Growing the next generation of researchers

Front matter

iii Growing the Next Generation of Researchers A handbook for emerging researchers and their mentors Lyn Holness

Growing the next generation of researchers: A handbook for emerging researchers iv and their mentors First published in 2015 by UCT Press an imprint of Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd First Floor Sunclare Building 21 Dreyer Street Claremont PO Box 14373, Lansdowne, 7779, Cape Town, South Africa © 2015, Lyn Holness and UCT Press ISBN 978 1 77582 085 7 (Print) ISBN 978 1 77582 197 7 (WebPDF) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher. Subject to any applicable licensing terms and conditions in the case of electronically supplied publications, a person may engage in fair dealing with a copy of this publication for his or her personal or private use, or his or her research or private study. See Section 12(1)(a) of the Copyright Act 98 of 1978. Project Manager: Glenda Younge Editor: Glenda Younge Proofreader: Alfred LeMaitre Typesetter: Red Setter Cover designer: Paula Wood Typeset in Minion Pro 10.5 pt on 14 pt The authors and the publisher believe on the strength of due diligence exercised that this work does not contain any material that is the subject of copyright held by another person. In the alternative, they believe that any protected pre-existing material that may be comprised in it has been used with appropriate authority or has been used in circumstances that make such use permissible under the law.

This book has been independently peer-reviewed by academics who are experts in the field. Reprinted 2016 (twice) Reprinted 2017 www.uctpress.co.za v Preface vii Acknowledgements ix Contributors ix Introduction and background xiii Part 1: Welcome to academia 1 Chapter 1: Understanding the terrain 5 Chapter 2: The research landscape: Internationalisation, quality assurance and benchmarking 24 Chapter 3: Crossing research boundaries 42 Part 2: Developing a research profile: The art and craft of research 61 Chapter 4: Research information and its management 65 Chapter 5: Research integrity 79 Chapter 6: Planning your research 94 Chapter 7: Optimising research opportunities: Sabbaticals, conferences and research visits 109 Chapter 8: Securing and managing research grants 129 Part 3: Getting research into the public sphere 145 Chapter 9: Scholarly publishing: From motivation to publication 149 Chapter 10: Scholarly publishing: Writing a book 165 Chapter 11: Research impact 175 Part 4: Doing and supervising a PhD 185 Chapter 12: Embarking on a PhD; Supervisor and student perspectives 189 Chapter 13: Writing a thesis: The preparatory stages 206 Chapter 14: The writing process: Submission and examination 219 Excursus: Complementary models of supervision 237 Conclusion 240 Appendix A: Memorandum of Understanding 243 References 245 Index 251 CONTENTS vi vii B ecoming an academic has many parallels with moving to a new city. If you merely visit a city, you can mostly get by with basic information—a map indicating the most important places and a guide to using the public transport system will often be enough to facilitate a comfortable stay in an unfamiliar place. However, going to live in that city requires far more. To become a good and effective citizen requires a deeper understanding of its sociology, politics and the many complex systems that drive or influence daily life. Without the right advice and support, living in even the most desirable of cities can be a frustrating and debilitating experience to a newcomer; you see the road opening up before the established citizens as they go about their business with ease and confidence, while you often turn into blind alleys and stumble across unexpected obstacles. They don’t know how to help you to settle in and to cope, and you don’t know exactly what questions you should be asking them.

Part 1 2

3 PART 1 F or most new academics, in particular those who have worked outside academia since completing their studies, the university is an unusual place. Returning as a staff member is a very different experience from being a student. While some come into academia from commerce, industry or other professions, there is another group of people who, without ever leaving university, make their way slowly up the ranks from being a student to a tutor, then perhaps a teaching assistant, and after this to a short-term teaching contact—all the while engaged in postgraduate study. So the transition to fully fledged academic staff member, when it comes, is not quite such a shock to this group. Either way there is much to learn, not least in terms of the expectations placed on academics, and their corresponding responsibilities. Very often new staff members are not assigned mentors—people who will show them the academic ropes, spelling out those things that do not appear in the appointment letter and make little sense at the time of orientation, and which the Head of Department has forgotten to mention. Coming to grips with the university environment is usually achieved through a combination of trial and error, learning from colleagues and, over time, absorbing things by osmosis (often to the individual’s cost).

