basic tasks of university professors. Increasingly, the independent leaders of junior research groups are also entitled to take on the role of first or second supervisorpdf, 235 kb.

Other persons, for example postdocs or external mentors, can be involved in the supervision with reduced responsibility. This opens up the possibility of broader subject-specific and interdisciplinary support, offers doctoral researchers additional contact persons and allows postdocs to gain experience with the supervision of doctoral researchers. In all models of multiple supervision and the involvement of additional persons, a clear distribution of roles is necessary in order to prevent a diffusion of responsibility.

Good supervision must find the appropriate individual balance between granting freedom for independent research and providing professional and social support. It focuses above all on supporting the independent research activity of doctoral researchers, on high quality and scientific relevance of the research, including the communication of the rules of good scientific practise and the monitoring of compliance with them, as well as the completion and submission of the dissertation in an appropriate time frame. In addition, good supervision supports the introduction to the national and international scientific community, gives advice on meaningful qualification content and suitable professional career steps, and motivates and supports doctoral researchers in challenging phases (see herepdf, 662 kb).

Continuous and reliable supervision is a crucial contribution to a successful doctorate. The frequency of supervision can vary according to individual and subject-cultural requirements as well as the respective phase in the doctoral process.

At the beginning of the doctorate, a supervision agreement is concluded between the doctoral candidate and the supervisors. A supervision agreement is intended to make the relationship between the doctoral candidate and the supervisors transparent for both sides in terms of content and time.

Supervision agreements also help to align mutual expectations. They can be used as a tool that supports open and objective communication in the supervision relationship. At Jena University, the supervision agreement is a prerequisite for admission as a doctoral candidate at a faculty. The doctoral regulations specify the form and content. At a minimum, a supervision agreement must contain the names of the doctoral candidate and supervisor(s), the doctoral topic, the intended type of dissertation (publication-based or monograph) and the respective responsibilities of the doctoral candidate and supervisor(s). Among other things, doctoral candidates and supervisors undertake to comply with the rules of good scientific practice. The University of Jena provides sample agreements based on the recommendations of the German Research Foundation (DFG).

Good supervision includes regular supervision meetings. The doctoral candidate and the first supervisor should have at least one detailed conversation about the status of the doctorate per year. The discussions can be initiated by both supervisors and doctoral candidates and should take place in a timely manner. It is helpful to have open communication on an equal footing regarding scientific questions, as well as clear statements by the supervisor regarding the orientation for the time after the doctorate. The meetings can be held on the basis of the doctoral candidate's progress reports. The conversations should not only be about the progress of the doctorate, but also about perspectives for the further career. Jena University provides a guideline for conducting conversations about the status of a doctoratepdf, 521 kb · de, which gives an overview of the usual topics and can be used to protocol outcomes of the conversation.

Mikrofon vor Menschen

Image: istockphoto

Good supervision includes that doctoral researchers are supported in their introduction to the national and international community of researchers. Doctoral researchers need regular opportunities to present their doctoral project and discuss it with professional colleagues locally, and also nationally and internationally. This includes the development of an own academic network, the participation in conferences and the publication of research outcomes.

Workshop

Image: Jan-Peter Kasper (University of Jena)

Doctoral candidates should be supported in their further qualification. They should be given the opportunity to attend qualification events with subject-related, methodological and interdisciplinary content, supplemented by workshops for the acquisition of teaching and supervision skills as well as workshops on career orientation. Of particular importance is the further qualification for ‘good scientific practice’. With regard to the extent of qualification events, a balance must be achieved between substantial and helpful further qualification and an unnecessary prolongation of the doctorate. It has proven successful that the qualification plan is developed jointly by the doctoral candidate and the supervisor, and consented by both.

Joint doctoral degree between universities of different countries and the Friedrich Schiller University Jena

Image: Istockphoto.com / Flaticon.com (@roundicon)

Scientific achievements are often made in cooperation between several people, working groups and scientific institutions. For doctorates, the participation of researchers from other national and international universities and non-university research institutions, or the conduct of the doctoral project within a joint graduate programme, is also common practice. The regulations for binational joint doctorates (Cotutelle de Thèse) and for doctorates in cooperation are a guidance for these doctorates. The cooperating scientists or scholars as well as the cooperating research institutions are equally involved in the supervision of doctoral candidates and in the doctoral examination procedure.

Mother with child who wears a doctoral hat

Image: Jan-Peter Kasper (University of Jena)

In the selection and admission of doctoral candidates, in the supervision and in the assessment of the dissertation, as well as in the oral examination, no one may be discriminated against on the basis of sex or gender, of cultural, ethnic or social origin, of religion and world view, of sexual identity or of disability. In particular, there should be awareness of the observed effect of an ‘unconscious bias’ according to which in some subjects there is a gender bias in the evaluation of doctoral performance in the form that the dissertations of female doctoral candidates are evaluated less frequently with ‘summa cum laude’ than the dissertations of male doctoral candidates.

The doctoral phase often coincides with the period of starting a family. It is highly commendable to balance work on the doctorate with family-related commitments. This applies equally to women and men. Essential for a successful work-life balance are financial security for the entire doctoral phase, a flexible and predictable handling of working hours and locations, as well as specific support for research activities if these cannot be carried out due to pregnancy, for example.

The proportion of women among doctoral and post-doctoral researchers is significantly lower than among Bachelor's and Master's students. Therefore the university stresses that women must be able to pursue doctoral degrees without structural and procedural obstacles. In the same way as men, women should be encouraged and actively supported to start and continue an academic career. A working climate characterised by equal appreciation for women and men should be a matter of course for all members of the university.

As the international diversity increases, the university and all of its members should take into account the specific concerns of international doctoral candidates on both an institutional and individual level, and allow them to fully participate in the university’s research and research contexts.

Two conflict parties and a mediator

Image: istockphoto.com/Andrii_Yalanskyi

The relationship between doctoral researchers and supervisors in Germany is particularly complex due to the frequent coincidence of different roles (supervisor, reviewer, boss, co-author). It requires a sensitive and reflective approach to the resulting dependence of doctoral researchers on their supervisors. Power abuse and the exploitation of dependencies must be prevented and obstructed on all levels.

In cases of conflict between doctoral researchers and supervisors that can’t be solved among both parties, there are ombudsmen that can be contacted. For such cases, the doctoral regulations provide for ombudsman procedures at faculty or university level. At university level, the persons who participate in these procedures are particularly experienced in doctoral supervision and are elected by the Senate.

Graduierte werfen Hüte hoch

Image: Arlene Knipper

The success of a doctorate becomes apparent, in the narrower sense, immediately after completing the examination procedure through the evaluation of the reviewers and the doctoral examination committee.

The success of the qualification phase ‘doctorate’ in the broader sense shows itself in the further professional career. By tracking and documenting the professional careers of their graduates, supervisors and faculties can use the expertise of the alumni for the qualification of doctoral candidates and their professional orientation.