Doctoral researcher skill development: learning through doing

Abstract

There has been increasing debate in recent years concerning the need to improve the skill set of Doctoral Researchers (DRs) in order to prepare them for work inside and outside of academia. Valuable discussion on the employability of graduates and the development of transferrable skills is largely focussed on undergraduate students despite the widening of career options for postgraduate research students outside academia. Skill development in current postgraduate pedagogy literature is focussed on specific academic based skills within the research process and does not address the process and content of more generic and transferable skills for DRs. This article explores the organisation of a conference by a small group of DRs and the consequential development and practice of a new skill set outside the usual research process. It presents an effective method for DR transferable, professional and practical skill development.

Keywords:

• skill development
• employability
• career options
• academic skills

Introduction

Increasing debate has evolved around the importance of effective skill development of Doctoral Researchers (DRs) to prepare them for employment inside and outside of academia. The change in focus of the research degree from an academic apprenticeship to a process-based qualification has highlighted the significance of the development of a wider, and more transferable, skill set during the research degree. Policy directives stress the significance of skill development and the Researcher Development Framework (RDF), provided by Vitae, was implemented in 2010 to provide clear guidance on enhancing skill development (Vitae 2010a). This framework has evolved from the Joint Skills Statement (JSS) published by UK Research Councils in 2001 to provide a generic skills agenda for postgraduate student development (Vitae 2013). Despite this focus, the implementation and quality of DR skill development and training is variable (Cryer 1998, Chiang 2011).

While there has been some valuable discussion concerning the needs of students enrolled in doctoral programmes (see Solem & Foote 2009, Fincher 2012, Meadows 2012, Wastl-Walter & Wintzer 2012), DRs remain under-represented as the subjects of skills development initiatives in pedagogical journals. Skill development for employability is largely focussed at the undergraduate level (Cryer 1998), despite the job market for PhDs becoming increasingly varied and often limited for field-specific skills. The applicability of this literature discussion to DR skill development is limited as DRs are operating at a higher level and require skills training to match if it is to be an effective attribute post-graduation (Cryer 1998). At the postgraduate level, discussions have focussed on structured training requirements for research methods (Deem & Lucas 2006) and the role of research culture (Deem & Brehony 2000) to enhance the final output (thesis) and success of completing the research process. The focus on the output rather than continual professional development during the qualification limits the incorporation of more generic and transferable skills into the research process (Gilbert 2004). This is despite a skills framework being endorsed by research councils.

Research on the DR cohort has highlighted the difficulty of incorporating relevant, and appropriately pitched, skills training to a diverse group of specialists and two streams of discussion have emerged around this difficulty. Firstly, the development of generic skills needs to be incorporated into individualistic training to address the specific interpretation of these skills within the field of study (Gilbert 2004, Blaj-Ward 2011). Secondly, and building from this, is the notion of communities of practice training within the DR cohort (McAlpine & Asghar 2010). This approach allows DRs to develop constructive and peer-led training in a context that is relevant to the wider development of the research process. However, both of these literature streams are focussed on the pedagogy of training in the DR community and are lacking clear discussion on what students are trained for or the ‘curriculum’ of skills development (Gilbert 2004).

The case study discussed in this article draws upon these themes and provides an example of effective development of the DR skill base by identifying; (1) which skills were developed, and (2) an alternative approach to professional development through a DR community of practice. An academic-industry-third sector conference was organised by a small group of four DRs at the University of Birmingham in summer 2012. The process of organising a conference was useful for developing skills outside the research process itself but which are valuable both within and outside academia. The skills, specifically transferable, professional and practical, are key attributes for a research student to develop and are more easily accessed through a learning experience rather than structured delivery (Wheeler et al. 2011). These skills are arguably central to training DRs for employment and continual professional development but are not fully accessed through the usual research process. Opportunities to undertake extra-curricular activities that are peer-led provide a constructive way of incorporating these aspects of skill development into the DR’s programme of research.