Our local institutions and those of us who work in them are de facto part of the international academic community, with a set of basic, sometimes tacit, conventions that apply everywhere, creating and sustaining networks of co-operation and critique. This situation is not without problems. Many of the driving forces in academia, worldwide, have their roots in and are sustained by a Western colonial model, while higher education institutions in the ‘Global South’ (which includes the whole of the African continent) live with the tension created by the need to nurture a local identity with local relevance, on the one hand, and to compete globally, on the other.

Further to this is the reality of the highly differentiated institutional contexts in which academics work: the well-resourced, with adequate research funding, and the underresourced (a particular problem in South Africa with its apartheid history and its legacy of historically disadvantaged institutions); those with a vibrant research culture and those with a more technicist approach; those where one is surrounded by research-active colleagues to ‘show the ropes’ and those finding themselves in a research vacuum, and so on. A limitation of this book, therefore—and especially Chapter 1—is that it cannot adequately address or reflect the conditions in which many academics find themselves. PART 1 WELCOME TO ACADEMIA

PART 1 4 But this does not invalidate the discussion, for its aim is to help readers understand both the intrinsic nature of academia, which applies no matter where one is located, and the global research landscape and the implications of this for the choices we make along the way.

The aim of Part 1 is to orient readers to the local, national and global academic terrain, with a particular focus on the research component of the academic portfolio.

CHAPTER 1: UNDERSTANDING THE TERRAIN 5 PART 1 T he networks of co-operation and critique that characterise the academic institutional environment are built around a number of features that are intrinsic to the terrain of academia. It is often taken for granted that the incoming generation understands this environment and knows how to function in it. But this is often not the case. In order to set the stage for what follows in this book, at the outset we introduce these features and how they fit together, acknowledging that local realities might present a less straightforward picture than the generic one presented here. This chapter will address the following themes: ◆ The interplay between the core functions of the academic, with a focus on the relationship between teaching and research. ◆ The nature of the academic milieu, which includes the principles of academic freedom and academic citizenship, and manifests itself in: • peer review • collegiality • networking • online presence. ◆ Research integrity.

Core functions of the academic: Teaching, research, administration and leadership, and social responsiveness Modern universities typically have three core functions: teaching, research and administration/leadership. In recent years social responsiveness has regained recognition as a core function.1 Institutions differ in their use of terms to describe this function, which is most commonly associated with service of some sort that is based on, but additional to, work actually carried out in the research process. In a broad sense it refers to what is known as engaged scholarship. The weight given to these core functions may vary from institution to institution, and there may be opportunity for individual choice in prioritising. In many universities teaching and research are prioritised and equally weighted, and there may be a choice between administration/leadership and social responsiveness as a third category of assessment. 1 This marks a subtle shift from the three historic functions of universities: teaching, research and service.

Chapter 1 Understanding The Terrain

PART 1 6 The purpose of universities A useful way to discern the relationship between the core activities is to look at why universities exist in the first place. Universities, or in some cases proto-universities, have their origins in China (third millennium BCE), Pakistan, India and Greece (first millennium BCE) and much later in Europe, where the first universities as we know them today emerged out of the learning kept alive in monasteries during the Dark Ages (fifth to tenth centuries, CE). Bologna (1088) is usually recognised as Europe’s oldest university, followed by Paris (1150) and Oxford (1167).2 In all cases they were concerned with scholarship or the promotion of learning, which in essence involves the generation, transfer and application of knowledge. The same holds true today, with this threefold dynamic being played out in a university’s core functions, described above. The Latin origin of the word ‘university’ is: universitas magistrorum et scholarium, which in translation refers to a ‘community of teachers and scholars’ . Many of us are attracted to this idea of a community, to joining in its traditions which embrace curiosity and promote enquiry, and to sharing esteem for intellectual endeavours. This attraction translates into a range of ethical considerations that shapes the work of today’s researchers and their encounters with new challenges.

