HPSP113 Assignment: Qualitative Analysis of PhD Student Experience

This report presents a qualitative analysis of a PhD student's experience, addressing the research question: How do PhD students experience doctoral study and what are the factors that influence their experiences? The analysis is based on an interview transcript, structured around key areas such as overall PhD experience, relationship with supervisors, career progress, feedback, learning strategies, capability to finish, and reflection on studies. The analysis explores themes including supervision and community of scholars, working process issues, and stress faced during the PhD curriculum. The findings highlight the importance of effective mentorship, constructive debate between supervisors, time management, and the impact of the work environment on student well-being. The report also emphasizes the role of supervisors in providing feedback, fostering interpersonal relationships, and encouraging innovation. The analysis concludes with observations on the student's communication skills, the impact of criticism, and the importance of coordination within the research team. The report aims to provide insights into factors that contribute to a positive and productive PhD journey.

Thematic Data Analysis
THEMATIC DATA ANALYSIS

Thematic Data Analysis
2
Table of contents
Perception on the experience of the PHD scholar...........................................................................3
Theme based analysis......................................................................................................................3
Supervision and community of scholars......................................................................................3
Issues related to working process.................................................................................................4
Stress faced during PhD curriculum............................................................................................5
References........................................................................................................................................7

Thematic Data Analysis
3
Perception on the experience of the PHD scholar
As per my acquired understanding from the open-ended questions asked to the PHD
scholar, the concerned student has been able to receive required motivation to continue exploring
new ideas and scope in context to his or her field of research. The effective mentorship skills of
supervisors and constant encouragement have allowed the scholar to apply innovative thought
process in researchstudies. Hence, I believe the scholar does not fear failure due to the constant
motivation from supervisors to face challenges and learn from setbacks. Thus, critical analysis
and cognitive learning skills are the major attributes that have been incurred by the scholar wish I
believe shall help him develop into a proficient scientist in the future (Coates et al. 2020).
Theme based analysis
Supervision and community of scholars
As per my understanding, the PHD scholar is under the supervision of a primary and
secondary mentor who guides him through the research curriculum. The primary supervisor
consistently evaluates the work progress of the concerned scholar whereas the secondary
supervisor personally visits the research scholar after intervals of six months. Hence, the primary
supervisor is more consistent in evaluate the progress of the scholar in comparison to the other
mentor.
Moreover, as per the interactions between the scholar and the interviewer, the two
supervisors often have contradictory ideas in context to the research approach. However,

Thematic Data Analysis
4
constructive debate between the mentors aid to expand the scope of research study and both of
them encourage inclusive decisions with the scholar (Mantai, 2017).
I have also inferred that regarding matters were the supervisor do not seem to agree and
when the scholar lacks sufficient knowledge to present this or her opinion, the scholar looks
agrees to the decisions taken by the primary supervisor. Hence, in matters of contradiction, the
hierarchical preference is considered to acknowledge the power culture.
Issues related to working process
I believe, the primary supervisor of the research scholar, encourages the concerned
individual to step out of his comfort zone and take up challenges at work. Moreover, the scholar
effectively manages time by working for 25 minutes at a stretch and then taking a break of 5
minutes and again indulges in the research work. Hence, this flexibility and proper balance
allows the scholar to avoid stress related to work execution. Moreover, the primary supervisor
motivates the scholar to learn from mistakes by sharing her own personal experiences during her
PHD curriculum. Such interactions have allowed the scholar to build a positive outlook towards
criticism from externals and constantly work on improving his analytical skills (Molla&
Cuthbert, 2019).
Role of supervisor
The supervisors perform their responsibilities effectively by providing useful feedback on
the research reports submitted by the scholar. The scholar proceeds on making necessary
amendments in working methods after receiving feedback from his supervisors. Hence, I believe
a strong interpersonal relationship between the PHD scholar and his supervisors constantly

Thematic Data Analysis
5
motivate him to make best possible efforts in conducting the scientific research. Observation
being a basic aspect in a working environment, supervisor can influence the relationship shared
between the PhD scholar and his or her supervisor in both a positive and negative mannerism. A
supervisor is delegated in providing assistance to the students in their research study by helping
enhance their development by actively guiding them throughout the process. A supervisor is
expected to modify students in designated areas to enhance their teamwork performance ability,
self-reliance skills and gain competence in such areas to evolve with expertise in their work.
Inclusive mentorship
The inclusive mentorship approach of the supervisors helps the scholar to present his
views on the research project and this acknowledgement might boost the confidence of the
scholar. I believe, the initiative taken by the mentors in encouraging scientific innovation in work
process allows the scholar to effective implement his critical thinking skills and develop new
approaches to standardize the research outcomes (Pojani et al. 2018). However, there are certain
limitation in achieving the expected involvement on the mentor’s end, as there are numerous
aspects like availability in guidance and the communication approach to help convey the
intentions of the mentor regarding the expectation of the assigned work to the scholar.
Additionally, the scholar should be active enough to approach his or her mentor to assist with
proper information regarding a study and help the scholar himself/herself decide the mannerism
of approach to get a thorough understanding of the same with the aid of experience.
Contradictorily, the scholar too must attempt to build trust and a collegial relationship with the
mentor to secure the support for a long term basis to help assist a successful and stable
enrichment of knowledge and not just be based on a temporary status.

