Supervision Guidelines at SPS

All supervision at OsloMet, including within the PhD Programme in the Study of Professions, is based on the Ethical Guidelines for Supervision at OsloMet.

PhD Candidate and Supervisor

• In their close collaboration with the candidate, the supervisor has both an academic and a social role
• In this relationship the candidate is of central importance and all supervision should be tailored to the candidates needs at different stages in the process
• PhD candidates may be in a vulnerable position due to the asymmetrical power relationship to their supervisors

Consider:

• Does the candidate have the necessary competence, or are additional courses needed beyond the standard academic training?
• What is the supervisor’s expertise (subject area, methodology, writing process, research design)?
• Will you co-author articles or similar publications with the candidate?

Remember:

• Discuss expectations and limitations early on (What is desirable and what is feasible?).
• Regularly evaluate how the supervision is working—either party may initiate this.
• Establish clear agreements at the start and throughout the process:
  • Will you co-author publications?
  • Will you follow a meeting schedule or meet as needed?
  • What happens in case of absence (candidate or supervisor)?

• Both candidate and supervisor share responsibility for keeping the research design and timeline up to date.
• The supervisor should maintain an ongoing overview of the process:
  • What are we doing now?
  • What comes next?
• Clarify uncertainties promptly.

Research Environment

• Supervision is not a private matter between candidate and supervisor. Everyone in the research environment shares responsibility for supporting PhD candidates and should be aware of their work.
• Candidates should be integrated into both the local research environment (SPS, departments, projects, research groups) and the international research community (courses, conferences, networks).
• The supervisor should emphasize the importance of joining a writing/reading group with other PhD candidates and ensure the candidate presents their work regularly in the research group.

Consider:

• Can the candidate be involved in senior researchers’ or the supervisor’s projects (idea exchange, mutual supervision)?

• Who else in the environment can be valuable discussion partners?
• Can the candidate present parts of their work at SPS research seminars?
• Are there relevant courses at other institutions the candidate should attend?
• How can the supervisor connect the candidate to their international network?
• Are there international seminars or conferences the candidate should attend?

Remember:

• The academic environment must support supervisors in developing their skills.

• When possible, candidates should have more than one supervisor, and all parties should meet regularly.
• Changing supervisors is always an option and should be facilitated by the academic environment if necessary.

Writing Process

• Candidates should be encouraged to start writing early, focusing on key questions.
• Plans for the midway evaluation and final reading seminar should be discussed jointly by the candidate and supervisors, including suggestions for participants.

Consider:

• Does the candidate need general writing support?
• What type of text should be submitted before supervision?
• Should the candidate:
  • Estimate number of pages/chapters and draft a preliminary structure?
  • Report progress via email monthly?
  • Specify the type of feedback they want (ideas, structure, etc.)?
  • Complete at least one chapter by the end of the first year?
• Should the supervisor provide written comments before meetings?
• What can be cut, clarified, developed, or corrected in the text?

Remember:

• Respect deadlines.

• Feedback should be given as agreed, and as promptly as possible.
• If delayed, the supervisor must inform the candidate when feedback can be expected.
• Both parties must be well-prepared for meetings.
• Feedback should be constructive, relevant, and thorough.
• Supervisors should highlight what is strong and promising in the text to ensure it is not lost in revisions.
• The supervisor must respect the doctoral candidate's authorship and ensure the text remains their own
• The goal of critique is to improve the work.
• Explaining challenges to someone other than the supervisor can help overcome writer’s block.

The Dissertation

• The candidate and supervisor should clarify expectations regarding the dissertation format early in the writing process.
• Ongoing reflection on the structure and components of the dissertation is essential.
• Whether the dissertation will be a monograph or a collection of articles should be decided as early as possible.
• Supervisors may encourage candidates to follow their curiosity and work on multiple parts of the dissertation simultaneously.

Consider:

• Should the dissertation be a monograph or article-based?
• Discuss the research design (What is the research question? What is the goal? How will it be achieved?).
• How can research questions and hypotheses be clarified and operationalized?
• Are the concepts and theories used appropriate for the material? Are there alternatives?
• Is the material too extensive or not comprehensive enough?
• Does the material offer new insights or merely confirm existing knowledge?
• Has the candidate written for their intended audience?
• When should the candidate stop working and let go of unfinished parts?

Remember:

• The candidate must credit all contributors whose ideas have influenced the project.

• The dissertation must answer the research questions posed.
• It must be coherent at all levels (sentence, paragraph, chapter, article).
• Precision in references and citations is essential for academic credibility.
• The dissertation should contribute new insights—not just confirm what is already known.