The relationship between teaching and research The relationship between teaching and research, or, to use a more contemporary term, the teaching–research nexus/interface, lies at the heart of a university. There is a substantial body of literature emanating from research in this area and grounded in varying understandings of the terms ‘teaching’ , ‘learning’ , ‘research’ , and ‘knowledge-production’ , and the relationships between them.

My own experience in working with academics is that most instinctively see research and teaching as two discrete, albeit sometimes related, activities. For some, these activities exist quite independently, research as knowledge production and teaching as knowledge transmission, and a research-active teacher is not a requirement for producing a love of learning in students. For others, teaching and research are more closely connected, forming part of the same activity. Here an assumption might be that good research produces good teaching and facilitates learning, and, conversely, that teaching under - graduate students is necessary for good research. In this view the outcomes of research provide or inform the content of teaching. This, however, is a flawed position: we all know that some of the most prolific researchers are appalling teachers, and among our best teachers are those with little or no interest in research. 2 www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~bump/OriginUniversities.html. Accessed 10 May 2014. There are scholars who argue that universities as we know them are uniquely European in their origin and defining characteristics.

CHAPTER 1: UNDERSTANDING THE TERRAIN 7 PART 1 The reality is that academic work is a more complex reality than any of these positions suggest.3 In order to consider the relationships more meaningfully, it might be helpful to shift our attention from the content of research and teaching/learning to the nature of research and its relation to teaching and learning. A number of scholars in higher education provide insights that usefully inform this discussion. Drawing on the theoretical positions of contemporaries, Chrissie Boughey brings teaching and research together in what she describes as the ‘knowledge-making’ task of all teachers within the areas in which they teach. This happens as they induct students into ways of knowledge-making that are grounded in the type of literacy that comes from apprenticeship to a particular discourse. Embedded in this understanding is the suggestion that university teachers do not teach knowledge but rather how knowledge is made.4 This position is supported in the work of Ernest L. Boyer, who calls for a return to an early meaning of the more inclusive term ‘scholarship’ as a way to move away from the teaching–research dichotomy and to bring legitimacy to the full scope of academic work. In the past, the integrity of one’s scholarship was measured by the ability to think, to communicate and to learn, providing us with a useful way to understand more comprehensively the relationship between research and teaching.5 A third scholar, Angela Brew, makes some helpful distinctions to inform our understanding of the teaching–research relationship. She first identifies two conceptions of research: 1 outcome-orientated (concerned with knowledge generation and externalproducts; linked to the relationship between recognition and research) 2 understanding-orientated (internal research processes; holistic process of discovery, uncovering creating underlying meanings).

These conceptions are set alongside two models of teaching: 1 teaching as knowledge-transmission (teaching and research separate, independent from each other) 2 teaching as student-focused knowledge-production within a socio-political context.6 3 See the article by Smith, H. (2011). ‘Relationships between teaching and research’ . www.ucl.ac.uk/ calt/support/cpd4he/resources/research_ teaching. Accessed 6 February 2014. 4 Boughey, C. (2012). ‘Linking teaching and research: An alternative perspective’ , in Teaching in Higher Education, 17 (5): 629–635. Online 29 October 2012. www.dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2 012.725528. Accessed 30 October 2014. 5 Boyer, E.L. (1990). ‘Enlarging the perspective’ , in Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate, Ch. 2. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: Special Report, 15–19. 6 Brew, A. (2003). ‘Teaching and research: New relationships and their implications for inquiry-based teaching and learning in higher education’ , Higher Education Research and Development, 22 (1): 3–18.

PART 1 8 These few perspectives confirm som ething crucial for every person setting out on an academic career: the relationship between teaching and research is both more complex and more important than many of us have been led to believe. It cannot be treated simplistically or dismissed as inconsequential. Contained in the sub-text of the different perspectives above is the importance of nurturing a spirit of enquiry among students that is only possible when both research and teaching are understood and practised holistically, taking into account content and process, intellectual endeavour and contextual reality. In contrast to the past, many universities are now incorporating the teaching– research nexus into their institutional strategies. At an individual level, one way to implement this is for academics to make their research accessible to students by explaining it in a comprehensible way and gently introducing them to the idea of enquiry and, therefore, genuine learning. This might well generate in students an interest in research and in developing research skills early on, possibly leading to them sharing in research projects and even to contributing insights in the classroom, that is, to enquiry-based learning. Common sense suggests that a healthy and productive relationship between these core functions and an expanded understanding of that relationship can only enhance the quality of knowledge production and communication in universities, to the benefit of both students and staff, and, ultimately, society as well. On the other hand, the dichotomising of teaching and research, especially at departmental level, is counter-productive at many levels, and for all.

