Introduction
The journey to a doctoral degree is not merely an academic endeavor but a test of character, determination, and tenacity. Notably, the researcher’s role in this journey is to accomplish predetermined goals and tasks, significantly broaden the horizon, and obtain new and valuable knowledge. The attainment of this esteemed degree is a voyage few undertake, and even fewer accomplish.
Some say it is not for the faint of heart, demanding the highest level of commitment, organization, and patience, accepting that the doctoral candidate’s voice may only fully resonate the day they walk across the graduation stage. Nevertheless, earning this pinnacle of academic achievement stands as one of the most rewarding experiences in a person’s life. Doctoral students who want to complete their studies should choose wisely and closely collaborate with their supervisors to achieve high results and gain valuable experience working with professionals.
Identity Development
The journey of earning a PhD is as important, if not more important, than completing the process. Pyhältö et al. (2012) state, “Previous studies on the doctoral experience suggest that doctoral students face a variety of difficulties during their studies.” (p. 1). The second piece of evidence is described by the authors, who state that the PhD process requires students to transition into the role of independent scholar, which entails significant effort (Coffman et al., 2015).
In addition, the third piece of evidence emphasizes that while pursuing a PhD, students should develop their personal scholarly identity (Garcia & Yao, 2019). This is a road less traveled, and to these ends is the candidate’s ability to take direction, learn how to research, prove or disprove the focus of what is being examined, and, through research, mold a body of research and other forms of an investigation into a final report that can withstand academic review and scrutiny. The process of academic and self-development often leaves the candidate with little or no identity, as they are speaking through the research of others.
Yet Coffman et al. (2016) suggest that the path to earning a doctoral degree is a social process that places the doctoral candidate within a “Community of Practice” (CoP) (p. 31). The notion of a community of practice is very similar (but not synonymous) with systems that bring together small populations of people into small learning communities. Consequently, synthesis is a collaborative effort among people to achieve a common goal. However, where a small learning community is designed to bring like-minded people together, led by a single leader to guide the team, a community of practice makes critical resources easily accessible to the candidate and the leader (supervisor), and the candidate is in an exclusive mentor-mentee relationship.
Relationships
One of the critical facets that can determine the candidate’s success is the relationship between the dissertation supervisor and the candidate. This is the social aspect that Coffman et al. (2016) outline. Researching, writing, creating, and deploying the surveys the candidate will use are mechanical processes; however, it is the coaching and support provided by the supervisor that serve as the scaffolding for all these activities to bear fruit. Most doctoral candidates enter the dissertation and degree arena with a basic idea of what they want to study, and it is the supervisor who guides the student and places them on the right path. Inouye and McAlpine (2016) state, “agency is the act of attempting to strive for and overcome personally determined goals…” (p. 1).
It is also important to note that, if this relationship is successful, the supervisor enters it as highly directive. Their task is also to guide the student and create an appropriate way for their development. For example, as Coffman et al. (2015) state, “creating safe space for students takes time but can make a difference” (p. 2). As the candidate grows, matures, and gains mastery in the scholarly process, complete ownership shifts to the candidate as they near the end of the journey.
Within the context of coaching, mentoring, and support, the supervisor (the expert) transforms what may seem complex into a palatable process. Inouye and McAlpine (2016) suggest that embracing the supervisor’s feedback is the essential catalyst for a candidate’s success or failure. Hattie and Timperley (2007) go on to state, “Feedback emphasizes or develops a ‘gap’ between the quality of student work and the assessor’s goal level, which students may close by actively seeking out and responding to comments and by developing the ability to recognize problems with their own work through self-evaluation” (p. 4).
This can be particularly challenging for the candidate, especially during the early stages of the relationship, as students often feel they know better and reject the feedback. For this reason, the final report often takes considerably longer to complete. Such collaborations have become increasingly challenging as the teaching and learning process has incorporated technology to facilitate learning, development, collaboration, and support.
Online Learning
There is no doubt that the large influence has had on levels of education. This is especially true for those seeking a graduate degree. There has never been a time in history before the advent of online learning when both educational institutions and students could connect with so many learners. With this set forth, online learning and collaboration continue to face an identifiable challenge: socialization. Garcia and Yao (2019) examined both the influence and challenges faced by online learners, and more specifically, the social aspects of this channel of learning. As a reporting note, this examination was conducted to assess students’ perceptions of their socialization and development (Garcia & Yao, 2019).
The authors suggest that, in the absence of face-to-face learning, students often feel isolated and lack the social aspects of learning found only in a brick-and-mortar environment. The researcher identifies the loss of social status and the stress of entering the path to the highest level of academic achievement as “imposter syndrome,” which is characterized by the candidate having “… feelings of doubt exemplified the phenomenon” (p. 47). The researchers suggest that socialization, despite the challenges of communicating online, mitigates the effects of this syndrome while simultaneously connecting people through relationship building and the sharing of ideas and experiences that often continue beyond graduation.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is essential to note that a supervisor’s influence directly affects students’ success in obtaining a PhD. The paper’s thesis was supported by academic resources, which enabled an understanding of the importance and peculiarities of the relationship between the supervisor and the student during PhD studies. In most instances, the candidate quickly learns that the mountain before them is far greater than those crossed to earn the previous degrees. Unlike the degrees required to reach this level of education, the student has direct expert support from the candidate’s supervisor (dissertation chair), a wealth of advanced resources, and the opportunity to connect and interact with fellow candidates.
As academic support was utilized during the research, it is essential to highlight the article by Coffman et al. (2015), which specified the process itself and its purpose. To summarize the analysis, it is essential to emphasize that the student’s path toward the PhD degree is challenging and fraught with obstacles. My reflection on it assumes that understanding the connection between the student and the professor is crucial. The research presented in this writing underscores that true success is predicated on two primary channels. The first and most important is the supervisor, and this relationship is highly social in nature. When the candidate accepts the mentor’s feedback, the process unfolds much more easily than taking the journey alone.
The second channel involves the relationships the candidate forms with other students on the path to becoming a scholarly researcher. In sum, and as stated earlier in this writing, if the journey toward earning a doctoral degree were easy, there would be millions of people in the world holding this advanced level of credentials. One should consider a quantitative method to obtain specific data as an alternative research methodology. For example, interviews and questionnaires can be conducted among PhD students to gain an understanding of the specifications of this degree.
References
Coffman, K., Putman, P., Adkisson, A., Kriner, B., & Monaghan, C. (2015). Waiting for the expert to arrive: Using a community of practice to develop the scholarly identity of doctoral students. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 28(1), 30–37.
Garcia, C. E., & Yao, C. W. (2019). The role of an online first-year seminar in higher education doctoral students’ scholarly development. The Journal of High Education, 52, 44–52.
Inouye, K. S., & McAlpine, L. (2017). Developing scholarly identity: Variation in agentive responses to supervisor feedback. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 14(2), 1–29.
Pyhältö, K., Toom, A., Stubb, J., & Lonka, K. (2012). Challenges of becoming a scholar: A study of doctoral students’ problems and well-being. ISRN Education, 2012, 1–12.