Thematic Data Analysis
6
Stress faced during PhD curriculum
As per my understanding from the open-ended discussions, the scholar appears to be an
introvert and cannot effectively socialize in conferences and academic meets. However, the
scholar does claim that he finds interest in the topic of academic decisions, though he struggles
in communicating with new scholars and externals in the conference meetings. Moreover, though
the scholar prefers in following routine work duration of 8 hours. However, the constant pressure
associated with research work and failure of standardizing the research results might increase the
work-related stress. However, the scholar does convey in the interview that constant support
from supervisors has helped to handle work pressures effectively through the intellectual
guidance of mentors. Moreover, the failure of receiving expected outcomes often discourages the
scholar in progressing through the work process. However, alternative strategies of research
project execution proposed by the diligent supervisors help to ensure effective methods of
research hypothesis testing (Press et al. 2019).
Summary
Thus, the scholar has been able to conduct his research studies effectively by constant
evaluation from supervisors and unbiased feedback from mentors. Furthermore, cognitive and
perception skills of the primary supervisor has aided to motivate the scholar in adopting
alternative methods of research study. Also, the effective time management skill implemented by
the scholar helps him to manage work related stress and ensure smooth flow of research work.
Also, the intellectual debates between the two supervisors aids to draw useful conclusion on the
effective methods of research progress. I also believe optimal standards of interpersonal

Thematic Data Analysis
7
relationships aid between guides and scholars allow handling work related issues with greater
effectiveness (Yu & Wright, 2016).
The evaluation of performance of the scholar might help supervisors to analyze the
improvements and potential of the concerned PhD scholar. I also believe improvement in the
communication skills might help the scholar to interact in academic conferences and exchange
intellectual ideas with other scientists and scholars. Moreover, positive approach towards
criticism might help the scholar to analyze the feedback of peers and external scientists. Hence,
the scholar might develop effective self-evaluation skills, which might help him to work on his
loopholes. Recognition to the innovative thinking skills of the aspiring scientist might help the
entire research team to execute projects that might be a breakthrough in scientific research field.
I believe, coordination between the concerned hierarchies of the research team might help to
mitigate bureaucracy in power culture and ensure proper guidance to the concerned scholar.
Hence, the scholar on being motivated and receiving optimal standards of recognition from
supervisors might make best possible efforts in conducting research work with complete diligent
and scientific approach. In addition, strong interpersonal relationships between guides and
scholars help to put forward the scientific resources that might be required to conduct necessary
experiments with proper working methods (Struthers& Strachan, 2019).

Thematic Data Analysis
8
References
Coates, H., Croucher, G., Moore, K., Weerakkody, U., Dollinger, M., Grosemans, I., ...& Kelly,
P. (2020). Contemporary perspectives on the Australian doctorate: framing insights to
guide development. Higher Education Research & Development, 1-18.
Mantai, L. (2017). Feeling like a researcher: Experiences of early doctoral students in
Australia. Studies in Higher Education, 42(4), 636-650.
Molla, T., & Cuthbert, D. (2019).Calibrating the PhD for Industry 4.0: global concerns, national
agendas and Australian institutional responses. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 3(2),
167-188.
Pojani, D., Olvera-Garcia, J., Sipe, N., & Byrne, J. (2018). Research productivity of Australian
planning academics: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Planning Education and
Research, 0739456X18804330.
Press, N., Rossi, D., Graham, C., & Danaher, P. A. (2019). Commonalities and Variations in
Understanding Doctoral Supervision in Two Australian Universities: A Collaborative
Autoethnography and an Interdisciplinary, Phenomenographic Case Study. In Traversing
the Doctorate (pp. 143-163). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Struthers, K., & Strachan, G. (2019).Attracting women into male-dominated trades: Views of
young women in Australia. International journal for research in vocational education
and training, 6(1), 1-19.

Thematic Data Analysis
9
Yu, B., & Wright, E. (2016). Socio-cultural adaptation, academic adaptation and satisfaction of
international higher degree research students in Australia. Tertiary Education and
Management, 22(1), 49-64.