Focusing on the process of knowledge production should not detract from the significance of the research product itself, nor should the two be mutually exclusive in teaching. But the opportunity to bridge the divide between the undergraduate teaching curriculum and the content of one’s research and to invite student involvement is easier in some disciplines than others, and also in some contexts than in others. The iterative disciplines, for example, philosophy, history, literature and anthropology, where knowledge evolves and is theoretically grounded, offer greater opportunities for student involvement than disciplines grounded in experimental work. A student of history is likely to have greater opportunity to offer critical insights in a lecture than a student of anatomy, for example. Most academics would like to teach in their areas of research interest. This lends itself to both an economic use of time and enthusiastic teaching. In reality this is seldom an option for early-career staff, but where it is possible, the opportunity should be grasped. Let us, however, consider this from the opposite perspective. Being required to teach a particular course can—surprisingly—generate a genuine interest in the area, in time becoming a serious research interest.

Another challenge faced by some junior staff members is how to manage the enor - mous institutional pressure to conduct research while in a departmental environment that does not value research and questions its relevance to teaching. In such a case, serious attention needs to be given to time management and careful planning.

CHAPTER 1: UNDERSTANDING THE TERRAIN 9 PART 1 These observations a nd comments do not provide answers but are designed to stimulate thought about possibilities for bringing together teaching and research, at departmental, faculty and institutional level. To consider these possibilities, some understanding of how academia works, both locally and internationally, can be useful for someone new to it. It is to this that we now turn our attention. The nature of academia Academia is a strange animal. It shares many features with other bodies or organisations, but its particular combination of functions and characteristics, and the weight they each bear, renders it unique. Academics of long standing tend to be blasé about their environment, forgetting that not everything is obvious to the newcomer. There are elements intrinsic to academia, the understanding of which is essential in order to become comfortably assimilated into this environment.

So, what are these? Until fairly recently there were at least three features that stood out: peer review, collegiality and networking. Now it is necessary to add another: online presence. These elements do not stand alone; they are interwoven, each sustained by the others, and there are particular ways in which they operate. Added to this is something fundamental and unique to university life and ethos, undergirding all else: the principle of academic freedom, which constitutes the matrix out of which universities have grown, and which needs to be held in creative tension with the other features of the environment and the challenges of the present.

If academic freedom undergirds the operation of universities, then its overseer is academic integrity—that is, activities carried out in an ethical manner. Many institutions now have an Office of Research Integrity. The career of a student, the granting of a degree, the reputation of an individual, a department or even a university can stand or fall on a single breach of ethical principles.

Academic freedom Academic freedom has a long history and is not uncontested. This suggests that the principle of academic freedom, that is, the freedom of enquiry essential to the mission of academia, while widely embraced, is not without challenges.7 What is academic freedom, what are its roots and why is it important?

The Dar es Salaam Declaration on Academic Freedom and Social Responsibility of Academics (1990) 8 defines academic freedom as ‘the freedom of members of the 7 Some of these challenges, focusing mainly on the African higher education environment, are foregrounded in Ramola Ramtohul’s article (2003). ‘ Academic freedom in a state-sponsored university: The case of the University of Mauritius, Journal of Academic Freedom, 3: 1–21. 8 This declaration was signed by delegates from six Tanzanian higher education institution staff associations. The full declaration, with a Preamble explaining the context that gave rise to it, is available at www1.umn.edu/humanrts/africa/DARDOK.htm. Accessed 6 August 2013.

