Content and context in knowledge production: a critical review of doctoral supervision literature

References

• Amundsen, C., and L. McAlpine. 2009. “‘Learning Supervision’: Trial by Fire.” Innovations in Education and Teaching International 46: 331–42. doi: 10.1080/14703290903068805
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, C., K. Day, and P. McLaughlin. 2006. “Mastering the Dissertation: Lecturers’ Representations of the Purposes and Processes of Master's Level Dissertation Supervision.” Studies in Higher Education 31: 149–68.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, T., and J. Hussey. 2014. “Overcoming Problems in Doctoral Writing Through the Use of Visualisations: Telling our Stories.” Teaching in Higher Education 20: 48–63. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2014.957266
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benmore, A. 2014. “Boundary Management in Doctoral Supervision: How Supervisors Negotiate Roles and Role Transition Throughout the Supervisory Journey.” Studies in Higher Education, doi:10.1080/03075079.2014.967203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boud, D., and A. Lee. 2005. “‘Peer Learning’ as Pedagogic Discourse for Research Education.” Studies in Higher Education 30: 501–16. doi: 10.1080/03075070500249138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bröckling, U. 2006. “On Creativity: A Brainstorming Session.” Educational Philosophy and Theory 38: 513–21. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2006.00208.x
   Google Scholar
• Butler, J. 1993. Bodies that Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex”. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Clegg, S. 1997. “A Case Study of Accredited Training for Research Awards Supervisors through Reflective Practice.” Higher Education 34: 483–98. doi: 10.1023/A:1003090314197
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cumming, J. 2010. “Doctoral Enterprise: A Holistic Conception of Evolving Practices and Arrangements.” Studies in Higher Education 35: 25–39. doi: 10.1080/03075070902825899
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Down, C. M. 2011. “The Metaphor and Reality of Contextual Transfer.” International Journal of Lifelong Education 30: 187–212. doi: 10.1080/02601370.2010.547614
   Google Scholar
• Delamont, S., O. Parry, and P. Atkinson. 1998. “Creating a Delicate Balance: The Doctoral Supervisor's Dilemmas.” Teaching in Higher Education 2: 157–73. doi: 10.1080/1356215980030203
   Google Scholar
• Deuchar, R. 2008. “Facilitator, Director or Critical Friend? Contradiction and Congruence in Change and the Social Science PhD: Supervisors’ Responses.” Teaching in Higher Education 13: 489–500. doi: 10.1080/13562510802193905
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emilsson, U. M., and E. Johnsson. 2007. “Supervision of Supervisors: On Developing Supervision in Postgraduate Education.” Higher Education Research and Development 26: 163–79. doi: 10.1080/07294360701310797
   Google Scholar
• Filer, A. 1994. “A Response to John Hockey's Paper ‘Establishing Boundaries.’” Cambridge Journal of Education 24: 307–9. doi: 10.1080/0305764940240212
   Google Scholar
• Gatfield, T. 2005. “An Investigation into PhD Supervisory Management Styles: Development of a Dynamic Conceptual Model and its Managerial Implications.” Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 27: 311–25. doi: 10.1080/13600800500283585
   Google Scholar
• Gopaul, B. 2011. “Distinction in Doctoral Education: Using Bourdieu's Tools to Assess the Socialisation of Doctoral Students.” Equity and Excellence in Education 44: 10–21. doi: 10.1080/10665684.2011.539468
   Google Scholar
• Grant, B. 2003. “Mapping the Pleasures and Risks of Supervision.” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 24: 175–90.