Method

On 8 June 2012 the Impact, Exchange and Making a Difference (IEMD) conference was held at the University of Birmingham. IEMD was a successful and professional conference driven by four DRs from the University of Birmingham. The conference was part of an ongoing continuous professional development scheme, Start2Finish Qualitative Methodology Research Group, established in 2009 by a small group of DRs and early career researchers in the School of Life and Environmental Sciences. The idea for the conference was self-led and emerged from discussions within the DR community at the school and beyond about the lack of knowledge in key areas of interest for DRs and their applicability to early career researchers. It was felt that these developments and areas of specific interest for the school community could be uncovered through events run by student groups.

The current provision of training for DRs in the school was designed to provide a base level of awareness of available opportunities for development across the university and externally, driven by the development of individual training needs analysis with supervisors. Required training is sought by the student-supervisor to meet the requirements of the individual and research project. In addition, some research council funded students are required to undertake a structured generic training programme based around research methods. Supplementary to this, funding is available for students to develop individual projects that are designed to address specific skill needs in the school. Competitive bids for funding are developed by individual or groups of DRs to address a specific need and success is determined by a college-level panel. A primary activity through this scheme is the delivery of a seminar or conference session. It is partly through this stream of funding that the IEMD conference was developed and the paper provides a case study of the skill development of the four DRs on the organising committee.

Conference theme

The focus on impact emerged from a discussion at Birmingham about Ron Martin’s (2001) paper ‘Geography and Public Policy: the Case of the Missing Agenda’. This discussion highlighted the fact that many of our DR colleagues felt ill-equipped or under prepared to carry out policy research. This is especially significant as pressure increases within universities to demonstrate research impact outside academia and the push by research councils for impact at the forefront of research programmes and departments. Similarly, the 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF) states that 20% of their assessment on the quality of individual departments’ research will be based on impact (Research Excellence Framework 2011). Geographers in particular are increasingly discussing the different ways their research might be disseminated or obtain greater ‘impact’ in the world (Hay & Israel 2001, Martin 2001, Bonnett 2003, James 2006). However, much current research fails to unlock its potential to direct, inform and influence policy decisions (Martin 2001). The focus of the IEMD conference was therefore academic impact, and specifically whether in a time of budgetary constraints this could be achieved by collaborating with partners from industry and the third sector. The conference was tailored to DRs to specifically address their role in generating research impact and to effectively bring the early career researchers up to speed on developments in academia for their future careers.

The IEMD Conference

The IEMD conference aimed to be more inclusive than traditional academic conferences; in the spirit of this, third sector, business and industry representatives were invited, along with non-academic staff from the University (Table 1). It was expected that this interaction between academics and non-academic representatives would show how collaboration can be used to achieve impact, and highlight the importance of dissemination of research findings to wider audiences.

Table 1 Conference details.

Date	8 June 2012
Location	University of Birmingham
Attendees (total)	44
DR attendees	40 (17 external)
External attendees	21 + 2 speakers
Non-academic attendees	4 + 5 speakers

The conference was structured to deliver two distinct criteria:

1. Information on the new REF system and the increasing importance of impact in academic research evaluation – through papers and panel sessions on academic understandings of impact.

2. Collaborative engagement - practical workshops on how to work with non-traditional research partners and disseminate research to different audiences.

The morning session focused on academic debates around impact, and featured contributions from academics and university REF coordinators to discuss three key questions:

• How can academics achieve and measure impact?

• What, in the context of your own research experiences, are the obstacles to or best practices that support impactful research?

• At a time when academic resources seem increasingly stretched, what strategies are available to increase academic impact?

The second part of the conference comprised two workshops running simultaneously; one with representatives from third sector organisations and one with representatives from industry and the University of Birmingham’s consultancy arm. The workshops were designed to provide access to third and private sector representatives and to generate frameworks for collaboration through cross-party discussion.

The conference finished with a Question and Answer (Q&A) session on public engagement to encourage participants to consider the different ways in which their research might be disseminated and the role of the media in promoting research developments.

Development process

The process of organising the conference involved several key stages.