PART 1 10 academic community, individually or collectively, in the pursuit, development and transmission of knowledge, through research, study, discussion, documentation, production, creation, teaching, lecturing and writing’ . This captures the original medieval sense of academic freedom in Europe, which was to ensure freedom of thought, ideas and expression to all those within and those visiting (passing through) universities. The concept is teased out further to include the requirement that such free pursuit of knowledge should take place without ‘unreasonable interference or restriction from law, institutional regulations or public pressure’ .9 In South Africa, Section 16 of the Constitution offers specific protection to academic freedom, despite some notable breaches in certain institutions here. But not all countries and institutions embrace the concept as comprehensively as this, making the scholarly pursuit difficult at times for academics. In many contexts universities exist and their business is carried out in the midst of social, political and economic challenges, and at times they must contend with state authoritarianism as well. There are situations in which university autonomy does not exist, where academic promotion criteria equate with those in the public service (years of service, for example), and where the state determines what research can be undertaken (and hence financed) at universities. Having said this, it is equally true that for many African countries independence came with a determination for a particular type of academic freedom, ‘re-appropriating knowledge and history’ .10 While there is caution about a concept so closely linked to Europe, and while subsequent historical developments have complicated and sometimes compromised conditions at higher education institutions, it remains that the principle of academic freedom is critical for the production of the type of knowledge that will enable our continent and subcontinent to flourish. This, however, needs to be exercised within the parameters of what has been described as a complementary concept: academic citizenship.

For Bruce Macfarlane, academic citizenship refers to the obligations of academic staff in relation to the overlapping communities they serve: students, colleagues, institution, discipline and profession, and the public. The importance of academic citizenship, as understood alongside academic freedom, is self-explanatory: it serves an ethical function, namely to avoid using academic freedom for achieving political rather than intellectual goals. Furthermore, academic citizenship is central to the success of the university as an entity rather than as a collection of individuals set on achieving personal goals.11 9 www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/2591/academic-freedom. Accessed 6 August 2013. 10 Khelfaoui, H. (2009). ‘The Bologna Process in Africa: Globalization or return to “colonial situation”’ , Journal of Higher Education in Africa, 7 (1&2): 23. www.codesria.org/IMG/ pdf/1Introduction_Eng.pdf. Accessed 6 August 2013. 11 Macfarlane, B. (2007). ‘Defining and rewarding academic citizenship: The implications for university promotion policy’ , Journal of Higher Education and Policy Management, 29 (3): 261–273. Drawing on the work of colleagues such as Schils, E. (1997). The Calling of Education: The academic ethic and other essays in higher education. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

CHAPTER 1: UNDERSTANDING THE TERRAIN 11 PART 1 UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM BENCHMARKS FOR ACADEMIC CITIZENSHIP MAY 2012 ‘Academic citizenship takes many forms and is guided by the principle of conscientious and responsible institutional involvement that extends beyond immediate colleagues, students, discipline or university to include obligations to society at large. At a formal level it involves the assumption of leadership and management at an appropriate level. At an informal level academic citizenship embraces responsibilities to colleagues, whether inside or outside the institution, such as helping, nurturing and supporting their work, especially that of younger or newer colleagues. It includes generous, mutually respectful and supportive working relationships with academic, administrative, technical and support staff. In all, the best acts of good citizenship demonstrate personal commitment towards the best interests of the institution. ’12 Against this backdrop we turn to consider some other distinguishin g features of an academic environment, beginning with peer review.

Peer review Peer review may be described as evaluation of work by an individual or, more commonly, a group of people who are of similar or higher competence or ranking in the same field as the person or group producing the work.13 Peer review may also be about the assessment of a situation by a group. At its best, peer review is primarily about quality assurance, the process aimed at maintaining or enhancing the quality of work in a particular field (academic or otherwise), and providing accurate assessment of it. It should also be about ensuring fairness.

In other words, the work or situation is subject to independent scrutiny in order to detect weaknesses or errors to which the producer/s of the work or those involved in the situation may have blind spots. Because peer review is frequently associated with a reward of one sort or another, it can be a powerful incentive to produce excellence. Conversely, peer review can also lead to disgrace, hence from a negative perspective as well it is used for moderating behaviour and performance. Peer review is present in many contexts, from children’s playgrounds to the business world, but it is something associated particularly with academia.

