Neuroscience research and trauma, anxiety and depression Sandplay Therapy EAP, Animal Assisted Therapies Efficacy studies
The demand for the doctorate has significantly increased, both globally and in the South African context, the demand being underpinned by the aim to produce research-led knowledge and increase the knowledge economy in South Africa, to foster global competitiveness, promoting innovation in the industrial and social contexts, and benchmarking academic institutions. This is reflected in the National Development Plan (NDP) (2012), which aims to increase doctoral output (from 1876 to 5000) by 2030. With the aim of producing highly skilled and knowledgeable professionals and increasing “research-based knowledge,” particularly in South Africa, the doctorate is regarded as a core function of academic institutions. However, despite the demand for doctorates addressing this call is not without critique. Two major critiques include: 1) debate as to the relevance of a PhD outside of academia, and 2) debate regarding the over-production of PhD’s. Adding to these debates, there is also concern regarding the availability and capacity of doctorate supervisors in meeting the demand. There tends to be an over-reliance of novice supervisors due to the shortage of experienced supervisors, and the supervisory relationship has been described as being a “challenging and chaotic” pedagogy with the intellectual, personal and professional relationships making up the core of this pedagogy. It is not uncommon for academics, who have just recently completed their own PhD’s to undertake doctoral supervision. As a novice doctoral supervisor, myself, who is currently supervising her first cohort of PhD students, I am often confronted with a milieu of challenges on various levels: institutionally, departmentally, academically, professionally, personally, and interpersonally within a supervisor-supervisee relationship, all of which indirectly, and directly impact the development of my identity as a doctorate supervisor. In view of this, and for the purpose of this assignment, I aim to weave a narrative elucidating the process of developing my identity as a doctorate supervisor. In order to conceptualise my identity, or the development of an identity, as a doctorate supervisor, I will draw on two positions I have held: the one position I draw on spans the period 2014 - 2017, as a doctorate student and the subsequent experience of being supervised through a PhD, and the second position begins from 2018, as a doctorate supervisor. For the purpose of this assignment, I refer to this space (transitioning from a doctorate student to becoming a supervisor) as a liminal metamorphosis in becoming a doctoral supervisor, and while I am, on paper, a supervisor of doctoral students, the development of my identity, and confidence, as a doctorate supervisor is still in its conception. Through this assignment, I aimed to not only address the challenges mentioned above from my own experiences, but also to map my development as a doctoral supervisor, against the extant literature. The assignment was structured as a quasi-research report, and was underpinned by a qualitative methodological perspective, guided by an autoethnographic approach. The specific aims of the assignment were: 1) to first explore the development of my doctoral supervisor identity by drawing on my experiences as a doctoral student, and a doctorate supervisor, and 2)to explore the challenges experienced in becoming a doctorate supervisor.
