Student preparedness in Ph.D. education - an assessment of supervisor and student perceptions of fulfilling Swedish third-cycle learning outcomes

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the perceptions of Ph.D. candidates and                          
supervisors regarding how well Ph.D. students fulfill the learning outcomes                  
specified for third-cycle higher education in Sweden. Data were gathered using                    
a survey sent to doctoral students and supervisors at five departments at Lund                        
University and one department at Malmö University. The investigation                
concentrated on 18 skills outlined in the learning objectives and on specific                      
analyses of student and supervisor ratings, gender differences, and differences                  
across departments. Responses from 123 survey participants show that skills                  
for specialized knowledge and specific method competencies were rated most                  
highly by respondents, while skills relating to contributing to others’ learning,                    
ethics, presenting to society, and identifying limitations of research were rated                    
lower than average. In 14 of the 18 skills, supervisors rated the students’                        
competencies higher than the students rated themselves. Although the                
highest-rated skills were rated similarly by male and female respondents, there                    
were gender differences for other learning objectives (e.g., ethics, personal                  
knowledge, and autonomy). Responses from the Biology and Physics                
departments revealed differences in both how students and supervisors rate                  
Ph.D. candidate performance and certain individual learning objective skills. Our                  
results demonstrate large differences in the appraisal of learning outcomes in                    
individual cases by students and supervisors, and that these assessments can be                      
influenced by gender and academic culture. For the third-cycle learning                  
outcomes to actually promote student learning and be a useful tool for quality                        
assurance, supervisors and students must be aware of their existence, and care                      
must be given to apply and assess the generic learning objectives in the context                          
of particular disciplines, with the consideration of the specific needs of individual
doctoral students. Embedding the learning outcomes in individual                
Ph.D. study plans would be a good initial step to meet this goal.