In a work context reviewers (also sometimes referred to as referees) are usually not selected from among close colleagues or others with a special relationship to the 12 www.intranet.birmingham.ac.uk/hr/documents/public/pdr/academic/citizenship-benchmarks. pdf. Accessed 28 October 2014. 13 ‘Peer’ refers to a person of equal standing. However, in the peer-review system it is usually, although not always, persons of higher rank or greater expertise that evaluate the work.

PART 1 12 producer of the work, or from among a group who may have vested interests one way or another. The object is to obtain, as far as possible, unbiased evaluation of the piece of work or the situation under scrutiny. Reviewers of another’s work are often anonymous to the producer/s of the work, and in some cases, notably in the review of written work for publication, the review is ‘double blind’ . That is, neither party knows the identity of the other.14 Up to this point the comments have been deliberately non-specific. Those with any experience of academia will immediately connect the term with the publishing process and the evaluation of other, non-textual, forms of research output. In reality, however, peer review permeates every aspect of academic life. It is going on all the time; it is built into the system. In striving for excellence, the reputation of a university stands or falls partly on the efficiency or otherwise of its various peer-review mechanisms. In Chapter 5, I shall consider in more depth peer review in publishing, but for now let us consider a number of areas in which it functions in the academy.

Procedures may differ between institutions, but the principles of academic peer review remain intact. They are put into effect every day in classes, committee meetings, review panels, conflict management situations, disciplinary hearings, research colloquia, and so on. This is not to suggest that peer review is the only or most important thing happening. It is not the end product. But, all the while, peer review is at work. It happens within institutions and across institutions. Below are a few examples of peer review in action.

Think about conferences and the levels of peer review operating in these. ◆ First, if you intend presenting a paper at a conference you submit an abstract. On the basis of a review process your abstract will be accepted or turned down, determining whether or not your piece of work is deemed appropriate for presentation at the conference. ◆ If it is accepted, the next stage is the presentation itself with questions and comments afterwards—another process of peer review, providing feedback that will, hopefully, enhance the quality of your work. ◆ Once you are home, and particularly if your institution provided funding for the conference, you will incorporate any useful feedback into your paper and transform it into an article for publication, inviting further peer review. ◆ Once it is published the process continues because each time your paper is read and cited, whether positively or negatively, it is effectively being reviewed by peers. Next, I consider funding applications, using an illustration from my own institution. Early-career staff members who participate in our Emerging Researcher Programme are eligible to apply for specially designated research development grants. The most obvious 14 Some of this material is sourced from The Linux Information Project. www.linfo.org/peer_ review.html. Accessed 17 April 2013.

CHAPTER 1: UNDERSTANDING THE TERRAIN 13 PART 1 goal of the application process is to enable a cohort of inexperienced academics to obtain the funding necessary to make progress with their research. But the application process itself is used to build research capacity. ◆ Applicants are invited to submit draft proposals for pre-submission review. Comments and suggestions for improvement are provided and implemented. ◆ Final drafts are submitted and scrutinised by a review panel, who, in making awards, sometimes request further refinement before final approval of the grant. This whole peer-review process is geared towards habitual excellence in the quality of proposals produced by the academics.

The peer-review process is not without problems; it is not a perfect system. Nowhere is this more evident than in the academic publishing world, where it is easily abused to promote particular individuals, groups or causes. It is also manipulated to promote business interests of the monopolies controlling academic publishing, worldwide. The problems (and temptations) of peer review manifest themselves at a local level as well: biased committee members, reviewers with a personal grudge against a grant applicant, ideological conflicts that cloud scientific merit, and incestuous journal boards, to name but a few.

The reality is—and this is the refrain—that, despite its faults, peer review is the best system we have to promote fairness, opportunity, efficiency and excellence in the academy, and this has implications for everyone. The responsibility of each academic is to play her or his part in ensuring that the peer-review system works as effectively as possible, and this means playing a part in the various review processes, both within and beyond one’s own university. Serving terms on institutional committees and boards is one of the most important, and certainly the most immediate, examples of participation in peer review. Other examples are the reviewing of articles for journals and acting as an external examiner of dissertations, both of which are closely related to a second hallmark of the academic environment: collegiality.