1. Funding sources

   The event was funded through two successful bids within the University of Birmingham college and university level funding schemes. The first was from the College of Life and Environmental Sciences Doctoral Researcher-led Research Conferences/Workshops scheme. The scheme was introduced following the withdrawal of ‘Roberts funding’. Roberts funding grew out of Sir Gareth Roberts’ review SET for Success (Roberts 2002) with the aim of developing postgraduates’ employability skills. Although Roberts funding has now stopped many universities continue a similar scheme, such as the funding available at the college level at the University of Birmingham. The second bid was to the Centre for Learning and Academic Development (CLAD), a university wide development team. CLAD’s role at the university is to enhance the student experience, but also to offer opportunities to develop the skills base of the overall student cohort. Both funders require DRs to bid for funding by drawing up funding proposals, to liaise with the funders throughout the project’s duration and, finally, to evaluate the project after its completion.

2. Development of themes and speakers

   The development of the conference theme is outlined above. The identification of appropriate speakers was a key aspect of the event for the organisers’ own professional development as well as the success of the event. Speakers were identified on the basis of their prominence in the field and to develop professional networks externally. Speakers included academics and industry practitioners who could potentially develop solid collaborative relationships for the team.

3. Organisation of event

   Tasks were identified using a Gantt chart and an informal skill analysis of each member undertaken. The purpose of this was to identify strengths and weaknesses in the team and to attempt to find a balance between skill development and existing competencies. The balance was important as the organisation of the conference was in addition to existing research commitments and the amount of time each member could provide to the event was limited. However, the project provided an opportunity for skill development so a conscious effort was made to ensure each member was enhancing or developing their individual skill base.

   Organising the IEMD event also gave all organisers the opportunity to develop marketing skills – both for the event and personally. From an impact perspective, as well as skill development, the team was conscious to utilise new and innovative methods of marketing, which did prove particularly successful. The conference was advertised through traditional means; university and academic mailing lists, sending emails to university departments and our own website, but it was also advertised through social media and the event was re-tweeted to Professor Alice Roberts’ 15,000 followers – a far greater impact than we could achieve individually.

4. Execution of event

   During the event the DR team was engaged in networking with peers and external guests. Between the practicalities of hosting the event, effort was made to engage and build alliances both individually and as an organising team with the spectrum of invited speakers and delegates. Attending and presenting at conferences is an integral part of academic life, and by organising an event a far greater awareness of the process and benefits of such activities is gained.

5. Post event

   The team was extremely keen to continue communication post-event with those who attended and with those who could not. Podcasts, web resources and a competition for research impact case studies from delegates were produced to maintain a set of resources from the event. Undertaking these activities provided a means for the DR team to develop marketing, public relations, ethical and technology based awareness.

These stages provided a structured process of skill development within the organising team.

Results and discussion

The process of organising the conference provided an opportunity to develop skills outside the direct research process. An analysis of skill development across the committee team was undertaken post-event and illustrated a distinct group of skills that had not previously been developed (Figure 1). Data were collected using two qualitative methods. Firstly, throughout the entire period of the organisation of the conference, reflective focus groups were held by the organisers. This enabled the committee to highlight key strengths and weaknesses in our approach, and to elucidate the core learning outcomes and skills development of the organisation process. Part of these reflective focus groups included each member presenting their own personal reflective log on their activities to other members. Through recording the key themes and desired learning outcomes in each reflective focus group, we were able to chart our progress by comparing the findings of each focus group with previous meetings.

Figure 1 Comparison of skill development in the organising team pre- and post-event (based on Vitae (2010b) Research Development Framework).

Secondly, conference participants were given feedback questionnaires following completion of the event. The questionnaires were analysed collectively through further group meetings, which enabled the committee to compare participants’ experiences of the event with our own to produce a cohesive picture of the outcomes of the conference.

As part of the RDF by vitae, the Researcher Development Statement (RDS) “sets out the knowledge, behaviours and attributes of effective and highly skilled researchers” (Vitae 2010b, p1) and has been used as the basis for an analysis of skills pre- and post-event in the four skills areas:

1. knowledge and intellectual abilities;

2. personal effectiveness;

3. research governance and organisation; and

4. engagement, influence and impact.

