English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

New to the academy’s ‘publish or perish’ game, doctoral students hold varied expectations of supervisors in relation to their publishing endeavours. These expectations can be unrealistic or contradictory to those of the supervisors and thus make supervision problematic. Set in a faculty of education in New Zealand, this study explores fantasies, fallacies and realities in doctoral students’ perceptions and experiences of their supervisors’ roles in doctoral publishing. The data analysed include online questionnaires and semi-structured interviews with 12 doctoral students, in which they describe their supervisors’ roles variously as feedback providers, advisers, co-authors and managers. The students’ perceptions are a mix of fantasies, fallacies and realities that are entangled with the temporality of their study and the open-ended process of being a becoming-student. The findings suggest a need for a dialogic space between students and supervisors to promote mutual understandings and foster a tailored, dynamic supervision, particularly in doctoral publishing.

Moving between fantasies, fallacies and realities: students’ perceptions of supervisors’ roles in doctoral publishing