Article Information

GRADUATE STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES: THE ROLE OF THE ACADEMIC SUPERVISOR

Anna Grigoryeva (avgrigoreva@hse.ru)

National Research University “Higher School of Economics”, Moscow, Russia

Citation: Grigoryeva A. (2021) Uspeshnost' aspirantov v oblasti sotsial'nykh nauk: rol' nauchnogo rukovoditelya [Graduate Student Success in the Social Sciences: The Role of the Academic Supervisor]]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology], 24(4): 90–109 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.31119/jssa.2021.24.4.4

Abstract. High dropout rate from doctoral school and a low percentage of thesis defense (10,4 % in 2019) is one of the major problems in doctoral education and educational policies and a challenge for higher education in Russia. One of the causes of the problem is the lack of academic integration of the doctoral students and the lack of activities aimed not only at social, but also at academic integration of DS. In this article, based on 18 semi-structured interviews with doctoral students and 24 interviews with supervisors, conclusions are drawn about the role of academic formal procedures in reducing academic integration in Russian doctoral school. The tools of social integration are viewed by both doctoral students and their academic supervisors as a type of «rituals» and are rather considered factors of academic disintegration. Understanding the mechanisms of excessive regulation and formalization of procedures (bureaucracy) in russian Doctoral school will make it possible to formulate practical recommendations for more effective mechanisms for the academic integration of Russian doctoral students.

Keywords: doctoral studies, academic supervision, dropout, thesis defense, Russian higher education, university bureaucracy, supervision styles.

References

Bednyi B.I. (2017) Novaya model' aspirantury: pro et contra [A new model of graduate school: pro et contra]. Vyssheye obrazovaniye v Rossii [Higher education in Russia]. 2017, 4: 5–16 (in Russian).

Bednyi B.I., Rybakov N.V., Sapunov M.B. (2017) Rossiyskaya aspirantura v obrazovatel'nom pole: mezhdistsiplinarnyi diskurs [Russian postgraduate studies in the educational field: interdisciplinary discourse]. Sotsiologicheskiye issledovaniya [Sociological Research], 9: 125–134 (in Russian).

Bekova S. (2019) Does employment during doctoral training reduce the PhD completion rate? Studies in Higher Education, 46(6): 1–13.

Demina N.V. (2005) Institutsionalizatsiya v soobshchestve uchenykh: zashchita kandidatskoy dissertatsii kak obryad perekhoda [Institutionalization in the Scholarly Community: PhD Defense as a Rite of Transition]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology], 8(1): 97–112 (in Russian).

Gennep A. van (2002) Obryad perekhoda: Sistematicheskoye izucheniye obryadov [Rite of passage: A systematic study of rituals]. Moscow: Vostochnaia literatura RAN (in Russian).

Glaser B., Strauss A. (2009) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Transaction Publishers.

Habermas J. (1984) The theory of communicative action. Vol. 2. Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston: Beacon Press.

Habermas J. (1987) The theory of communicative action. Vol. 2. Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason. Boston: Beacon Press.

Mahoney M.J. (1976) Scientist as Subject: The Psychological Imperative. Cambridge: Ballinger Publishing Company.

Maloshonok N., Terentev E. (2019) National barriers to the completion of doctoral programs at Russian universities. Higher Education in Russia and Beyond, 3(9): 18–20.

Murphy M. (2009) Bureaucracy and its limits: accountability and rationality in higher education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 30(6): 683–695. doi: 10.1080/01425690903235169.

Pyhältö K., Keskinen J. (2012) Doctoral Students' Sense of Relational Agency in Their Scholarly Communities. International Journal of Higher Education, 1(2): 136–149.

Radayev V.V. Kak organizovat' i predstavit' issledovatel'skii proyekt. 75 prostykh pravil [How to organize and present a research project. 75 simple rules]. Moscow: GU-VSHE Publ.; INFRA-M Publ., 2001 (in Russian).

Schugurensky D. (2000) The forms of informal learning: Towards a conceptualization of the field. WALL Working Paper, 19. Toronto: University of Ontario.

Sokolov M.M., Titayev K.D. (2005) Provintsial'naya i tuzemnaya nauka [Provincial and Native Science]. Antropologicheskiy forum [Anthropological Forum], 19: 239–275 (in Russian).

Strathearn M. (ed.) (2000) Audit cultures: Anthropological studies in accountability, ethics and the academy. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Strauss A., Corbin J. (1994) Grounded Theory Methodology: An Overview. In: Denzin N. Lincoln Y. (eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage.

Tinto V. (1993) Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Tomlinson M. (2008) ‘The degree is not enough’: students’ perceptions of the role of higher education credentials for graduate work and employability. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29(1): 49–61. doi: 10.1080/01425690701737457.

Travers M. (2007) The new bureaucracy: Quality assurance and its critics. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.

Wear D., Skillicorn J. (2009) Hidden in plain sight: The formal, informal, and hidden curricula of a psychiatry clerkship. Academic Medicine, 84: 451–458.