The results demonstrate that the organisation of an event provided a distinctly different skill development than the standard research process, as well as enhancing several of the skills already being developed. The new skill development areas are primarily in engagement, influence and impact and research governance and organisation quadrants. In all quadrants, however, new skills were developed. In the personal effectiveness domain, for instance, although there is considerable skill development through the research process in project management, motivation, planning and reputation building, the event organisation continued to reinforce these skills as well as develop more team-focussed skills that are not traditionally primary skills in a solitary research degree. The RDS has evolved to reflect the broader range of skills required by postgraduate researchers and this case study illustrates a method of addressing these skill requirements within the research process.

A particularly interesting element is the emergence of a learning experience within the research process. Although a research degree is a ‘learning experience’ in the wider sense (the PhD process is often negotiated by the individual student and the wider experience as a practicing academic is as valuable as the output), the use of a learning experience for wider skill development is a means of crossing the field-specific divide and bringing together student communities to learn, as in undergraduate fieldwork teaching (Wheeler et al. 2011). In addition, the process of a collaborative event provides greater capacity to build creative, leadership and enterprise skills, a new focus of the RDS and JSS (Vitae 2010a, b).

A key difficulty with DR skill development is the range of technical fields of study and backgrounds within a group of DRs (Gilbert 2004, Blaj-Ward 2011). The learning experience of event organisation is a method of incorporating generic skill development within specific research contexts across a diverse group. The topic of an event provides a useful cross-over context for a collaborative exercise, both within specific fields of study but also across them, such as the IEMD event. The committee team had a diverse mix of backgrounds and specialisms, which were reflected to a degree in the development of workshops in the second half of the conference. However, the wider topic allowed the team to combine these tailored elements into a more generic overall concept. In doing so, the event became relevant to the research process as well as an aspect of transferrable skill development.

Wider benefits from the activity are the generation of materials on early career research impact and collaborations between delegates and organisers. Resources, including video interviews with participants and speakers, presentations, workshop case studies and learning outcomes, are all available as e-learning tools on the Start2Finish website. This has facilitated access to learning for delegates who were unable to attend the conference itself. Additionally, participants were asked to provide an individual case study a month after the conference on how their research will now be applied to generate impact. This provided significant feedback on how the conference significantly influenced the way DRs will approach their own research:

“The conference has really made me think about new and exciting ways to distribute my research rather than just through academic journals.” (Conference Participant 1).

“I think the conference was very useful in enabling me to think through what it means to have impact and to which audiences I want to target.” (Conference Participant 2).

The design of the conference provided a unique opportunity for researchers to interact with a range of specialists to discuss the issue of research impact. The conference initiated and strengthened relationships between academia and the wider community, and our evaluation identified a number of cases where potential collaborative projects took root as a result of the conference. The need for an interactive relationship between academics and businesses was a major conclusion from the conference:

“Academics, the outside world is hungry for what you know!”

(Mike Bentley, Bentley Associates EU Ltd).

Conclusions

This article demonstrates the valuable skills DRs gained from conference design, funding bids and collaborative project development that are transferrable across industries. The IEMD conference was more open and inclusive than traditional academic conferences by providing a platform for academics and the outside community to explore the issue and approaches to research impact. The inclusiveness of the topic allowed a more diverse group of DRs to undertake the project because it tapped into each individual’s specific research process as well as build networks across communities. These skills are interpersonal and transferable, which contributes to both our academic toolkit and further professional life outside academia.

The application of skills is a key aspect of skill development and the organisation of an event that is both research and skill relevant provides an opportunity for this within the traditional research process of PhD study. There has been a call for a “…change in how graduate students are prepared for professional careers, with concerns being raised about the inability of many new graduates to apply their knowledge and skills to serve a broad range of societal needs” (Solem & Foote 2009, p13). By integrating a learning experience within the research process the application of key skills can be developed and clearly demonstrated post-study. Evaluation of the conference demonstrates one method in which DRs can develop their skills and continue to learn within higher education.

Acknowledgements

The conference that forms the basis of the case study was funded by two separate grants from the Centre for Learning and Academic Development (CLAD) and the College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, in 2011–12.