   Google Scholar
• Green, B. 2005. “Unfinished Business: Subjectivity and Supervision.” Higher Education Research and Development 24: 151–63. doi: 10.1080/07294360500062953
   Google Scholar
• Gurr, G. M. 2010. “Negotiating the ‘Rackety Bridge’ ─A Dynamic Model for Aligning Supervisory Style with Research Student Development.” Higher Education Research and Development 20: 81–92. doi: 10.1080/07924360120043882
   Google Scholar
• Hasrati, M. 2005. “Legitimate Peripheral Participation and Supervising PhD Students.” Studies in Higher Education 30: 557–70. doi: 10.1080/03075070500249252
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hockey, J. 1994. “Establishing Boundaries: Problems and Solutions in Managing PhD Supervisor's Role.” Cambridge Journal of Education 24: 1–13. doi: 10.1080/0305764940240211
   Google Scholar
• Hockey, J. 1995. “Doctoral Supervision Styles.” Oxford Review of Education 21: 195–206. doi: 10.1080/0305498950210205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hockey, J. 1996. “Motives and Meaning Amongst PhD Supervisors in the Social Sciences.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 17: 489–506. doi: 10.1080/0142569960170405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holligan, C. 2005. “Fact and Fiction: A Case History of Doctoral Supervision.” Educational Research 47: 267–78. doi: 10.1080/00131880500287179
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holley, K. 2009. “Animal Research Practices and Doctoral Student Identity Development within a Scientific Community.” Studies in Higher Education 34: 577–91. doi: 10.1080/03075070802597176
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ives, G., and G. Rowley. 2005. “Supervisor Selection or Allocation and Continuity of Supervision: PhD. Students’ Progress and Outcomes.” Studies in Higher Education 30: 535–55. doi: 10.1080/03075070500249161
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, L., A. Lee, and B. Green. 2000. “The PhD and the Autonomous Self: Gender, Rationality and Postgraduate Pedagogy.” Studies in Higher Education 25: 135–47. doi: 10.1080/713696141
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kendall, G. 2002. “The Crisis in Doctoral Education: A Sociological Diagnosis.” Higher Education Research and Development 21: 131–41. doi: 10.1080/07294360220144051
   Google Scholar
• Kiley, M. 2011. “Developments in Research Supervisor Training: Causes and Responses.” Studies in Higher Education 36: 585–99. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2011.594595
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lather, P. 1991. Getting Smart: Feminist Research and Pedagogy With/in the Postmodern. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, Anne. 2008. “How are Doctoral Students Supervised? Concepts of Doctoral Research Supervision.” Studies in Higher Education 33: 267–81. doi: 10.1080/03075070802049202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, Alison, and B. Green. 2009. “Supervision as Metaphor.” Studies in Higher Education 34: 615–30. doi: 10.1080/03075070802597168
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, S., and C. Seale. 2007. “Managing Criticism in PhD Supervision: A Qualitative Case Study.” Studies in Higher Education 32: 511–26. doi: 10.1080/03075070701476225
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindsay, S. 2014. “What Works for Doctoral Students in Completing Their Thesis?” Teaching in Higher Education, doi:10/1080/13562517.2014.974025
   Google Scholar
• Mainhard, T., R. van der Rijst, J. van Tartwijk, and T. Wubbels. 2009. “A Model for the Supervisor-Doctoral Student Relationship.” Higher Education 58: 359–73. doi: 10.1007/s10734-009-9199-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manathunga, C. 2005a. “Early Warning Signs in Postgraduate Research Education: A Different Approach to Ensuring Timely Completions.” Teaching in Higher Education 10: 219–33. doi: 10.1080/1356251042000337963
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manathunga, C. 2005b. “The Development of Research Supervision: ‘Turning the Light on a Private Space.’” International Journal for Academic Development 10: 17–30. doi: 10.1080/13601440500099977
   Google Scholar
• Maxwell, T., and R. Smyth. 2010. “Research Supervision: The Research Management Matrix.” Higher Education 59: 407–22. doi: 10.1007/s10734-009-9256-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAlpine, L., and J. Norton. 2006. “Reframing our Approach to Doctoral Programs: An Integrative Framework for Action and Research.” Higher Education Research and Development 25: 3–17. doi: 10.1080/07294360500453012
   Google Scholar
• McCormack, C. 2009. “Stories Return Personal Narrative Ways of Knowing to the Professional Development of Supervisors.” Studies in Continuing Education 31: 141–56. doi: 10.1080/01580370902927485
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owler, K. 2010. “A ‘Problem’ to be Managed? Completing a PhD in the arts and Humanities.” Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 9: 289–304. doi: 10.1177/1474022209356330
   Google Scholar
• Parry, O., P. Atkinson, and S. Delamont. 1997. “The Structure of PhD Research.” Sociology 31: 121–29. doi: 10.1177/0038038597031001009
   Google Scholar
• Pearson, M. 1999. “The Changing Environment for Doctoral Education in Australia: Implications for Quality Management, Improvement and Innovation.” Higher Education Research and Development 18: 269–87. doi: 10.1080/0729436990180301
   Google Scholar
• Pearson, M., and A. Brew. 2002. “Research Training and Supervision Development.” Studies in Higher Education 27: 135–50. doi: 10.1080/03075070220119986c
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petersen, E. 2007. “Negotiating Academicity: Postgraduate Research Supervision as Category Boundary Work.” Studies in Higher Education 32: 475–87. doi: 10.1080/03075070701476167
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar